Tag Archives: Ron Wyden

Senate Democrats Close In on Passing Climate and Tax Bill

WASHINGTON—The Senate advanced a climate and tax package past a procedural hurdle in the narrowly divided chamber, as Democrats closed in on passing elements of President Biden’s agenda that have languished on Capitol Hill for more than a year.

After the procedural vote, which was approved 51-50 thanks to a tiebreaking vote by Vice President

Kamala Harris,

lawmakers began an hourslong series of votes on amendments that aren’t likely to change the bill’s contents. Once that process is over, the package could receive a final vote in the 50-50 Senate later on Sunday before it is sent to the House, where lawmakers are scheduled to vote on it Friday.

The legislation, which largely survived a review by the Senate’s parliamentarian, raises more than $700 billion in government revenue over 10 years, with much of that coming from a 15% minimum tax on large, profitable corporations and money generated by enhancing tax-collection efforts at the Internal Revenue Service. Empowering Medicare to negotiate lower prescription-drug prices and imposing a 1% tax on stock buybacks will also add revenue to the government’s budget in the next decade.

About $430 billion of those funds would be dedicated toward incentives for companies and individuals to reduce carbon emissions and an extension of subsidies for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. The legislation dedicates the rest of the new revenue toward reducing the deficit.

The bill meets “all of our goals: fighting climate change, lowering healthcare costs, closing tax loopholes abused by the wealthy, and reducing the deficit,” Senate Majority Leader

Chuck Schumer

(D., N.Y.) said Saturday. “This is a major win for the American people,” he said.

Republicans say that the bill, known as the Inflation Reduction Act, would do little to combat inflation and contains damaging corporate tax increases that would flow down to households.

Democrats united on their climate and healthcare package after making changes Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D., Ariz.) demanded.



Photo:

Sarah Silbiger/Bloomberg News

Referencing voters’ worries over inflation, Senate Minority Leader

Mitch McConnell

(R., Ky.) said Saturday that Senate Democrats “are misreading the American people’s outrage for yet another reckless taxing-and-spending spree.”

During the amendment process, Republicans largely targeted the bill’s energy and tax provisions. They also offered an amendment to reinstate a pandemic-era policy known as Title 42, which allows migrants to be turned away at the border without a chance to ask for asylum. The Biden administration has sought to end the policy.

Democrats lined up against the GOP proposals as they sought to prevent any changes that could endanger the bill’s support in the chamber.

Sen.

Bob Menendez

(D., N.J.) said Saturday that he would oppose the legislation entirely if lawmakers voted to add immigration restrictions during the amendment process.

“I urge my Democratic colleagues to stand united and vote no on ALL amendments, regardless of the underlying policy and regardless of which party offers them,” Mr. Menendez said.

As they blocked GOP amendments, Democrats occasionally offered parallel proposals that ran afoul of Senate rules, giving lawmakers the opportunity to vote in support of measures without risking alterations to the bill.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) gave a lengthy speech in the Senate to call on Democrats to expand the legislation’s measures. He said the current bill was inadequate as written.

“What I am asking today is for all 50 Democrats to come together and begin the process of addressing the major crises facing working families,” he said, adding that the bill “has some good features, but also some very bad features.”

In the first amendment of the night, Mr. Sanders introduced an expansion of the drug-pricing provisions, seeking to begin government negotiation for lower prices sooner and apply it to more drugs. It, along with another proposal from Mr. Sanders to broaden the legislation, failed as Democrats joined Republicans to vote them down.

The open-ended amendment process, called a vote-a-rama in the Senate, is the last obstacle Democrats face to pass the legislation, which Democrats are pursuing through a legislative process called reconciliation. Reconciliation allows Democrats to skirt the 60-vote threshold necessary for most legislation in the Senate, but it also requires lawmakers to comply with a special series of rules and undergo the lengthy amendment process.

The Senate’s nonpartisan parliamentarian made a series of rulings on Saturday that found much of the Democrats’ bill complied with reconciliation’s rules.

“I’m happy to report to my colleagues that the bill we presented to the parliamentarian remains largely intact,” said Mr. Schumer said.

Mr. Schumer said the parliamentarian didn’t accept one portion of the bill, related to a requirement that drug companies pay rebates if they raise prices faster than inflation for Medicare and private insurance.

The rebate requirements will only apply to Medicare, and not the commercial market, a setback to Democrats’ efforts to limit drug prices more broadly. A push to cap the cost of insulin at $35 a month could face a similar fate as the rebate provision, and Democrats are preparing to try forcing the issue on the Senate floor and putting Republicans on the spot over the sensitive political issue.

After reaching an agreement with Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.), who has resisted much of Democrats’ broader agenda, after months of failed negotiations, Democrats had to make a series of final changes this week to the bill on Thursday to earn the support of Sen.

Kyrsten Sinema

(D., Ariz.). They agreed to pare back elements of the corporate minimum tax and to drop a proposed tax increase on carried-interest income.

Ms. Sinema hasn’t explicitly committed to supporting the bill, saying she wants to see its final form after the amendment process.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) has resisted much of Democrats’ broader agenda.



Photo:

Rod Lamkey/Zuma Press

If Democrats are successful in passing the bill, its passage would mark a victory for their party just months before the midterm elections, which polls show will be challenging for Democrats in large part because of public concern over inflation.

Beginning in 2026, the bill would for the first time empower Medicare to negotiate the prices of a limited set of drugs selected from among those that account for the biggest share of government expenditures. It would also cap out-of-pocket drug costs for Medicare beneficiaries at $2,000 a year, beginning in 2025, and starting next year mandate free vaccines for Medicare enrollees. Under the bill, subsidies enacted last year as part of the American Rescue Plan to help people buy health insurance through the Affordable Care Act would be extended for three years, through 2025, at a cost of $64 billion.

On climate change, the bill pumps money into wind and solar projects, along with the batteries to store renewable energy, while also subsidizing technology to capture and store carbon-dioxide emissions. Consumers would benefit from subsidies for certain windows, heat pumps and other energy-efficient products, as well the extension of a $7,500 tax credit to buy electric vehicles.

Builders, homeowners and small businesses could avail themselves of new capital pouring into so-called green banks, which will receive $20 billion to provide low-cost financing for energy-efficient products such as heat pumps, windows, solar panels, insulation and electric-vehicle charging stations.

The most significant climate provisions are tax credits that would channel billions of dollars to wind, solar and battery developments that put clean power onto the grid, according to Rhodium Group, an independent research firm. The group estimated that the bill would cut greenhouse-gas emissions 31% to 44% below 2005 levels in 2030, compared with 24% to 35% under current policy.

Write to Siobhan Hughes at siobhan.hughes@wsj.com and Andrew Duehren at andrew.duehren@wsj.com

Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Read original article here

Democrats look for offramp from masking in public

Democratic lawmakers are distancing themselves from the strong pro-mask stance they took for most of the pandemic, which is becoming more and more of a political liability at a time when many Americans are reaching their limits of COVID-19 fatigue. 

Democrats are being battered by poll after poll showing that President BidenJoe BidenBiden hails UN vote: ‘Lays bare Putin’s isolation’ Overnight Defense & National Security — US tries to turn down the dial on Russia Johns Hopkins doctor says children need to get vaccinated against COVID-19 MORE’s approval rating is hovering around 40 percent, and lawmakers say COVID-19 fatigue is a major factor behind why so many voters are dissatisfied with the direction of the country. 

Hardly any Democratic senators wore their masks on the House floor Tuesday night when the nation tuned in to watch Biden’s first State of the Union address, one of the biggest prime-time political events before November’s midterm elections.  

Brian Monahan, the Capitol’s attending physician, announced in a memo circulated before the State of the Union address that people would no longer be required to wear masks in the House chamber or elsewhere around the Capitol complex. 

He advised they were optional, and a number of Senate Democrats who for months have always worn their masks around the Capitol hallways took them off for Biden’s speech, beaming their pleasure at the president’s words unencumbered, including Sens. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth WarrenDemocrats press Treasury over concerns Russia could use cryptocurrency to evade sanctions Five takeaways from the Texas primaries Biden State of the Union: A plea for unity in unusual times MORE (Mass.), Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenOn The Money — Manchin makes counteroffer to Biden’s big bill Senator offers bill to revoke Russia’s trade status Biden State of the Union: A plea for unity in unusual times MORE (Ore.), Jeff MerkleyJeff MerkleyAdvocates criticize ‘tepid’ Biden request for global COVID-19 funding Stock ban faces steep hurdles despite growing support  Franken on Senate resignation: ‘They made it impossible for me to get due process’ MORE (Ore.), Brian SchatzBrian Emanuel SchatzThe Hill’s 12:30 Report – Sights and sounds from Biden’s State of the Union The Hill’s 12:30 Report: Negotiations crawl as government funding deadline nears Democrats hit limits with Luján’s absence MORE (Hawaii), Sherrod BrownSherrod Campbell BrownDemocrats press Treasury over concerns Russia could use cryptocurrency to evade sanctions Biden State of the Union: A plea for unity in unusual times Biden urges GOP to end blockade on his Fed picks MORE (Ohio) and Sheldon WhitehouseSheldon WhitehouseDemocratic Senate debates merits of passion vs. pragmatism Senators introduce a resolution honoring Tom Brady’s career Senate panel advances appeals court nominee despite objections from home state Republicans MORE (R.I.).  

Lawmakers viewed the State of the Union as a low-risk event because all attendees were required to receive a negative COVID-19 test before attending. But at least six legislators, including Sen. Alex PadillaAlex PadillaThe Hill’s Morning Report – Biden goes after Putin, stresses unity Democratic lawmakers test positive for COVID-19 ahead of SOTU Big Tech allies point to China, Russia threat in push to squash antitrust bill MORE (D-Calif.), announced they had tested positive, showing that the virus is still swirling about Congress.   

Fewer and fewer Democrats are wearing their masks in the halls of Congress, joining Republican colleagues who ditched masks last year after vaccines were widely available to the public.   

When Senate Majority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerSenate passes cybersecurity bill amid fears of Russian cyberattacks Schumer wants to confirm Biden’s Supreme Court pick by April break Five viral moments from Biden’s State of the Union MORE (D-N.Y.) met with Biden’s Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown JacksonKetanji Brown JacksonWho the judge is matters — but not always the way people think Schumer wants to confirm Biden’s Supreme Court pick by April break Judge Jackson should recuse herself from major discrimination case before the court MORE in the historic Mansfield Room for a photo-op just off the Senate floor, neither wore a mask — even though many of the reporters and photographers in the room, though not all, were wearing facial coverings.  

Schumer after the meeting declared that the nation under Democratic leadership had pretty much defeated COVID-19.

“As the president said, Democrats have done a … very good job at getting us out of the COVID mess and we’re about to turn the corner,” he said.  

“I hope our Republican colleagues will join us in getting some kinds of new funding to keep us normal. God forbid another variant comes along,” he added.

Sen. Debbie StabenowDeborah (Debbie) Ann StabenowWhite House chief of staff tries to pump up worried Senate Democrats Democrats try to regroup heading into rough November Senate slips within 48 hours of government shutdown deadline MORE (D-Mich.), who stopped wearing a mask in the Capitol this week, said she and her colleagues recently discussed easing up on wearing masks, but she said the decision was driven by the latest guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).  

“We have discussed it and now based on the science, it’s really recommended to be an individual decision,” she said. “Based on what Monahan said, based on D.C. lifting [its mask mandate], it’s become something that’s more of an individual decision.”

“I do have to say it’s a little weird,” she said, noting that Wednesday was only the second day she had walked the Capitol’s hallways without a mask since the pandemic hit Washington two years ago.

While the CDC, as of Feb. 25, recommends that a mask be worn based on personal preference in a low-risk environment, it recommends wearing masks in medium-risk indoor environments, especially when coming into contact with people at higher risk of severe infection.  

Several members of the Senate are in their 80s and could be seen as in a higher health-risk category.  

The guidance provided by the District of Columbia is also mixed.  

Starting March 1, D.C.’s city government stopped requiring masks at restaurants, bars, sports venues, gyms and grocery stores. But city officials still require masks at libraries, nursing homes, correctional facilities, on public transit and at government facilities where employees have direct interaction with the public.  

Democrats won control of the White House and Senate in the 2020 elections after embracing masks and other COVID-19-prevention protocols as a sign they were taking the pandemic more seriously than former President TrumpDonald TrumpJan. 6 panel claims Trump ‘engaged in criminal conspiracy’ Capitol riot defendant pleads guilty to seditious conspiracy, agrees to cooperate The Memo: Boebert’s antics blasted as another twist in politics’ downward spiral   MORE, who repeatedly refused to wear a mask in public.  

But now there are myriad signs that Americans are growing sick of masks and other restrictions.  

Democratic governors last month led a charge to ease mask requirements and now Democratic officeholders in Washington are following suit.  

Being pro-mask is a mixed bag politically, as Republicans are making inroads with swing voters by lumping mandatory masking policies with COVID-19-related school closures and urging for a faster return to pre-pandemic normalcy.   

Sen. John CornynJohn CornynWho the judge is matters — but not always the way people think The Hill’s Morning Report – Biden goes after Putin, stresses unity McConnell, Scott face off over GOP’s agenda MORE (Texas), an adviser to the Senate Republican leadership, said mask requirements are starting to hurt Democrats politically.  

“Biden cured COVID-19, pandemic’s over,” Cornyn quipped.  

“He made it political in his campaign against Trump, and he’s paying the price for that,” he said of Biden’s prominent use of masks during the 2020 presidential campaign.  

“It’s schools and it’s education and it’s parents’ roles in their kids’ education. All that stuff has flowed from that [mask] controversy, and I think they’re paying a political price for it now,” he said.  

After a Monmouth University poll showed that 70 percent of Americans nationwide think COVID-19 is here to stay and “we just need to get on with our lives,” New Jersey Gov. Phil MurphyPhil Murphy’Plain old racist’: Other kid from NJ mall fight condemns treatment of Black teen Family of Black teen arrested in New Jersey mall hires Benjamin Crump NJ governor ‘deeply disturbed’ by video showing Black teen handcuffed, pinned by police MORE (D) announced his state would lift its school mask mandate on March 7.  

“We have to learn to live with COVID,” he said last month.  

Several Democratic senators on Wednesday bristled at the suggestion that they’re shedding their masks to avoid bad political optics.  

“I don’t think politics should have anything to do with it. And I’ve felt that strongly and it’s all about science, about keeping people safe. It’s about those that are vulnerable. It’s about children that don’t have the opportunity to get vaccines. It’s not a political issue and it never should have been,” said Sen. Catherine Cortez MastoCatherine Marie Cortez MastoDemocrats try to regroup heading into rough November Democrats seek midterm course-correct in suburbs Overnight Energy & Environment — Biden says Russia attack could spike oil prices MORE (D-Nev.), who faces a toss-up reelection race this year. She was not wearing a mask.  

The divide between Democratic and Republican lawmakers over wearing masks and other COVID-19-prevention protocols has been stark for much of the pandemic.  

Sen. Rand PaulRandal (Rand) Howard PaulHouse passes bill making lynching a federal hate crime This week: Congress returns to Ukraine crisis, Supreme Court fight US voices question if Putin underestimated Ukraine MORE (R-Ky.), who contracted COVID-19 early in the pandemic, was never spotted wearing a mask on Capitol Hill and claimed last year that they didn’t work, citing a peer-reviewed study from Denmark.  

Most Senate Democrats wore masks in public throughout the pandemic, even after getting vaccinated when the omicron variant caused a new surge of infections across the country.  

Brown, the chairman of the Banking Committee, memorably got into a heated spat with Sen. Dan SullivanDaniel Scott SullivanInclude seafood in the sanctions to squeeze Putin Senate confirms Rahm Emanuel to be ambassador to Japan GOP resistance to Biden FCC nominee could endanger board’s Democratic majority MORE (R-Alaska) in November 2020 because his GOP colleague wasn’t wearing a mask while presiding over the Senate floor.  

Sullivan got hot under the collar when Brown asked him to “please wear a mask as he speaks.” 

“I don’t wear a mask when I’m speaking, like most senators. I don’t need your instruction,” he shot back.  



Read original article here

Wyden rips Musk over Tesla stock poll: ‘It’s time for the Billionaires Income Tax’

Sen. Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenBillionaire tax proposal would raise 7B: JCT The 0.3 percent investment — capable of making a difference in elder abuse prevention Manchin doubles down as House puts paid leave in spending bill MORE (D-Ore.) ripped Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon MuskElon Reeve MuskHillicon Valley — TSA cyber mandates draw pushback NYC mayor-elect says he’ll take first three payments in bitcoin Judge rules against Bezos’s Blue Origin in suit over contract for lunar lander MORE Saturday after Musk proposed selling a percentage of his stock on Twitter. 

Musk’s earlier tweet appeared to be in response to a proposal that Wyden suggested aimed at taxing billionaires.

Musk is now the richest person in the world, a spot once held by Amazon founder Jeff BezosJeffrey (Jeff) Preston BezosHillicon Valley — TSA cyber mandates draw pushback Judge rules against Bezos’s Blue Origin in suit over contract for lunar lander On The Money — Presented by Citi — Pelosi plays hardball with Manchin MORE

“Much is made lately of unrealized gains being a means of tax avoidance, so I propose selling 10% of my Tesla stock. Do you support this?” Musked asked in a poll posted on Twitter on Saturday.

“Whether or not the world’s wealthiest man pays any taxes at all shouldn’t depend on the results of a Twitter poll. It’s time for the Billionaires Income Tax,” Wyden, chair of the Senate Finance Committee, hit back in a statement issued later Saturday evening. 

Late last month, Wyden released a proposal to be included in Democrats’ social spending bill as a way to help pay for some of the initiatives proposed in the legislation. The tax proposal would tax the investment gains of billionaires annually. 

“We have a historic opportunity with the Billionaires Income Tax to restore fairness to our tax code, and fund critical investments in American families,” Wyden said in a statement at the time. 

The tax proposal would effect around 700 taxpayers who either have income of over $100 million for at least three years in a row or have assets worth over $1 billion. 

In the proposal, tradable investment and non-tradable assets would be assessed differently. In the case of tradable investments, those affected under the policy would claim deductions on losses and pay taxes on investment gains each year. 

For scenarios that include real estate and other types of non-tradable assets, once taxpayers sell their assets, they could pay both regular capital gains taxes and an additional charge. 

The Joint Committee on Taxation’s (JCT) preliminary estimates of the policy indicated that it would have generated $557 billion over the span of a decade, however, it was ultimately not included in a framework proposed by the White House. 

Musk has previously slammed the policy, claiming that it would slowly start targeting other taxpayers later on. 

The House has yet to pass the $1.75 trillion social spending package built on the framework released by the White House. The lower chamber did pass a $1.2 trillion, bipartisan infrastructure passage on Friday. 



Read original article here

Senate Democrats dial down the Manchin tension

Senate Democrats are trying to turn down the temperature after days of high-profile drama and a delay of the bipartisan infrastructure bill in the House.

The House broke on Friday after days of intense, hours-long meetings without an agreement on a path forward on the Senate-passed infrastructure bill and the reconciliation bill, which is supposed to carry many of Democrats’ long-held policy ambitions.

The standoff on Capitol Hill sparked a proxy war between the Squad and Senate moderates, with leadership stuck in the middle trying to figure out a way to satisfy them both. But Senate Democrats, including progressives in the caucus, are largely avoiding piling on against Sen. Joe ManchinJoe ManchinThe Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Alibaba – Democrats still at odds over Biden agenda Manchin throws down gauntlet with progressives Debt fight revives Democrats’ filibuster angst MORE (D-W.Va.).

“We are in negotiations with all Democrats. Everyone is trying to row in the same direction,” said Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth WarrenThe Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Alibaba – Democrats still at odds over Biden agenda On The Money — Democrats dig in with Biden agenda in the balance Democratic civil war hits new heights MORE (D-Mass.), when asked if she was surprised or frustrated by Manchin’s $1.5 trillion top-line figure that’s $2 trillion short of what Biden and other Democrats have been pursuing.

Sen. Debbie StabenowDeborah (Debbie) Ann StabenowDemocrats surprised, caught off guard by ‘framework’ deal Congress facing shutdown, debt crisis with no plan B GOP warns McConnell won’t blink on debt cliff MORE (D-Mich.), who was spotted huddling with Manchin and Sen. Chris CoonsChris Andrew CoonsManchin raises red flag on carbon tax Dems punch back over GOP holdup of Biden SBA nominee Biden threatens more sanctions on Ethiopia, Eritrea over Tigray conflict MORE (D-Del.) on the Senate floor this week, noted that they talked about “things that we want to get done, that we share.”

“There’s a lot of common ground,” she added. “There’s a lot of positive effort.”

The effort to stay positive comes after Manchin threw down a gauntlet on Thursday, publicly announcing his preference for a $1.5 trillion price tag for Democrats’ social spending bill. That’s significantly less than the $3.5 trillion Democrats green lit under a budget resolution earlier this year and the bill drafted by House committees.

“For them to get theirs, elect more liberals. …I’ve never been a liberal in any way, shape or form,” Manchin told reporters in a massive gaggle outside of the Capitol.

But the response from Senate Democrats was largely muted, with several spinning Manchin’s comments as a positive step forward after weeks of questions about what their moderate colleague was seeking.

“It’s certainly helpful to know Senator Manchin’s priorities,” said Sen. Chris MurphyChristopher (Chris) Scott MurphyDebt fight revives Democrats’ filibuster angst Democrats pour cold water on Manchin’s .5T price tag Congress poised to avert shutdown, but brawl looms on debt MORE (D-Conn.). “What he’s signaling is that he wants to get a deal.”

Sen. Tim KaineTimothy (Tim) Michael KaineCongress poised to avert shutdown, but brawl looms on debt Senate Democrats eye government funding bill without debt hike Democrats scramble for strategy to avoid default MORE (D-Va.), asked if he viewed the $1.5 trillion as a hard stop for Manchin, said, “I would be surprised if that was a non-negotiable, just knowing Joe.”

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenSchumer feels heat to get Manchin and Sinema on board Congress poised to avert shutdown, but brawl looms on debt On The Money — House pushes toward infrastructure vote MORE (D-Ore.), in response to a question about Manchin’s red line on $1.5 trillion, instead pointed back to the senator’s comments from earlier this week to a small group of reporters where he pointed to changes to the GOP 2017 tax bill as a core starting point.

“He made it very clear that he wants to start reconciliation by rolling back the 2017 tax bill. …I want everybody to know that the Senate Finance Committee and I have spent three years getting ready for exactly this, and we’re ready to go right now,” Wyden said.

“And one other point on this, he and I continue to have constructive discussions with regard to energy issues and I think that’s helpful,” Wyden continued.

Part of the calculus for Democrats has been a belief that throwing rhetorical bombs at Manchin isn’t likely to move him. Even as Senate progressives have deep disagreements with Manchin on both the size and some of the substance of the $3.5 trillion spending plan, in a 50-50 Senate and with all Republicans voting, leadership will ultimately need his support in order to be successful.

“I think this is really a situation where I don’t think that all of us sort of banging on Joe is going to do it,” Sen. Mazie HironoMazie Keiko HironoThe Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Alibaba – Democrats still at odds over Biden agenda Debt fight revives Democrats’ filibuster angst On The Money — Democrats dig in with Biden agenda in the balance MORE (D-Hawaii) told reporters recently when asked to dish about the efforts by Senate Democrats to figure out what Manchin wants.

Asked about Manchin, Sen. Tammy BaldwinTammy Suzanne BaldwinBiden sidesteps GOP on judicial vacancies, for now Democrats confront ‘Rubik’s cube on steroids’ Warren, Daines introduce bill honoring 13 killed in Kabul attack MORE (D-Wis.) added during a CNN interview, “I like to look at the positives.”

“He is still negotiating. He’s still talking. He’s a little too focused on top line numbers rather than programs. And let me say that I believe that progressives and moderates alike are committed to the Build Back Better agenda,” she said.

It’s not just Senate Democrats, with key players in the House holding their punches.

After Manchin called a $3.5 trillion plan “fiscal insanity,” Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiTransportation funding lapses after Pelosi pulls infrastructure vote The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Alibaba – Democrats still at odds over Biden agenda White House says it’s ‘closer to agreement than ever’ after House punts infrastructure vote MORE (D-Calif.) didn’t bite on questions about her “Senate problem” and if she thought Manchin sounded “like someone who’s open to further negotiation.”

“Look, I think that Joe Manchin is a great member of Congress — of the Senate, we’re friends. We’re Italian-Americans, we get along, Catholic, we have shared values. I have enormous respect for him. … So we have our common ground,” Pelosi told reporters.

Progressive Caucus Chairwoman Pramila JayapalPramila JayapalTransportation funding lapses after Pelosi pulls infrastructure vote The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Alibaba – Democrats still at odds over Biden agenda Manchin throws down gauntlet with progressives MORE (D-Wash.), asked about Manchin saying $1.5 trillion was his top-line figure, added that “there’s no point in us negotiating against ourselves.”

“We have invited Sen. Manchin or anyone else who wants to, to put forward their vision,” she added.

Democrats are facing high stakes amid weeks of escalating infighting and big questions about how they get their competing factions onto the same page. The two-part infrastructure and spending package is at the heart of Biden’s legislative agenda, with many Democrats viewing it as too big to fail as they increasingly turn their attention to 2022.

Biden met with House Democrats on Friday at the Capitol and predicted that afterward the two pieces of legislation — the Senate-passed bipartisan bill and a social spending package — would eventually land on his desk.

“We’re gonna get this done,” Biden said as he departed the caucus meeting.”It doesn’t matter when. It doesn’t matter whether it’s six minutes, six days or six weeks. We’re gonna get it done.”

Senate Democrats echoed those remarks, predicting that a deal would come together — at some point.

Kaine said that Senate Majority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerDemocrats back Hollywood crews threatening historic strike Overnight Energy & Environment — Presented by the American Petroleum Institute — Manchin: Gas ‘has to’ be part of the clean energy program Senate confirms Biden’s controversial land management pick MORE (D-N.Y.) “is optimistic that we’re going to get this done, and I am too.”

“I just think this is the tough part. The last days of labor. It’s just the tough part of the negotiation,” Kaine added. “We want Biden to be successful. Biden being successful is going to be good for every last member of this caucus.”

Asked about the timing, Stabenow said, “You just don’t know. You really don’t know.”

“I think that time ends up in the details of writing,” she said. “We’re in a spot where people want to come together…  and they’re talking specifics.”



Read original article here

Biden pushes back at Democrats on taxes

President BidenJoe BidenSunday shows preview: Coronavirus dominates as country struggles with delta variant Did President Biden institute a vaccine mandate for only half the nation’s teachers? Democrats lean into vaccine mandates ahead of midterms MORE is pushing to prevent congressional Democrats from scaling back his tax proposals, as lawmakers work on a $3.5 trillion social spending package aimed at advancing the president’s economic agenda.

The White House and congressional Democrats both want to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations, and strengthen tax enforcement, to pay for investments in areas such as child care, health care and climate.

But the legislation that the House Ways and Means Committee approved Wednesday raised some taxes by less than Biden had previously proposed, and left out some of Biden’s proposals altogether.

It remains to be seen whether the administration can get lawmakers to be more aggressive on tax increases and enforcement, given Democrats’ narrow majorities in Congress.

In recent days, the White House has stepped up its messaging and lawmaker-outreach efforts around the social-spending package, and in particular has been emphasizing its proposals to raise taxes on high-income households and corporations and to increase IRS enforcement against the wealthy.

The tax proposals were front and center in a speech Biden gave at the White House on Thursday.

“I’m not out to punish anyone. I’m a capitalist. If you can make a million or a billion dollars, that’s great. God bless you,” Biden said. “All I’m asking is you pay your fair share. Pay your fair share just like middle-class folks do. But that isn’t happening now.”

Biden pushed back on Republican criticisms of his economic plans, saying GOP lawmakers would “rather protect the tax breaks of those at the very top than give tax breaks to working families.” 

The new efforts came as House panels advanced their portions of the $3.5 trillion package. Notably, the Ways and Means Committee advanced a portion that includes tax-increase provisions as well as provisions that extend expansions of tax credits that benefit low- and middle-income households.

The committee’s proposal is less aggressive in raising taxes on high-income households and corporations than proposals Biden released earlier this year. House Democrats are proposing smaller increases in the corporate tax rate and the top capital gains rate than Biden had. Additionally, the committee left out several of Biden’s revenue raising proposals, including those to tax capital gains at death and to increase the amount of information financial institutions report to the IRS about bank accounts.

White House officials have publicly spoken positively about the Ways and Means Committee bill, saying it’s a key step toward accomplishing Biden’s goals on taxes. At the same time, the administration is pushing Congress to do more. 

Biden the day of his speech also spoke on the phone with House Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiRepublicans caught in California’s recall trap Raise the debt limit while starting to fix the budget   ‘Justice for J6’ organizer calls on demonstrators to respect law enforcement MORE (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerBiden discusses agenda with Schumer, Pelosi ahead of pivotal week CEOs urge Congress to raise debt limit or risk ‘avoidable crisis’ If .5 trillion ‘infrastructure’ bill fails, it’s bye-bye for an increasingly unpopular Biden MORE (D-N.Y.) about his economic agenda.

A readout of the call from the White House emphasized unity with the two Democratic leaders.

It said that the three policymakers “reaffirmed that, as we act at this crucial moment to ensure working families are dealt back into our economy, it is only fair that we pay for these tax cuts and investments by repealing the Trump tax giveaways to the wealthiest Americans and big corporations, who often pay little to nothing in taxes.” 

The administration has made touting the proposal on IRS reporting a focus in recent days. The proposal calls for requiring financial institutions to provide the IRS with information about account inflows and outflows in an effort to prevent wealthy people from avoiding paying taxes they already owe. 

“It’s about the super-wealthy finally beginning to pay what they owe — what the existing tax code calls for — just like hard-working Americans do all over this country every Tax Day,” Biden said in his speech Thursday.

Treasury Secretary Janet YellenJanet Louise YellenWhite House touts Nobel economists’ support for Biden agenda Joe Manchin is wrong — we can’t afford not to invest in our children The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by National Industries for the Blind – What do Manchin and Sinema want? MORE and IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig also sent letters to Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard NealRichard Edmund NealWant a clean energy future? Look to the tax code Democrats brace for toughest stretch yet with Biden agenda The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by National Industries for the Blind – What do Manchin and Sinema want? MORE (D-Mass.) last week in support of the information-reporting proposal.

“The objective of this reporting regime is to help the IRS pursue high-end noncompliance by providing some information about opaque income streams that disproportionately accrue to the top,” Yellen wrote.

There are indications that some type of proposal on bank account reporting could make it into the final legislation. Neal said Wednesday that his committee is “in conversations with the administration on reporting proposals that target sophisticated tax avoidance and evasion without impacting middle-class and working Americans.”

Former congressional tax aides say it’s not surprising that the White House is seeking to emphasize its position on taxes during the negotiations over the social-spending package.

“It seems fairly predictable to me that they’re trying to get Congress to support as much of the president’s agenda as they can,” said Ryan Abraham, a former Senate Finance Committee aide who is now a principal at EY’s Washington Council.

The White House may also be hoping that Senate Democrats propose tax increases that go beyond House Democrats’ legislation. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenWant a clean energy future? Look to the tax code Democrats brace for toughest stretch yet with Biden agenda Lawmakers lay out arguments for boosting clean energy through infrastructure MORE (D-Ore.) has expressed interest in tax-increase options that were not in the Ways and Means bill, such as taxing billionaires’ investment gains annually and an excise tax on stock buybacks.

“This policy is far from done,” Abraham said.

At the same time, Biden has to get nearly every Democratic House member and every Democratic senator to vote for a final piece of legislation, and some moderates have already raised concerns about tax and spending proposals in House Democrats’ bill. 

On Wednesday, Biden met with Sens. Joe ManchinJoe ManchinBriahna Joy Gray: Push toward major social spending amid pandemic was ‘short-lived’ Overnight Energy & Environment — Presented by Climate Power — Emissions heading toward pre-pandemic levels Biden discusses agenda with Schumer, Pelosi ahead of pivotal week MORE (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten SinemaKyrsten SinemaOvernight Energy & Environment — Presented by Climate Power — Emissions heading toward pre-pandemic levels Biden discusses agenda with Schumer, Pelosi ahead of pivotal week Biden goes after top 1 percent in defending tax hikes MORE (D-Ariz.), two moderates who have raised concerns about the size of the social-spending package.

Democrats will also face a major effort from business groups and Republicans to advocate against his tax proposals. For example, a group of financial industry and business organizations on Friday urged House leaders to not adopt Biden’s IRS information reporting proposal, saying it is not well targeted at uncovering instances of wealthy people not complying with tax laws.

Congressional observers say Biden will need to work to get moderates and progressive to reach a consensus.

“When the political margins are very tight, you just can’t ignore that,” said Jorge Castro, a former congressional aide and senior IRS official who now is a co-leader of the tax-policy practice at Miller & Chevalier.

 



Read original article here

Democratic plan would close tax break on exchange-traded funds

U.S. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., questions IRS Commissioner Charles P. Rettig at a June 8, 2021 Senate Finance Committee hearing.

Tom Williams | Pool | Reuters

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., has floated a new levy on exchange-traded funds to help pay for the Democrats’ $3.5 trillion budget package. 

Exchange-traded funds are a basket of assets, such as stocks or bonds, and can be bought or sold throughout the day like stock. While everyday investors don’t directly own the shares, a fund manager may buy or sell the underlying assets to financial institutions. 

Regular investors typically avoid taxes while owning the fund because financial institutions can swap the underlying assets for others, known as an “in-kind” trade, which doesn’t trigger capital gains.

Wyden has called for ending the tax break for these in-kind transactions, according to the proposal, which may affect all investors across the $6.8 trillion U.S. exchange-traded fund industry.

The plan aims to crack down on the financial institutions that bypass capital gains taxes.

“We’re only talking about the taxable accounts of the wealthiest investors,” said Wyden in a statement, as the plan exempts ETFs in tax-deferred retirement plans, such as 401(k) plans or individual retirement accounts.  

“This particular proposal simply applies the same rules already in place for corporations to regulated investment companies, so wealthy investors can no longer avoid all tax on their gains,” he said.

More from Personal Finance:
Mega Millions and Powerball jackpots are now above $400 million
House Democrats promise ‘meaningful’ relief for SALT deduction cap
You don’t have to be Britney Spears to get a prenup

Fund managers use the in-kind trading strategy to get rid of appreciated assets without creating a taxable transaction.

For example, a fund manager may tell a financial institution to deposit stocks, and the financial institution redeems the assets the fund manager wanted to sell two days later, known as a “heartbeat trade.”

“Everyone uses [heartbeat trades] when there’s going to be a rebalancing,” said Jeffrey Colon, professor of law at Fordham University who has researched the topic.

Wyden’s plan to tax in-kind trading has already received pushback from the exchange-traded fund industry saying the plan may hurt smaller investors as they could be liable for taxes as well.

Wyden’s proposal may raise $200 billion over the next decade, according to preliminary estimates from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation. However, lawmakers are still debating ways to fund the $3.5 trillion budget.

“As the Senate Democratic caucus continues to look at the menu of tax policy I’ve put forward, this package of loophole closers will be an important part of our conversation,” Wyden said.

Read original article here

Senators reach bipartisan deal on cryptocurrency amendment 

Republican Sens. Pat ToomeyPatrick (Pat) Joseph ToomeyBlack women look to build upon gains in coming elections Watch live: GOP senators present new infrastructure proposal Sasse rebuked by Nebraska Republican Party over impeachment vote MORE (Pa.) and Cynthia LummisCynthia Marie LummisThe Senate should support innovation and pass the Lummis-Wyden-Toomey amendment The “compromise” crypto amendment is no compromise at all Hillicon Valley: Cryptocurrency clash complicate’s infrastructure bill’s path forward | FTC hits Facebook over ‘inaccurate’ explanation for banning researchers | Yelp to allow filtering for business requiring vaccination MORE (Wyo.) said an amendment to the infrastructure bill that would redefine who falls subject to cryptocurrency regulation requirements will be brought for a unanimous consent vote on Monday afternoon after a group  of bipartisan senators and the Treasury Department came to an agreement.

The amendment, which will be co-sponsored by Sens. Mark WarnerMark Robert WarnerThe Senate should support innovation and pass the Lummis-Wyden-Toomey amendment The “compromise” crypto amendment is no compromise at all Hillicon Valley: Cryptocurrency clash complicate’s infrastructure bill’s path forward | FTC hits Facebook over ‘inaccurate’ explanation for banning researchers | Yelp to allow filtering for business requiring vaccination MORE (D-Va.), Rob PortmanRobert (Rob) Jones PortmanThe Senate should support innovation and pass the Lummis-Wyden-Toomey amendment Republicans renew intraparty battle over trillion-dollar spending The “compromise” crypto amendment is no compromise at all MORE (R-Ohio) and Kyrsten SinemaKyrsten SinemaSenate votes to end debate on T infrastructure bill McConnell urges Biden to withdraw embattled ATF nominee The “compromise” crypto amendment is no compromise at all MORE (D-Ariz.), seeks to amend the definition of a “broker” in the underlying infrastructure bill in a way that would keep software developers and transaction validators from being subject to the new reporting requirements. 

Notably, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenSenate votes to end debate on T infrastructure bill GOP senator vows to slow-walk T infrastructure bill, sparking standoff The Senate should support innovation and pass the Lummis-Wyden-Toomey amendment MORE (D-Ore.), who was a leading force in the charge to amend the definition, is not sponsoring the amendment. Wyden signaled he would not oppose the amendment, tweeting that it is “certainly better than the underlying bill.”

“We’ve been working hard to get a deal. I don’t believe the cryptocurrency amendment language on offer is good enough to protect privacy and security, but it’s certainly better than the underlying bill. Majority Leader [Charles] Schumer [D-N.Y.] says he won’t block a unanimous consent request on it,” Wyden tweeted shortly before the deal was announced.  

Toomey said senators will put forward the amendment this afternoon.

It would take just one senator to block a vote on the compromised amendment, leaving the underlying infrastructure bill with the language fiercely opposed by the cryptocurrency industry based on arguments that it would call for developers and so-called miners to report information to tax collectors that they don’t have access to.

Wyden had put forward an amendment last week with Toomey and Lummis with broader exemptions laid out to limit who would be subject to the reporting requirements.

The amendment pitted the Democratic finance chair against the Biden administration.

The administration chose to back a competing bill that Warner, Portman and Sinema proposed with more narrow cryptocurrency regulation exemptions.

“While we each would have drafted this solution differently, we all agree it’s important to ensure that these obligations are properly crafted to apply only to entities that are regularly effectuating transactions of digital assets in exchange for consideration. To best memorialize this common understanding, we propose to incorporate this important amendment into the infrastructure bill and urge our colleagues to join us in enacting this bipartisan clarification,” Toomey, Warner Lummis, Sinema and Portman said in a joint statement.

A spokesperson for the Treasury Department confirmed the department was consulted and does not oppose the amendment.

A sticking point Toomey and Lummis had with the competing Warner-Portman-Sinema proposal was that the amendment had included parameters based on different technologies used to validate cryptocurrency transactions. 

The compromise bill does not include language that regulates based on the technology used to validate transactions.

Cryptocurrency industry leaders had fiercely pushed back on the Warner, Portman and Sinema amendment, but on Monday said the new compromise amendment was a better fix to issues they had with the broad “broker” definition in the underlying bill and urged senators to support it.

Jerry Brito, executive director for Coin Center, said that the amendment “sufficiently” defines brokers in a way that “it would be difficult to argue it covers protocol devs who only write and publish code.”

“That all said, there is a lot of work left to be done. While this is better than the base text, the provision still has other issues besides the ‘broker’ definition,” Brito tweeted.

Kristin Smith, executive director of the Block Chain Association, similarly offered measured support for the amendment.

“This isn’t perfect, but better than the underlying bill. More work to do, but the Senate should move to adopt this language today,” Smith tweeted.

The association had urged supporters last week to call senators to oppose the Warner, Portman and Sinema amendment.

Toomey and Lummis also told reporters that their support of the amendment does not mean that they will support the underlying infrastructure bill, which they said they oppose for reasons unrelated to the cryptocurrency regulation.



Read original article here

How Washington and Big Tech won the global tax fight – POLITICO

Press play to listen to this article

Washington may have fallen out of love with Big Tech. But when it comes to revamping the world’s tax system, the United States backed Silicon Valley against the world.

The U.S. government fended off a largely European push to force the likes of Google, Facebook and Amazon to pay more into national coffers worldwide. Instead of targeting digital — and almost exclusively American — companies, Washington succeeded in convincing countries to agree on a tax regime that requires the world’s largest companies, digital or not, to pay more tax in countries wherever they have local operations.

Those negotiations, overseen by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), come to a close Thursday. While talks are ongoing, the U.S. and Silicon Valley are on track to avoid the worst-case scenarios that had initially appeared likely, including national taxes in countries like France and the U.K. that would have solely targeted American tech companies.

The new system, expected to be approved by the Group of 20’s finance ministers on July 9, will also set a global minimum tax rate of roughly 15 percent to stop multinational firms from shopping around for international jurisdictions where they can pay the least amount of tax.

In Washington, the upcoming global tax announcement is already being framed as a win for the U.S. economy. It follows a long-standing strategy, one that has bipartisan support, to oppose other countries’ efforts to pocket more tax revenue from Silicon Valley’s biggest names — revenue that would otherwise go to U.S. coffers.

“Making sure we actually get rid of these discriminatory taxes has an enormous impact on our country, and I have made it clear the Biden administration actually has to get it done,” U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who chairs the Senate’s Finance Committee, told POLITICO. 

Big Tech disrupts tax

Under the prospective tax agreement, the largest U.S. tech companies will still have to pay more tax overseas in a complex formula where profits, above a certain threshold, will be divided among countries.

But by expanding the global tax overhaul to encompass the entire economy – and not just the digital world — U.S. policymakers and Silicon Valley sidestepped a charge, led by the European Union, to slap new levies exclusively on the tech giants. Under the new agreement, German carmaker Volkswagen or British bank HSBC will be just as liable to pay up as Google or Facebook.

Many EU leaders believed U.S. tech giants disproportionately benefited during the COVID-19 crisis, as much of everyday life moved online. U.S. tech companies argue it’s unfair to single out the sector as the entire economy becomes more digitized every year. 

“We should do what we can to avoid any arbitrary distinctions,” said Megan Funkhouser, director of tax and trade policy at the Information Technology Industry Council, a trade group that counts Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Twitter and other tech companies as members. 

The culmination of the years-long negotiations in the coming days highlights how the tech sector, which has already upended large parts of the global economy, became a catalyst in disrupting the international tax system, according to tax officials, trade groups and independent analysts. 

“We’re at a point where it’s bigger than tech,” said Sam Rizzo, director of policy at ITI, the trade group, said in reference to the global tax talks. “It’s about what is a sustainable tax policy from a U.S. foreign policy perspective.”

Thanks to the U.S., initial efforts to capture profits from online advertising and other digital services — often parked in low-tax regimes like Ireland and Luxembourg — have now morphed into a comprehensive global tax overhaul whose effects will be felt in almost every industry and capitals worldwide.

“What the U.S. did was to jumpstart the talks,” said William Reinch, a senior adviser to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think tank, and former Clinton-era official. “These talks will go down to the wire. But if successful, they represent a watershed moment.”

A united front

Silicon Valley is still fighting U.S. policymakers on multiple fronts, including the big tech companies’ role in enabling the spread of election-related misinformation and alleged abuse of market dominance.

But policymakers put those fights aside when it came to tax policy. In recent months, they have been keen to keep their doors open to tech giants, which provided regular updates on how digital services taxes worldwide were affecting them and offered suggestions on how the U.S. can intervene to protect them. 

The detente is because on taxes, U.S. foreign policy and Big Tech’s interests are aligned. 

Washington is eager to hold on to the lion’s share of tax from these extremely profitable companies, which means ensuring other countries don’t dole out their own digital levies. 

“It’s not that they are tech companies, it’s that they are American companies,” said one Democratic aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “It happens to be that there’s a single industry that is very large and successful and important and profitable that is almost exclusively American. It’s hard to think of another industry where the U.S. has such a strong position.”

On tax issues, tech companies and U.S. officials share memos, jump on Zoom calls and debrief each other regularly, according to seven officials, congressional aides, trade body representatives and corporate executives. Many spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the interactions. 

The global digital tax conversations are separate from ongoing discussions about contentious policy topics like content moderation, privacy and antitrust. There’s little, if any, “cross-pollination” among those issues, those people said, adding company executives who handle tax policy often don’t handle other tech issues. 

It helps that in government, tax policy falls under the U.S. Congress’ finance-focused committees, not panels that oversee privacy and Big Tech’s content legal liability protections.

American officials view other countries’ unilateral digital taxes as discriminatory, and have threatened billions of dollars in retaliatory tariffs if the likes of France and Spain don’t back down. Tech executives have been eager to promote that message, warning international policymakers they risk starting a potential transatlantic trade war if they pursue their own domestic taxes.

Sharing intel

The U.S. Treasury has kept the industry up to speed in its ongoing talks, while tech officials have shared details from their conversations with international policymakers, according to those aides, officials and executives who spoke on the condition of anonymity. 

In late 2020, for instance, tech companies alerted Capitol Hill staffers when France started collecting its digital services taxes after promising to postpone the levy while international talks continued. 

“We wouldn’t have known that until the companies said, ‘Hey just so you know, we got a bill from the French government,’” said another Democratic aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

OECD experts and politicians from business-friendly countries like Ireland — home to many of these companies’ international operations — have routinely met with tax experts from Microsoft, Facebook and others over the last two years to discuss the ongoing international negotiations, according to freedom of information requests to the Irish government submitted by POLITICO.

“One of my teams has been actively providing technical inputs to the OECD Secretariat for a good two years now to help them kind of work out how to do this,” Nick Clegg, head of Facebook’s global public policy and communications team, said in reference to the ongoing talks. “You can imagine what our interest is, and obviously I’ve also got a self interest, in having clear non-discriminatory rules, which are evenly applied and easy for us to follow.” 

Washington has been public in its support for the tech sector.

When the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) first began investigating France’s digital services taxes in 2019, eight of the 10 witnesses at its public hearings represented at least one of the top tech companies. Jennifer McCloskey, who participated as ITI’s vice president of policy, subsequently became a senior tax manager for Google in 2020, where she continues to work on the issue. 

Hearings held by President Joe Biden’s USTR on numerous countries’ digital services taxes earlier this year mostly featured representatives of the tech companies, particularly through ACT, a lobby group, which counts Apple as a member.

Despite their political differences, Biden and former President Donald Trump have pursued almost identical digital tax policies, although the new administration dropped proposals from Biden’s predecessor that would have made the pending global tax overhaul merely voluntary for companies worldwide.

Tax all companies

A turning point in the yearslong tax talks came in early April.

The U.S. unveiled a plan to reinvigorate the stuttering negotiations, which had descended into tit-for-tat threats from European capitals over imposing unilateral digital taxes, and from Washington about slapping foreign companies with retaliatory tariffs.

By focusing on the biggest firms — those with revenues of at least $20 billion and profit margins of more than 10 percent — the Biden administration hoped to streamline the global tax overhaul into a more manageable system that could be quickly approved, according to three officials involved in the discussions, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

Both sides gave ground.

After France balked that Amazon, whose profit margins are below the 10 percent threshold, may not be included in the new regime, negotiators tweaked the deal so that a company’s profitable business units would be included even if its overall profit margin didn’t make the cut. That allowed the company’s cloud business, Amazon Web Services, to be part of the prospective deal even as the e-commerce giant’s overall profit margin hovered under 7 percent. 

The United Kingdom fought hard to keep its domestic financial services sector, which competes with that of New York, out of the pact. But U.S. officials rejected such a carve-out, arguing that if the U.S. tech companies were included, so too should other countries’ high-profile industries.

Negotiators are still finalizing the tax deal, expected to be announced Thursday, and details may still change, according to the officials close to the ongoing talks. 

Yet as the hours count down to a likely agreement, it is Washington and Silicon Valley, not other national capitals, that have the most to rejoice.

Some U.S. tech giants will be part of the overall tax revamp. But other countries’ industrial champions will also have to pay more — a recognition that to persuade the U.S. to sign on to the global deal, mostly-European policymakers had to give up their ambition to target Big Tech with new digital levies.

“If anybody has integrity. I think they’re going to say all companies are in for whatever criteria we finally adopt and let the chips fall where they may,” said Peter Barnes, a lawyer at the tax firm Caplin and Drysdale who was previously a senior international tax counsel for General Electric. “That’s the only way a deal is going to last.”

Want more analysis from POLITICO? POLITICO Pro is our premium intelligence service for professionals. From financial services to trade, technology, cybersecurity and more, Pro delivers real time intelligence, deep insight and breaking scoops you need to keep one step ahead. Email [email protected] to request a complimentary trial.

for(var key in aepc_pixel_args) args[key] = aepc_pixel_args[key];

return args; };

// Extend args if ( 'yes' === aepc_pixel.enable_advanced_events ) { aepc_pixel_args.userAgent = navigator.userAgent; aepc_pixel_args.language = navigator.language;

if ( document.referrer.indexOf( document.domain ) < 0 ) { aepc_pixel_args.referrer = document.referrer; } } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.agent="dvpixelcaffeinewordpress";n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', aepc_pixel.pixel_id, aepc_pixel.user); setTimeout( function() { fbq('track', "PageView", aepc_pixel_args); }, aepc_pixel.fire_delay * 1000 );

Read original article here

House Democrats pass sweeping $1.9T COVID-19 relief bill with minimum wage hike

House Democrats passed their sweeping $1.9 trillion coronavirus aid package in a party-line vote early Saturday morning, advancing President BidenJoe BidenBiden ‘disappointed’ in Senate parliamentarian ruling but ‘respects’ decision Taylor Swift celebrates House passage of Equality Act Donald Trump Jr. calls Bruce Springsteen’s dropped charges ‘liberal privilege’ MORE’s top legislative priority.

Lawmakers passed the bill 219-212, with two Democrats — Reps. Jared Golden (Maine) and Kurt SchraderWalter (Kurt) Kurt SchraderHouse Democrats to keep minimum wage hike in COVID-19 relief bill for Friday vote Democrats face unity test on Biden’s .9T bill Senate Democrats likely to face key test of unity on 2022 budget MORE (Ore.) — joining all Republicans in voting against it. Democrats could only afford up to four defections with their narrow House majority.

The bill’s passage comes days after the COVID-19 death toll in the U.S. surpassed 500,000 people while more contagious virus variants remain a threat to containing the pandemic.

Lawmakers are hoping to build on the momentum from vaccines gradually reaching people to end the global pandemic that’s shaken up American life for most of the past year. 

The relief package now heads to the Senate, where Democrats are expected to amend it next week and send it back to the House for approval before unemployment insurance benefits expire on March 14.

The legislation, which was modeled after Biden’s proposal, includes provisions to provide a third round of direct stimulus checks of up to $1,400 for individuals, a $400 weekly unemployment insurance boost through Aug. 29, and $8.5 billion in funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to distribute, track and promote public confidence in COVID-19 vaccines.

The direct payments of up to $1,400 for individuals or $2,800 for married couples are the largest pandemic impact payments yet, after the two previous rounds last year maxed out at $1,200 and $600. 

Individuals with incomes of up to $75,000 and married couples earning up to $150,000 would be eligible for the full amounts, while the payments would phase out for individuals making up to $100,000 or $200,000 for couples.

Other key parts of the massive package include $350 billion for state and local governments, $130 billion to help K-12 schools reopen for in-person classroom instruction, and an expansion of the child tax credit to $3,000 per child or $3,600 for children under six years of age. 

But one component of the bill that the House passed early Saturday is doomed to be left on the cutting room floor once it reaches the Senate: an increase in the federal minimum wage from the current $7.25 per hour to $15. 

The Senate parliamentarian ruled on Thursday that the minimum wage hike would not comply with the budget rules required to pass bills under the reconciliation process, which Democrats are using so that their pandemic relief package won’t be subject to a GOP filibuster in the upper chamber. 

House Democrats opted to keep the minimum wage provision in the bill as a show of support for the top progressive priority. 

“Even if it is inconceivable to some, it is inevitable to us. And we will work diligently to shorten the distance between the inevitable and the inconceivable,” Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiMinimum wage setback revives progressive calls to nix Senate filibuster House Democrats to keep minimum wage hike in COVID-19 relief bill for Friday vote Schiff sees challenges for intel committee, community in Trump’s shadow MORE (D-Calif.) said of raising the wage. 

The push to raise the minimum wage to $15 has been met with strong pushback from Republicans and a handful of centrist Democratic lawmakers, who cited a Congressional Budget Office report estimating that while it would lift 900,000 people out of poverty, it would also lead to 1.4 million job losses.

Only one sitting House Democrat, Rep. Kurt Schrader (Ore.), voted against a bill in 2019 to raise the minimum wage to $15. While Schrader’s preference for a regionally-adjusted minimum wage over a federal statute for $15 didn’t threaten the relief package’s prospects in the House, it’s a more delicate balance for Democrats’ 50-50 standing in the Senate.

Democratic Sens. Joe ManchinJoseph (Joe) ManchinMinimum wage setback revives progressive calls to nix Senate filibuster Biden ‘disappointed’ in Senate parliamentarian ruling but ‘respects’ decision House Democrats to keep minimum wage hike in COVID-19 relief bill for Friday vote MORE (W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.) both expressed opposition to including the $15 minimum wage as part of the COVID-19 relief package. Manchin has called for increasing the minimum wage to $11 per hour instead, arguing it’s a more reasonable level for a state like West Virginia.

Democrats are weighing proposals from Sens. Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenBiden nominee previews post-Trump trade agenda Labor expands jobless aid for workers who reject employers skirting COVID-19 rules Democrats hesitant to raise taxes amid pandemic MORE (Ore.) and Bernie SandersBernie SandersHouse Democrats to keep minimum wage hike in COVID-19 relief bill for Friday vote Sanders slams parliamentarian decision on minimum wage Parliamentarian nixes minimum wage hike in coronavirus bill MORE (I-Vt.) that would impose penalties on large corporations that don’t pay employees at least $15 an hour and incentivize small businesses to increase workers’ wages. 

A senior Democratic aide said Friday that Senate Majority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerHillicon Valley: Biden signs order on chips | Hearing on media misinformation | Facebook’s deal with Australia | CIA nominee on SolarWinds House Rules release new text of COVID-19 relief bill Budowsky: Cruz goes to Cancun, AOC goes to Texas MORE (D-N.Y.) is considering adding such a provision to the relief package, while top House Democrats were still noncommittal on the idea.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthyKevin McCarthySchiff sees challenges for intel committee, community in Trump’s shadow Cruz hires Trump campaign press aide as communications director Conservatives go after Cheney for Trump CPAC remarks MORE (R-Calif.), meanwhile, called the tax incentive proposal “stupid” and questioned why the minimum wage and other provisions were attached to a bill related to coronavirus relief. 

“The swamp is back,” McCarthy declared during House floor debate. “To my colleagues who say this bill is bold, I say it’s bloated. To those who say it’s urgent, I say it’s unfocused. To those who say it is popular, I say it is entirely partisan. It has the wrong priorities.”

The final vote on the pandemic relief package didn’t occur until well after midnight on Saturday because Republicans delayed proceedings for several hours by speaking before the House Rules Committee on the more than 200 amendments they submitted to the bill. 

None of the GOP amendments, which ran the gamut from stripping the bill of the minimum wage provision to requiring K-12 schools to have reopening plans for in-person teaching in place in order to access full funding, were granted floor time. 

It’s possible that Democrats could pass a separate bill to increase the minimum wage, but it would be subject to a 60-vote threshold to clear a Senate GOP filibuster. 

“I guarantee you there’ll be a raise in the minimum wage before the election,” House Budget Committee Chairman John YarmuthJohn Allen YarmuthDemocrats call for relief package to waive taxes on unemployment benefits Democrats in standoff over minimum wage On The Money: Neera Tanden’s nomination in peril after three GOP noes | Trump rages after SCOTUS rules on financial records MORE (D-Ky.) told reporters in the Capitol. “Hold me to it.”

Progressives are calling for Vice President Harris, the president of the Senate, to overrule the parliamentarian’s advisory opinion or for Democrats to abolish the filibuster to ensure that the campaign promise of a minimum wage increase can eventually become law under Biden.

“So it’s not just about minimum wage, because Democrats made a lot of promises in winning the House, the Senate and the White House. And it’s going to come up again and again. So we’re gonna have to make a choice here. Are we going to stick to these rules or are we actually going to use the levers of government to work for the people?” said Congressional Progressive Caucus Chairwoman Pramila JayapalPramila JayapalBiden ‘disappointed’ in Senate parliamentarian ruling but ‘respects’ decision House Democrats to keep minimum wage hike in COVID-19 relief bill for Friday vote Bill would strip pension for president convicted of felony MORE (D-Wash.).

“To me that’s not radical — that’s governing.”



Read original article here

Biden, GOP senators agree to more COVID-19 talks after ‘excellent’ first meeting

President Biden and a group of 10 GOP senators agreed on Monday to hold additional negotiations on coronavirus relief, as they look to find room to craft a bipartisan agreement. 

The group of Republicans met with Biden at the White House on Monday for roughly two hours, significantly longer than either side had expected the meeting would last. Both sides characterized the meeting as productive, though the White House indicated that Biden would not back down from his demand for a robust package despite opposition from Republicans. 

Sen. Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsBiden meeting with GOP senators Monday on coronavirus relief Biden invites GOP senators to White House for relief talks The president has changed, but Washington hasn’t MORE (R-Maine), who has taken the lead on trying to negotiate a deal, called the meeting “very productive” and “cordial.” 

“It was a very good exchange of views. I wouldn’t say that we came together on a package tonight, no one expected that in a two hour meeting. But what we did agree to do was follow up and talk further at the staff level and amongst ourselves and with the president and vice president on how we can continue to work together on this very important issue,” Collins said outside of the White House on Monday night. 

The White House in a statement called the meeting “productive” and “substantive” but added that Biden “reiterated that while he is hopeful that the Rescue Plan can pass with bipartisan support, a reconciliation package is a path to achieve that end.” The White House also made clear that Biden believes the $618 billion proposal unveiled by the GOP senators falls short.

“While there were areas of agreement, the President also reiterated his view that Congress must respond boldly and urgently, and noted many areas which the Republican senators’ proposal does not address,” White House press secretary Jen PsakiJen PsakiBiden meeting with GOP senators Monday on coronavirus relief Biden invites GOP senators to White House for relief talks Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi detained in early morning raid as military takes over country MORE said. “The President also made clear that the American Rescue Plan was carefully designed to meet the stakes of this moment, and any changes in it cannot leave the nation short of its pressing needs.”

The meeting marked Biden’s first visit he’s had with lawmakers in the Oval Office, a fact Collins touted to reporters. 

“[It] was an excellent meeting, and we’re very appreciative that as his first official meeting in the Oval Office the president chose to spend so much time with us in a frank and very useful discussion,” she said. 

The GOP group used the sit-down meeting to explain their $618 billion coronavirus proposal to Biden, Vice President Harris and top aides. The White House also provided more details on its $1.9 trillion package after senators in both parties pushed for more details on how the administration came up with its proposal. 

Collins — the only GOP senator to speak after the meeting — didn’t address a decision by Democratic leadership to lay the groundwork this week for passing a coronavirus bill by a simple majority, allowing them to bypass GOP support if they need to. 

Instead, she noted Congress has previously been able to negotiate bipartisan coronavirus relief bills. Many of the senators were part of the so-called 908 coalition that proposed a framework late last year that leadership credited with breaking a months-long stalemate. 

“We have demonstrated in the last year that we can come together on a bipartisan package. … I am hopeful that we can once again pass a sixth bipartisan COVID relief package,” Collins said. 

But there are big differences between the package offered by the GOP group and the larger $1.9 trillion one backed by Democrats. While Biden would prefer to sign a bill with GOP support, the White House made clear Monday that he would support Democrats passing the bill through reconciliation with a simple majority.

The GOP proposal includes $160 billion in pandemic response funding including protective equipment and more money for vaccine distribution. It also extends the $300 per week federal unemployment benefit through June 30.

The bill includes a $1,000 direct payment to Americans, compared with the $1,400 direct payment in Biden’s plans, with $500 for adult dependents and children. The proposal also lowers the income cap for qualifying for the direct assistance.

Under previous coronavirus bills, individuals who make up to $75,000 would receive the check, with the amount of the payment phasing out after that. But under the GOP proposal, individuals who make up to $40,000 would get a $1,000 check, with the amount of the check phasing out altogether at $50,000.

It also includes $20 billion in additional funding for schools, $20 billion in child care funding, an additional $50 billion in small business aid, $12 billion for nutrition assistance and $4 billion for behavioral health resources.

But incoming Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenHillicon Valley: Fallout from Reddit-driven stock rallies, GameStop purchase ban continues | Lawmakers grill NSA on years-old breach in the wake of massive Russian hack | Facebook reportedly considering antitrust lawsuit against Apple Lawmakers grill NSA on years-old breach in the wake of massive Russian hack Lawmakers offer bill to repeal cap on SALT deduction MORE (D-Ore.) warned that the GOP offer didn’t go far enough, previewing the backlash Biden is likely to face if he agrees to go substantially lower. 

“The package outlined by 10 Senate Republicans is far too small to provide the relief the American people need. In particular, a three-month extension of jobless benefits is a non-starter. … We can’t keep jumping from cliff to cliff every few months,” Wyden said in a statement, adding that an “extension of benefits for at least six months is essential.”

Democratic Sen. Jon TesterJonathan (Jon) TesterIndigenous groups mount campaign against ABC’s ‘Big Sky’ VA secretary nominee sails through confirmation hearing To protect our parks, hit pause on leasing MORE (Mont.), one of the caucus’s more moderate members, also warned that he didn’t think the GOP plan was big enough. 

“I think it’s got to be bigger than that. … If we have to come back time and time and time again, I just don’t think that’s good for the economy, I don’t think it’s good for certainty,” Tester said. 

The meeting comes hours after Senate Majority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerCongressional Democrats are on the wrong side of impeachment politics Proposal for permanent Capitol fencing sparks bipartisan pushback Immigration reform can’t wait MORE (D-N.Y.) and Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiBiden meeting with GOP senators Monday on coronavirus relief Portman says Republican leadership ‘ought to stand up’ against Greene’s comments Congressional Democrats are on the wrong side of impeachment politics MORE (D-Calif.) filed a budget resolution that will include instructions to craft a $1.9 trillion bill that Democrats could pass under reconciliation, which allows them to avoid a 60-vote legislative filibuster. 

“Democrats welcome the ideas and input of our Senate Republican colleagues. The only thing we cannot accept is a package that is too small or too narrow to pull our country out of this emergency. We cannot repeat the mistake of 2009,” Schumer said from the Senate floor.

— Morgan Chalfant contributed.

— Updated 8:57 p.m.



Read original article here