Biden offers major change to tax proposal in effort to secure infrastructure deal with Republicans

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: Washington Post



President Biden signaled at a private meeting on Wednesday that he would support significant revisions to his tax proposal to win Republican backing on a broader infrastructure package, outlining a plan for about $1 trillion in new spending financed through tax changes that do not appear to raise the top corporate rate. Biden’s new offer amounted to a major concession after Republicans said his earlier proposal to lift the corporate tax rate from 21 percent to 28 percent — a move that would unwind the tax cuts the GOP adopted in 2017 — amounted to a nonstarter.

Instead, Biden on Wednesday recommended a new, minimum corporate tax of 15 percent, seeking to take aim at dozens of profitable U.S. corporations that pay little to nothing to the federal government annually, according to a person familiar with the talks who requested anonymity to describe them. The White House also proposed stepping up enforcement on corporations and wealthy earners who rely on loopholes to lessen their tax burdens, the person said. The offer marked an attempt by the White House to thread a delicate political needle. It aimed to preserve the president’s 2020 campaign pledge not to raise taxes on Americans making under $400,000 a year, while steering clear of the “red line” set down by Republicans who see the 2017 tax cuts as their crowning economic achievement.

Biden long has decried the fact that some of the country’s most profitable enterprises pay nothing in taxes. He stressed during his first-ever address to Congress last month that it is time to close “tax loopholes," urging lawmakers to “reform corporate taxes so they pay their fair share and help pay for the public investments their businesses will benefit from as well.” Biden presented his new proposal, a revision of his total $2.2 trillion American Jobs Plan, during a meeting Wednesday with the GOP’s chief negotiator on infrastructure, Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.). But the source maintained that Biden has not strayed in his overall belief in raising rates on both corporations and wealthy individual earners.

Even with the new concession on taxes, the White House’s roughly $1 trillion plan still amounts to four times as much as Republicans have been willing to spend to improve the country’s roads, bridges, pipes, ports and Internet connections. Entering the meeting, GOP leaders had endorsed roughly $257 billion in new spending, while maintaining an unwavering opposition to any tax hikes to finance infrastructure reform.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/06/03/biden-infrastructure-tax-republicans/

[seta1950]

1. I feel

Any concessions to get the gop in their , is a mistake Democrats will regret , when it’s time for elections, they are delaying everything and none of them will vote for any bill. Just like last time.

[LizBeth]

2. We went from 2.2 to 1.8 to 'round 1 trilion and corporate still get a free pass.

[yaesu]

21. soon it will be just called pave a road bill if he keeps trying to placate the fascists. nt

[LizBeth]

22. +1

[oldsoftie]

27. This would actually get MORE revenue from corporations

Rates dont matter. Whats actually PAID is what matters

[LizBeth]

28. More concerned with the "around" a trillion

[JohnSJ]

3. There won't be any compromise with the republicans, and I predict no later than two

Last edited Thu Jun 3, 2021, 02:44 PM - Edit history (1)

weeks from today the the Democrats will go it alone through reconciliation

[BumRushDaShow]

12. Yup - he's got another reconcilliation option there

although I think some of this is directed towards Manchin who seemed to have an issue with the tax portion of the original. So I think it's to try to get 51 votes for that. E.g., as outlined by a recent opinion piece -

Opinion: Biden is reaching out to Republicans. But his real target is Joe Manchin.

Opinion by Paul Waldman and Greg Sargent

May 12, 2021 at 4:51 p.m. EDT

(snip)

The best way to understand these discussions with Republicans is that they’re really about someone who isn’t in the room: Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W. Va.), the 50th Senate vote for any Democratic bill and the person who needs to be convinced to give Biden the victory he’s after. Above all, Manchin must be able to say that a serious effort to win over Republicans was made, both by the White House and by Senate Democrats. Then it will be easier for him to agree to pass the final package by the simple-majority reconciliation process. To be clear, one can envision a compromise with Republicans here. One way it might happen is if Democrats and Republicans agree on a package that’s just focused on the GOP idea of “real” infrastructure, i.e., roads, bridges, waterways and ports.

Theoretically, 10 Senate Republicans could support such a thing, giving it 60 votes, and then Democrats could pass all the other stuff they want to do — investments in clean energy, caregiving infrastructure, expanded college access, etc. — in a separate package via reconciliation. But even if 10 Republicans did settle on a level of spending on that first package acceptable to Democrats (and Republicans have proposed something that doesn’t even add up to the $600 billion in spending that it advertises), Republicans won’t agree to pay for it with anything other than a regressive gas tax or user fees. It’s important to note that Manchin has already moved toward compromising with Republicans on paying for even a limited infrastructure package.

While Biden has proposed raising the corporate tax rate to 28 percent, Manchin has said he prefers 25 percent. That sets up a fairly obvious endgame. Manchin is invested — personally and politically — in the idea of bipartisanship. For him to vote for a partisan infrastructure bill — the only kind there will be — he must be able to say that he did so reluctantly, regretfully, and only because Republicans left him no choice. How does Biden get Manchin from here to there? Bipartisan Oval Office meetings are part of the plan.

The only way Manchin will be part of a purely party-line vote for infrastructure is at the end of an extended process in which Biden makes repeated attempts to bring Republicans in, attempts that are clearly rejected by McConnell. We’ve seen this before. When Democrats were trying to pass their big covid-19 relief package, Manchin conspicuously refused to go along with reconciliation, instead insisting on efforts to win GOP support. Only after this, said Manchin, would reconciliation be “appropriate.” Of course, that GOP support never materialized, and Democrats did end up passing the plan by reconciliation, with Manchin’s backing.

(snip)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/12/biden-is-reaching-out-republicans-his-real-target-is-joe-manchin/

In this case, if separated out as a future next step, one piece ("traditional" roads, bridges, etc) could be done by Regular Order if they can get 10 GOP Senators and the other by reconciliation with a corporate tax increase. I think the former had the recommendation for taking COVID-19 funds to pay for it and that is a non-starter. However, this other suggestion of handling taxes might be directed towards the former with an actual corporate increase to 25% done later by reconciliation, with Manchin already stating he was on board with 25%.

[LizBeth]

23. I hope when they go alone they bring it back to the 2.2 and not 1 trillion there abouts.

[tecelote]

30. I agree.

I think we should pass everything we think is needed, let Americans experience the benefits, then see if Republicans have anything to offer.

Back to 2.2. Do what's best and forget bipartisanship.

[JohnSJ]

33. I don't see why not

[EndlessWire]

4. Yeah

They are not going to be "bipartisan." Their plan is to obstruct any and everything that Biden tries to accomplish. At least Biden tried. Get used to seeing this. Nothing to get excited about. We need to dedicate ourselves to keeping these vermin out of the government. They can't win an inch at Midterms.

[droidamus2]

5. Everybody knows the trick why don't the Democrats

The Republican trick is to get the Democrats to make major concession that will anger the Democratic base and then when it comes time to vote they vote no anyway. That way they can even claim to the Democratic base that they protected them from those bad changes and on the other hand hit the Democrats as 'do nothings'. Why do the Democrats not realize they are basically negotiating with themselves and therefore should just do everything they can to pass what they want and ignore the Republicans.

[AZ8theist]

6. This has to be a fucking joke, right???????

[AZ8theist]

7. REPEAL AND REPLACE THE FUCKING TRUMP TAX SCAM.

[aocommunalpunch]

8. LMAO

They still won’t vote for it.

[Lonestarblue]

9. I thought Democrats learned the lesson with the ACA. Biden should have.

Republicans will offer hundreds of amendments solely to run out the clock, and not one of them is likely to vote for this bill. Democrats should know this. McConnell has already shown his colors of obstruction with the 1/6 Commission. He has promised to obstruct everything. This is frustrating. The public approves of the larger plan and the increased taxation of corporations. They don’t really care if it passes with Republican help. It’s time to say we tried but Republicans refused to work with us and go back to the $1.8 trillion plan and pass it under reconciliation. Why is it that Republicans ignore bipartisanship to get what they want and Democrats allow the desire for bipartisanship to deny them not only what they want but what the country needs!

[LizBeth]

24. +1

[Glaisne]

10. So it's more important to cave

to the Republicans than to push ahead for what's best for the country. Got it.

[LenaBaby61]

11. So, we capitulating AGAIN, right?

😑

[bucolic_frolic]

13. Republicans won't be happy until gas tax is $2 a gallon and half of it goes to tax cuts for them

[intheflow]

14. FFS, Joe. Read the room.

The Republicans aren't going to go for anything you put out there, no matter how far to the right you go to appease the traitors. Meanwhile, you're alienating your base. Not a good look for the party.

[Marthe48]

15. No

Dems keep offering a carrot on a stick. The r's WILL NOT be tempted, lured or reasonable. They are the party of NO and our country needs to move on.

[FloridaBlues]

16. We all know they will water down the bill and not vote for it anyway

[liberalgunwilltravel]

17. A very smart move

Folks,
I really think many of you are reading this the wrong way. This is a brilliant move by team Biden. It boxes his opponents in. It doesn't lower the corporate tax rate but it does remove the loopholes that allows the most profitable companies in America to pay zero in taxes, so at least they will pay 15%. That will bring in more money than the current tax rate or even if it was raised to 28%. Also, Joe doesn't expect the Republicans to agree to it. It is not focused on the GOP. It's focused on Manchin, Sinema and the EU, where the Biden Administration is pushing for a minimum tax so US companies can't hide their profits in foreign tax shelters. I am disappointed that so many are misinterpreting this move.

[BumRushDaShow]

18. I basically posted that above

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=2751694

[liberalgunwilltravel]

34. Sorry

I missed your post above. My bad.

[BumRushDaShow]

35. Apparently based on Manchin

it's that "good faith effort" attempt that seems to give him cover to go with reconciliation as a next step.

Assuming Turtle will torpedo anything we want to do regardless, the "very public negotiations" and (apparent) "concessions" will provide him and others (because in many cases, it's not just him but some other "moderate" Democrats like Chris Coons) the talking points to establish that "they tried", and are forced to go partisan... although working with Capito might result in a handful of others (including her) voting for the reconciliation since I know WV needs it bad, and they can declare it "bipartisan".

[liberalgunwilltravel]

38. That's my take

I think what you are saying is likely the case. It backed the opponents into a corner. It will be interesting to see how Manchin and Sinema respond.

[BumRushDaShow]

39. The excerpts from the WaPo opinion piece I had posted upthread

noted that Manchin had voted for reconciliation for the "American Rescue Plan" (i.e., COVID relief/stimulus), so the assumption was the kabuki theater was needed in this case.

The only way Manchin will be part of a purely party-line vote for infrastructure is at the end of an extended process in which Biden makes repeated attempts to bring Republicans in, attempts that are clearly rejected by McConnell. We’ve seen this before. When Democrats were trying to pass their big covid-19 relief package, Manchin conspicuously refused to go along with reconciliation, instead insisting on efforts to win GOP support. Only after this, said Manchin, would reconciliation be “appropriate.” Of course, that GOP support never materialized, and Democrats did end up passing the plan by reconciliation, with Manchin’s backing.

(snip)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/12/biden-is-reaching-out-republicans-his-real-target-is-joe-manchin/

So we'll see...

[oldsoftie]

26. YES!! But too many have that "hit 'em hard" reaction

MORE money will be raised even with the LOWER rate.
You laid it out very well

Its just like those who want the old "90% rate" of the 50s. Even though practically NO ONE ever paid anywhere NEAR that rate. But it feels good!

[patphil]

31. I agree that this is aimed toward Manchin and Sinema.

Right now it appears to be what is needed to get them on board.
I don't give a crap about the Republicans. They aren't on board at any level.
Once passed, we can fully focus on the voting rights legislation.
That's the other "must pass" piece of the puzzle.
Protect the right to vote and we have a good chance of holding onto the House and Senate. If we can do that we can always come back with additional legislation later.
One other thing we could then do is get statehood for the District of Columbia.

[Hestia]

42. Yeah, sure - that's what we heard in 2009 and look at what happened - if Ted Kennedy had not been

alive, we never would have gotten the ACA. 3rd dimensional chess and all that bullshit. All that is seen is the GQP controlling the narrative AGAIN and then yee haw, 2022 elections.

I don't know about y'all but I do not want to live through another 2009 again. It was painful and anger inducing then, it will be worse this time.

It gets extremely old waiting for reason to prevail - all that exists is GQP winning again because we - Democrats - don't have a clue as to what we are doing and it certainly looks like it everyday. Schumer was majority leader then and is now, I think we can draw some correlations from both timelines.

Isn't it funny that they can use the filibuster for denying the 1/6/21 commission but it is considered high crimes and misdemeanors when we do it.

[Moostache]

19. Now, where have we seen THIS trick before?

[WHITT]

20. Hopefully It's Kabuki

[oldsoftie]

25. FINALLY looking at reality

Set that minimum!! Too many pay ZERO. We need a low minimum rate and minimal deductions over that.
Trust me, we'll collect more revenue from corporations by getting them ALL to actually PAY a lower rate than setting some bullshit higher rate that they all will avoid

[stillcool]

29. This is the moment for Manchin and Sinema

to fish or cut bait, once and for all.

[mvd]

32. The corporate tax rate proposal doesn't sound bad

How it compares to the original plan I am not sure. But it would definitely be a good idea to close that big tax loophole and others.

$1T isn’t big enough to repair the country’s long neglected infrastructure. But knowing the Repukes, they will reject this also. This should be our last offer. Then we should go back as close to the original plan as possible.

[louis-t]

36. Joe, you know when they say 'bipartisan' they mean

'our way or the highway', right?

[PSPS]

37. Biden knows they would vote against it anyway. This is just a perfunctory step to placate Manchin.

[kairos12]

40. This is Obamacare 2.0. The Reich Wing will sign nothing.

[BumRushDaShow]

41. The ACA & PPA

which I watched the hearings and markups for, that went on in both chambers in multiple committees, and watched the debates on the final legislation (including the joint effort to reconcile the 2 different bills), required 60 votes to advance in the Senate, and Democrats only got that 60 vote majority during the summer of 2009, with a defection of Arlen Specter from R to D.

But with the pontificating Max Baucus and Joe Lieberman, along with 17 anti-abortion House Democrats lead by Bart Stupak, what was left of the final iteration of the consolidated bill, managed to get passed in December 2009 with the temp (D) replacement for Ted Kennedy, who died that summer before the bill became law.

And when Massachusetts decided to vote for fucking GOP Senator Scott Brown that same December 2009 (in the MA special election to replace Ted Kennedy), that killed the 60 votes needed to get a "fix" (able to invoke cloture) for what was originally passed, and they had to do the final piece the next spring by reconciliation with only 59 votes (which was more than enough for the simple majority needed for that type of legislative process), which limited the types of things that could be put in. Then the SCOTUS came around and killed the mandate.

We are in a different world today - barely having a majority in the Senate, which is only due to having the VP (who is the technical President of the Senate), who can cast a tie-breaking vote for a simple majority.