logo
Trump ‘pushing for tax rise on the rich'

Trump ‘pushing for tax rise on the rich'

Yahoo08-05-2025

Donald Trump is reportedly pushing to increase taxes on the rich.
The US president privately urged House speaker Mike Johnson to raise the top rate of tax and close the carried interest tax loophole, according to Punchbowl News.
Speculation has mounted in recent weeks that Mr Trump will raise taxes on the wealthy to help pay down the national debt and support working class voters.
'I actually love the concept,' Mr Trump recently told Time magazine, when asked about a proposal apparently circulating among his inner circle to raise taxes for those earning more than $1 million a year.
Although he added: 'I don't want it to be used against me politically, because I've seen people lose elections for less, especially with the fake news.'
The apparent call between Mr Trump and Mr Johnson takes place as the Republican-controlled House aims to pass a Reconciliation Bill that would extend Mr Trump's 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
The act applies to businesses and individuals, while eliminating taxes on tip income, overtime pay and Social Security benefits.
Republicans are aiming to complete Mr Trump's 'one big beautiful bill' by late next week and pass it in the House ahead of the May 26 US Memorial Day holiday.
The president is pushing to raise the top tax rate from 37 per cent to 39.6 per cent for individuals earning $2.5 million and higher or joint filers earning $5 million, with carve-outs for small businesses, an insider told Reuters.
'They've been talking about this for weeks,' one source said.
It comes after Mr Trump's imposition of sweeping tariffs on American trading partners led to a sell-off in the dollar and US government bonds, suggesting global markets were losing faith in American assets.
With the Federal Reserve facing the need to refinance $7 trillion of debt this year alone, a wealth tax has been mooted as a way to bring more cash into the Treasury.
The prospect of a tax hike on the wealthy will likely be met with a frosty reception from Republicans on Capitol Hill, who have long campaigned for lower taxes and opposed Joe Biden's plans to raise the top capital gains tax rate to 39.6 per cent.
The top rate of income tax in the US is set at 37 per cent, while capital gains is paid at an effective rate of around 24 per cent.
Mr Johnson and other top Republicans have resisted the idea of increasing the tax rate on wealthy Americans up until now. Meanwhile, Scott Bessent, the Treasury Secretary, told reporters last week that Mr Trump had ruled out the idea.
However, the party has remained under pressure from Mr Trump's populist Maga supporters to limit tax breaks for wealthy individuals and businesses.
JD Vance, the vice-president, and Russell Vought, the budget director, are said to have expressed openness to the idea, according to The Washington Post.
Steve Bannon, Mr Trump's former chief strategist, has also repeatedly endorsed the proposal as a way to pay for sweeping tax cuts and neuter Democrat attacks on the Republicans as the party of the rich.
Representative Jason Smith, who chairs the tax-writing House Ways and Means committee, said in a recent interview that his panel could close tax loopholes that benefit the rich.
The proposed tax increase is said to go hand in hand with a proposal to scrap the 'carried interest loophole'.
The loophole offers favourable tax treatment for private equity, venture capital and hedge fund managers, meaning they pay a low rate of roughly 20 per cent tax on their profits.
Removing it risks a showdown between the Trump administration and Wall Street, which has previously pushed back against presidents floating the idea.
The president has sent mixed messages on the subject of a wealth tax, telling reporters last month that 'a lot of millionaires would leave the country' if he imposed a 'millionaire tax'.
'You lose a lot of money if you do that. And other countries that have done it have lost a lot of people. They lose their wealthy people. That would be bad because the wealthy people pay the tax,' he said.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump threatens to cut Musk government contracts amid agenda bill spat
Trump threatens to cut Musk government contracts amid agenda bill spat

UPI

time2 minutes ago

  • UPI

Trump threatens to cut Musk government contracts amid agenda bill spat

Tesla CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump hold a press conference in the Oval Office at the White House on Friday as Musk ends his tenure as director of the Department of Government Efficiency. Photo by Francis Chung/UPI | License Photo June 5 (UPI) -- President Donald Trump on Thursday threatened to cut Elon Musk's government contracts through Tesla amid his departure from his role cutting government spending and opposition to Trump's sweeping legislative agenda bill. Trump threatened to end all government contracts with the Musk-founded Tesla in a post on Truth Social and suggested that would be a fast way to reduce government spending. "The easiest way to save money in our budget, billions and billions of dollars, is to terminate Elon's governmental subsidies and contracts," Trump wrote. Tesla share prices declined by more than 14% on Thursday and shed $152 billion in value from the EV maker. Trump on Thursday accused Musk of going "crazy" after the president canceled the federal electric vehicle mandate imposed by the Biden administration. "I took away his EV mandate that forced everyone to buy electric cars that nobody else wanted," Trump said in a Truth Social post on Thursday. "He just went crazy!" Trump said he asked Musk to leave his advisory position with DOGE, although Musk was scheduled to exit the position at the end of May. Musk earlier said Trump would not have won the Nov. 5 election without his help. He contributed an estimated $250 million to Trump's campaign effort. "Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate," Musk said Thursday morning in a post on X. Musk has criticized the proposed "one big, beautiful" federal government budget bill as increasing the nation's debt and negating his work with DOGE. The entrepreneur opposes the spending bill that the House has passed and is before the Senate because it removed tax credits and subsidies for buying EVs, Trump claimed. "I don't mind Elon turning against me, but he should have done that months ago," Trump said in a subsequent Truth Social post on Thursday afternoon. "This is one of the greatest bills ever presented to Congress," he continued. "It's a record cut in expenses, $1.6 trillion dollars, and the biggest tax cut ever given." If the measure is not passed, Trump said it will trigger a 68% tax increase, "and things far worse than that." The president said the "easiest way to save money ... is to terminate Elon's governmental subsidies and contracts" with Tesla. Later on Thursday, Musk in an X post said it is "time to drop the really big bomb" on the president. Trump "is in the Epstein files," Musk said. "That is the real reason they have not been made public." Musk did not say in what context Trump allegedly appears in the Epstein files, but ended his post with: "Have a nice day, DJT!" He made a subsequent post that asks: "Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80% in the middle?" Trump and Musk often appeared together at high-profile events in the first four months of the administration.

Bloomberg Daybreak: Trump-Musk Feud
Bloomberg Daybreak: Trump-Musk Feud

Bloomberg

time4 minutes ago

  • Bloomberg

Bloomberg Daybreak: Trump-Musk Feud

On today's podcast: 1) Elon Musk and President Donald Trump engage in a public dispute the traded personal barbs and weighed down Tesla stock and Musk's personal wealth. The dispute began over differences on the GOP tax legislation, with Musk opposing the bill and Trump accusing Musk of being motivated by self-interest. After Tesla shares tanked 14% and Musk's personal wealth dropped by $34 billion, Musk signaled a willingness to cool tensions with Trump, responding to a user's advice to "cool off and take a step back for a couple days" with "Good advice." 2) Tensions appear to be easing between the US and China. President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed to further trade talks to resolve disputes over tariffs and rare earth minerals. The two leaders had a 90-minute call, during which Trump acknowledged that the trade relationship with China had gotten "a little off track" but said they are now "in very good shape" with a trade deal. 3) Investors brace for a critical May Jobs Report. Traders are awaiting the key monthly nonfarm payrolls report, which may reinforce expectations that the Federal Reserve will cut interest rates at least twice this year.

Federal vs. state power at issue in a hearing over Trump's election overhaul executive order
Federal vs. state power at issue in a hearing over Trump's election overhaul executive order

Associated Press

time7 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

Federal vs. state power at issue in a hearing over Trump's election overhaul executive order

BOSTON (AP) — Democratic state attorneys general on Friday will seek to block President Donald Trump's proposal for a sweeping overhaul of U.S. elections in a case that tests a constitutional bedrock — the separation of powers. The top law enforcement officials from 19 states filed a federal lawsuit after the Republican president signed the executive order in March, arguing that its provisions would step on states' power to set their own election rules and that the executive branch had no such authority. In a filing supporting that argument, a bipartisan group of former secretaries of state said Trump's directive would upend the system established by the Constitution's Elections Clause, which gives states and Congress control over how elections are run. They said the order seeks to 'unilaterally coronate the President as the country's chief election policymaker and administrator.' If the court does not halt the order, they argued, 'the snowball of executive overreach will grow swiftly and exponentially.' Trump's election directive was part of a flurry of executive orders he has issued in the opening months of his second term, many of which have drawn swift legal challenges. It follows years of him falsely claiming that his loss to Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election was due to widespread fraud and an election year in which he and other Republicans promoted the notion that large numbers of noncitizens threatened the integrity of U.S. elections. In fact, voting by noncitizens is rare and, when caught, can lead to felony charges and deportation. Trump's executive order would require voters to show proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections, prohibit mail or absentee ballots from being counted if they are received after Election Day, set new rules for voting equipment and prohibit non-U.S. citizens from being able to donate in certain elections. It also would condition federal election grant funding on states adhering to the strict ballot deadline. The hearing Friday in U.S. District Court in Boston comes in one of three lawsuits filed against the executive order. One is from Oregon and Washington, where elections are conducted almost entirely by mail and ballots received after Election Day are counted as long as they are postmarked by then. The provision that would create a proof-of-citizenship requirement for federal elections already has been halted in a lawsuit filed by voting and civil rights groups and national Democratic organizations. In that case, filed in federal court in the District of Columbia, the judge said the president's attempt to use a federal agency to enact a proof-of-citizenship requirement for voting usurped the power of states and Congress, which at the time was considering legislation that would do just that. That bill, called the SAVE Act, passed the U.S. House but faces an uncertain future in the Senate. Trump's executive order said its intent was to ensure 'free, fair and honest elections unmarred by fraud, errors, or suspicion.' The Justice Department, in arguing against the motion by the attorneys general for a preliminary injunction, said the president is within his rights to direct agencies to carry out federal voting laws. The order tasks the U.S. Election Assistance Commission with updating the federal voter registration form to require people to submit documentation proving they are U.S. citizens. Similar provisions enacted previously in a handful of states have raised concerns about disenfranchising otherwise eligible voters who can't readily access those documents. That includes married women, who would need both a birth certificate and a marriage license if they had changed their last name. A state proof-of-citizenship law enacted in Kansas more than a decade ago blocked the registrations of 31,000 people later found to be eligible to vote. The two sides will argue over whether the president has the authority to direct the election commission, which was created by Congress as an independent agency after the Florida ballot debacle during the 2000 presidential election. In its filing, the Justice Department said Trump's executive order falls within his authority to direct officials 'to carry out their statutory duties,' adding that 'the only potential voters it disenfranchises are noncitizens who are ineligible to vote anyway.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store