Senate Republicans Consider Automatic Tax Hikes If Revenue Falls Short

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and members Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas and Sen. Patrick Toomey, R-Pa., back left, walk from the the West Wing to speak to reporters after a meeting with Pres... Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and members Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas and Sen. Patrick Toomey, R-Pa., back left, walk from the the West Wing to speak to reporters after a meeting with President Donald Trump at the White House in Washington, Monday, Nov. 27, 2017. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans are considering a trigger that would automatically increase taxes if their sweeping legislation fails to generate as much revenue as they expect. It’s an effort to mollify deficit hawks who worry that tax cuts for businesses and individuals will add to the nation’s already mounting debt.

The effort comes as a second Republican senator, Steve Daines of Montana, announced Monday that he opposes the tax bill in its current form. Previously, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., said he opposed the bill, leaving Senate Republicans no room for error as they hope to vote on the bill this week.

Both senators complained that the tax bill favors large corporations over small businesses. Republicans have only two votes to spare in the Senate, where they hold a 52-48 edge and anticipate Vice President Mike Pence breaking a tie.

At the White House, President Donald Trump maintained that the bill would help all Americans.

“I think it’s going to benefit everybody,” the president said. “It’s going to mostly benefit people looking for jobs more than anything else, because we’re giving great incentives.”

Senate Republicans indicated that they still had a way to go to secure the votes.

“We’re making progress, minute by minute, hour by hour, day by day. But we’re not there yet,” said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate. Pressed on timing, he said the expectation is a vote this week.

A new congressional estimate says the Senate tax bill would add $1.4 trillion to the budget deficit over the next decade. But GOP leaders dispute the estimate, saying tax cuts will spur economic growth, reducing the hit on the deficit.

Many economists disagree with such optimistic projections. The trigger would be a way for senators to test their economic assumptions, with real consequences if they are wrong.

“Do we have realistic numbers and is there a backstop in the process just in case we don’t?” asked Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla.

“We should build in the ‘What if?’ What if this doesn’t work?” Lankford said. “What changes might be needed in the tax code in the days ahead to be able to adjust in what scenario?”

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said the Trump administration and Senate Republican leaders are open to some kind of a trigger to increase revenues if the tax plan falls short.

Neither Corker nor Lankford spelled out exactly how the trigger would work, noting that senators are still working on the proposal. Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, said the trigger is possible. But, he added, the proposal could run afoul of the Senate’s byzantine budget rules.

Trump and Senate Republicans scrambled Monday to make changes to the bill in an effort to win over holdout GOP senators and pass a tax package by the end of the year. Corker said he spoke to White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and economic adviser Gary Cohn throughout the weekend, and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin was at his Senate office on Monday.

“Very possible,” Corker said when asked if he might vote “no” in the Senate Budget Committee on Tuesday if the revenue issue isn’t settled. “It’s important for me to know we’ve got this resolved,” he said.

Johnson told Wisconsin reporters on Monday, “If we develop a fix prior to committee, I’ll probably support it, but if we don’t I’ll vote against it.”

Trump and Senate leaders are trying to balance competing demands. While some senators fear the package’s debt consequences, others want more generous tax breaks for businesses. In a boost for the legislation, Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky said he would back the measure.

Trump hosted Republican members of the Senate Finance Committee at the White House on Monday. GOP leaders were still trying to round up the votes in the Senate to pass the bill.

Whatever the Senate passes must be reconciled with the House version of the tax bill.

Trump suggested he is open to making unspecified changes to the way millions of “pass-through” businesses are taxed, a sticking point for some lawmakers. These are businesses in which profits are passed onto the owners, who report the income on their individual tax returns. The vast majority of U.S. businesses, big and small, are taxed this way.

Both Daines and Johnson said the current bill doesn’t cut business taxes enough for these types of partnerships and corporations. Johnson gets substantial income from such companies, including a manufacturer he helped found in Wisconsin and a commercial real estate company, according to his financial disclosure statements.

Johnson said Trump has assured lawmakers there will be changes. Trump is to travel to Capitol Hill on Tuesday to lobby Republican senators personally.

The overall tax package blends a sharp reduction in top corporate and business tax rates with more modest relief for individuals.

In signaling his support, Paul wrote in an op-ed on Fox News: “I’m not getting everything I want — far from it. But I’ve been immersed in this process. I’ve fought for and received major changes for the better — and I plan to vote for this bill as it stands right now.”

___

Associated Press writers Andrew Taylor, Ken Thomas and Zeke Miller contributed to this report.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. So…the scenario would be: tax revenues are falling, meaning the economy is slipping, and then taxes would hike…sounds like a plan!

    In reality, of course, the GOP would simply say, “We can’t raise taxes now like we said we would because raising taxes on the downturn would be imprudent.” Ta da!

  2. How much debt would we have to build up before the trigger kicks in? And where would the increase in revenue come from when that happens? Corporations and pass-through businesses? Or middle class workers who get a W-2? And how much will Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid be cut after the mid-terms to throw some more pain on 90-95% of Americans?

  3. Avatar for drwho drwho says:

    “Johnson gets substantial income from such companies, including a
    manufacturer he helped found in Wisconsin and a commercial real estate
    company, according to his financial disclosure statements.”

    Trumpf also gets substantial income from such companies. Of course, without his tax returns there’s no way of knowing how substantial.

    Why is Congress even considering tax cuts (“reform” haha) without seeing Trumpf’s tax returns?

  4. Avatar for marknc marknc says:

    My guess would be a BIGGER cut for the top 1/10 of 1% as a “stimulus” and a 10% increase on people making $20-120k.

    Of course, the tax cut adder for the rich (since they make a enormous amount of money) would still be bigger than the 10% increase on the masses so they would have to come back and do it again.

    • protectionist trade policies / autarky
    • absolutely no financial regulation
    • tax increases in the event of an economic slump

    These fuckers are setting up the next goddamn Great Depression.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

25 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for george_c Avatar for paulw Avatar for austin_dave Avatar for voreason Avatar for cometboy Avatar for Lacuna-Synecdoche Avatar for otterqueen Avatar for daveyjones64 Avatar for arc_of_the_universe Avatar for dddinah Avatar for benthere Avatar for thunderclapnewman Avatar for texastwostep Avatar for romi Avatar for marknc Avatar for rickjones Avatar for kumquat16 Avatar for coprophagoussmile Avatar for drwho Avatar for phillip Avatar for moniker

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: