众议院筹款委员会主席詹森·史密斯。2023年5月30日星期二，在华盛顿国会大厦，众议院规则委员会准备了债务限额法案，即2023年财政责任法案，以供投票表决。他的右边是加州民主党众议员迈克·汤普森和堪萨斯州共和党众议员罗恩·埃斯蒂斯。和民主党众议员布伦丹·博伊尔。
华盛顿-在两党就债务上限达成协议成为法律仅六天后，众议院共和党人提出了一系列减税措施，导致民主党人指责民主党人虚伪，这场争吵显示了美国经济的两种冲突愿景。
共和党议员正在推动为公司和富人大幅减税，以此作为维持经济增长的主要动力，而总统乔·拜登和民主党人则寻求更有针对性的减税，以实现社会目标，如减少儿童贫困和转向可再生能源，这从长远来看有助于经济发展。
共和党对企业的减税，加上家庭标准扣除额的增加，将通过取消拜登去年签署成为法律的10年内2160亿美元的税收减免来提供资金，以支持电动汽车和可再生能源的发展。
“他们应该把这个计划看作是更多的工作，更高的工资，”密苏里州众议员詹森·史密斯说。众议院筹款委员会主席。"我们正在取消不好的政策，代之以好的政策."
白宫官员表示，共和党人迅速转向减税，表明他们在债务限额辩论中从未对缩减赤字表现出诚意。共和党人上周在筹款委员会通过的许多(但不是全部)税收改革将是暂时的。
如果提议的变更与公司有关赋税拜登政府表示，如果被永久化，将会破坏本月提高政府借贷权限协议中的削减开支部分。
白宫国家经济委员会(White House National Economic Council)主任莱尔·布雷纳德(Lael Schmidt)表示:“我们刚刚获得一项平衡的两党减赤协议，他们就回来把5000亿美元的企业减税计划摆在桌面上。”。“就是前后矛盾。”
这场争论为2024年的奥运会做好了准备选举美国和获胜者将面临的直接经济挑战:立法者将需要再次提高债务上限，2017年在时任总统唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)领导下通过的减税措施的关键部分将到期，除非延长，否则将导致大多数家庭的税收增加。
民主党人表示，共和党的最新计划将在很大程度上有利于公司和富裕家庭。它将使企业的某些税收优惠追溯到2022年。白宫表示，对公司过去所做的事情减税对创造共和党承诺的就业机会没有什么帮助。
“让我们深入研究并问一问，‘这些营业税减免将如何影响人们关心的事情?’“他们关心自己社区的好工作，”布雷纳德说追溯性税收意外之财会带来一份额外的工作吗?"
虽然共和党人将减税的前提是需要通过经济获得减税，但民主党人将他们首选的减税措施定位为几十年内发生的投资。
这种差异很重要，因为共和党人认为，就业可能来自较低的有效利率和政策，例如永久性地让小企业更容易完全支付新业务设备的成本，以及改变国税局对使用承包商的公司的要求。民主党人反驳说，从长远来看，帮助儿童并为清洁能源提供市场信号的税收减免将带来增长。
“关键政策的真正基础部分必须围绕我们如何进行长期投资，以帮助我们的社区，帮助我们的家庭，”D-Wash众议员Suzan DelBene说。他是民主党国会竞选委员会的主席。“共和党人一直是目光短浅的人，他们真正关注的是富人和有关系的人。”
政党之间的一个关键区别是他们如何向家庭提供资金。共和党的法案将在2024年和2025年将个人的标准扣除额增加2000美元，将家庭的标准扣除额增加4000美元。这听起来可能是一大笔钱，但它比人们想象的要少，因为这些总数适用于应税收入，而不是储蓄。
根据定义，低收入者从更慷慨的标准扣除中得到的退款会更少。根据税收政策中心的分析，收入最低的40%的家庭平均每月减税不到12美元。收入最高的20%的家庭每月平均减税46美元。
史密斯为自己的计划辩护说，该计划是根据选民在西弗吉尼亚、俄克拉荷马州和佐治亚州的实地听证会上告诉他的委员会的内容制定的。他说，作为税收计划一部分的三项法案产生于2月份开始的听证会，反映了立法者从选民那里听到的内容。
“我们通过的立法中的一切都来自华盛顿以外所有这些听证会的讨论或想法，”史密斯说。“所以这个法案是为工薪阶层家庭准备的。”
相比之下，民主党人更愿意通过更新扩大的儿童税收抵免来帮助家庭，由于拜登的2021年冠状病毒疫情救助计划，儿童税收抵免变得更加容易获得，规模也有所增加。作为扩展计划的一部分，每个家庭每个孩子每月可以获得多达300美元的补助，该计划在一年后失效。由于支付，儿童贫困率在2021年降至5.2%的历史低点。
紧张的另一个来源是共和党如何构建他们的成本。他们的许多减税政策将在2025年后到期，尽管他们想让他们的政策永久化。但是，他们想要取消的拜登减税政策将延续10年，这导致共和党人被指控隐瞒了他们减税的全部费用。负责任的联邦预算委员会(Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget)的一项估计表明，让整个共和党计划永久化的成本将超过1万亿美元，这将消除作为债务限额协议一部分的支出削减所带来的几乎所有节省。
“最讽刺的是成本，”税收政策中心的高级研究员霍华德·格莱克曼说。“他们拿走了10年的税收，并用它来支付两年的减税。他们让减税成为暂时的，这样看起来成本比实际成本低。”
倾向保守的政策组织税收基金会(Tax Foundation)估计，共和党的法案将在2024年和2025年略微提升美国经济的规模。但好处是有限的，因为企业减税大多是暂时的，不太可能改变企业的投资和招聘选择。
“当你考虑税收政策如何改善经济时，所有这些都是长期决策，”税收基金会的高级经济学家埃里卡·约克说。“如果你想让它尽可能有意义，那么就需要让它永久存在。”
虽然众议院的法案不太可能在参议院通过或得到拜登的签署，但它是两党如何看待税法的更广泛信息的一部分。正如民主党人对共和党的削减会带来增长深表怀疑一样，共和党人对通过国税局管理社会政策持谨慎态度。这些差异指向2025年的风险，届时债务限额戏剧重新开始，中产阶级和富人的税收优惠即将失效。
约克说:“税法的目的有一个根本性的脱节。”“这让我们在2025年面临一大堆不确定性。”
Who gets a break? Clashing ideas on tax relief are teed up for the 2024 campaign
WASHINGTON --Just six days after the bipartisan deal on the debt limit became law, House Republicans proposed a slew of tax cuts, leading to charges of hypocrisy by Democrats in a squabble that shows two clashing visions for the U.S. economy.
GOP lawmakers are pushing deep tax cuts for companies and the affluent as the primary driver for sustaining economic growth, while President Joe Biden and fellow Democrats seek more targeted tax cuts to achieve social goals such as reducing child poverty and shifting to renewable energy that can help the economy in the long run.
The Republican tax cuts for businesses, coupled with an increase in the standard deduction for households, would be funded by wiping out $216 billion in tax breaks over 10 years that Biden signed into law last year to support the development of electric vehicles and renewable energy.
“They should look at this plan as more jobs, higher wages,” said Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. “We are undoing bad policy and replacing it with good.”
White House officials say Republicans' quick pivot to tax cuts reveals they were never sincere about shrinking deficits during the debt limit debate. Many — but not all — of the tax changes that Republicans last week passed out of the Ways and Means Committee would be temporary.
If the proposed changes related to corporatetaxeswere made permanent, the Biden administration says, it would undermine the spending cuts that were part of the agreement this month to raise the government's borrowing authority.
“No sooner did we get a balanced bipartisan agreement to reduce deficits than they came back and put $500 billion of tax cuts for businesses on the table,” said Lael Brainard, director of the White House National Economic Council. “It’s just inconsistent.”
The dispute sets the stage for the 2024elections and the immediate economic challenges that the winners will face: Lawmakers will need to raise the debt limit again and key portions of the 2017 tax cuts passed under then-President Donald Trump will expire and cause taxes to rise for most households unless they are extended.
Democrats say the latest Republican plan would largely favor companies and better-off households. It would make certain tax breaks for businesses retroactive to 2022. The White House says that tax breaks for what companies did in the past would do little to create the jobs that Republicans are promising.
“Let’s really dig in and ask, ‘How will these business tax breaks affect things people care about?’ They care about good jobs in their communities,” Brainard said. “Is a retroactive tax windfall going to result in a single additional job?”
While Republicans are premising their tax cuts on the need to get tax relief flowing through the economy, Democrats are positioning their preferred tax breaks as investments that would occur over decades.
That difference matters as Republicans believe jobs are likely to come from lower effective rates and policies such as permanently making it easier for small businesses to fully expense the cost of new business equipment and changing the IRS requirements for companies using contractors. Democrats counter that tax breaks to help children and provide market signals for cleaner energy will deliver growth in the long run.
“The really fundamental part of key policies has to be around how do we make long-term investments that help our communities, help our families,” said Rep. Suzan DelBene, D-Wash., who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “Republicans have been short-term thinkers and are really focused on the wealthy and well connected.”
One key difference between parties is how they would get money to families. The GOP bill would increase the standard deduction by $2,000 for individuals and $4,000 for families in 2024 and 2025. That might sound like a lot of money, but it's less than one might think because those totals apply to the amount of income that's taxable rather than savings.
By definition, lower earners would receive less money back from a more generous standard deduction. The bottom 40% of households would on average have tax cuts of less than $12 a month, according to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center. Households in the top 20% would have an average monthly tax cut of $46.
Smith defended his plan by saying it grew out of what voters told his committee at field hearings in West Virginia, Oklahoma and Georgia. He said that the three bills that are part of the tax plan grew out of the hearings that began in February and reflected what lawmakers heard from voters.
“Everything in the legislation that we passed out came from discussions or ideas at all of these hearings outside of Washington,” Smith said. “So this bill is for working class families.”
By contrast, Democrats would rather help families by renewing the expanded child tax credit, which became more accessible and increased in size because of Biden's 2021 coronavirus pandemic relief package. Families could get monthly payments of as much as $300 per child as part of the expansion, which lapsed after one year. The child poverty rate fell to a record low of 5.2% in 2021 because of the payments.
Another source of tension is how Republicans structure their costs. Many of their tax cuts would expire after 2025, even though they'd like to make their policies permanent. But the Biden tax breaks they want to eliminate extend over 10 years, leading to the charge that Republicans are hiding the full expense of their tax cuts. An estimate by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget indicates that the costs of making the entire GOP plan permanent would exceed $1 trillion, eliminating almost all of the savings from spending cuts that were part of the debt limit agreement.
“The most cynical part of this is the cost,” said Howard Gleckman, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center. “They’re taking 10 years of revenue and using it to pay for two years of tax cuts. They make the tax cuts temporary so it looks like it costs less than it actually costs.”
The Tax Foundation, a conservative-leaning policy organization, estimated that the GOP bills would slightly boost the size of the U.S. economy in 2024 and 2025. But the benefits are limited because the business tax cuts are mostly temporary and unlikely to change the investment and hiring choices of companies.
“When you’re thinking about how tax policy can improve the economy, all of that is long-term decision-making," said Erica York, senior economist at the Tax Foundation. “If you want this to be as meaningful as it can be, then it needs to be made permanently.”
While the House bill is unlikely to pass the Senate or get signed by Biden, it's part of a broader message on how each party thinks about the tax code. Just as Democrats are deeply skeptical that the GOP's cuts would produce growth, Republicans are wary about administering social policy through the IRS. Those differences point toward the risks in 2025, when the debt limit drama restarts and tax breaks for the middle class and wealthy alike are on the verge of lapsing.
“There’s a fundamental disconnect about the purpose of the tax code," York said. “That sets us up in 2025 for a whole bunch of uncertainty.”
