Missouri's Billy Long grilled over donations, tax credits in Senate confirmation hearing
Former Missouri Congressman Billy Long denied any wrongdoing regarding his ties to companies involved with controversial tax credit schemes during his confirmation hearing Tuesday on his nomination to lead the Internal Revenue Service.
Long, who worked as an auctioneer before serving six terms representing a Southwest Missouri congressional district, also denied seeking donations from anyone associated with those companies that he used to pay off a personal loan he gave to his unsuccessful 2022 campaign for U.S. Senate.
'You know as well as I do that anytime you're dealing with the (Federal Elections Commission), you have to follow FEC guidelines,' Long told members of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee on Tuesday. 'And that's exactly what I did all the way through.'
Democrats on the committee were not convinced that Long didn't ask for the money.
'You expect us to believe that the money just fell out of the sky and it showed up in your campaign treasury?' said U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon.
In December, Trump nominated Long to lead the IRS. At the time, Long's campaign committee had $130,000 in debt — money that Long had loaned the campaign himself.
By early January, his Senate campaign committee raised $137,000, with much of the money coming from executives at companies that have been accused of selling fraudulent tax credits.
Billy Long's bid to lead IRS under scrutiny over donations that paid off personal debt
In addition to the campaign donations, Wyden hammered Long for allegedly raking in 'referral fees, steering clients to firms that sold fake tax shelters and pushing small businesses to unknowingly commit tax fraud.'
A financial disclosure Long submitted as part of his confirmation process shows him receiving at least $5,000 in compensation from White River, an Arkansas-based oil and gas company that sold a tax credit that the IRS says doesn't actually exist.
White River said in a statement that Long made an 'insignificant amount of referrals of these credits to third parties' for the company, and that no federal agency has ever told it the credits are invalid.
Long on Tuesday denied he'd ever met or interacted with anyone at White River and claimed he had only referred the credits to a few friends.
The Missouri Republican also faced tough questions from U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, over whether President Donald Trump is allowed to use the IRS to strip organizations of their nonprofit status.
Warren pointed to a portion of federal law that prohibits any member of the executive branch to request the IRS to conduct or terminate an audit on a taxpayer.
'In the first place, he wouldn't do that,' Long said.
'That's not my question, Mr. Long,' Warren responded.
A few seconds of back and forth later, Long said he was 'going to follow the law,' but that 'I'd have to go to the lawyers at the IRS to tell me.'
Warren wasn't impressed.
'If you think follow the law is you get to make it up on the spot,' she said, 'then you don't get to be the IRS commissioner.'
U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock, a Georgia Democrat, continued the line of questioning later, pressing Long over whether he had previously said he would ignore an order from Trump to audit a taxpayer.
'I think I told you that he wouldn't do that in the first place,' Long responded, 'but if he did, I'd do exactly what you said. So, yes.'
In his opening statement, Long vowed to make long-needed changes at the agency if confirmed to be the next IRS commissioner. And if he isn't ultimately confirmed, he'll gladly head back to Missouri.
'I have the opportunity to make real transformational change to an agency that needs it more than any other federal agency,' he said. 'Or I can go back home to southwest Missouri where the fish are biting and as they say, they ain't going to catch themselves.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
23 minutes ago
- New York Post
Husband witnesses wife's killer be executed 43 years after her death: ‘I made a promise'
A grieving husband witnessed the Tuesday execution of the man who abducted and killed his wife from a Florida insurance office over four decades ago — stating he 'made a promise' to see her tragic case through. Randy White, 70, lost his wife, Janet Renee White, after she was abducted, raped, and stabbed to death by Kayle Bates in 1982 — just minutes after he last said goodbye to her, USA Today reported. 3 Randy White, 70, lost his wife, Janet Renee White, after she was abducted by Kayle Bates in 1982. The attack happened just minutes after he last said goodbye to her. Randy White Advertisement Bates, 67, died by lethal injection at 6:17 p.m. Tuesday at Florida State Prison under a death warrant signed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis. It was the state's 10th death sentence carried out in 2025. The execution gave the widower long-awaited relief that he had finally reached the end of a nearly 43-year battle for justice in his wife's killing. 'I made a promise to her right after it happened that I would be there for every trial, every hearing, every appeal, and that as long as I was living, I would seek justice for her,' White told the outlet after the execution. Advertisement He was only 27 when he lost his wife, who was the youngest of five siblings and always dreamed of having kids and her own business, the outlet reported. 'I feel a relief that I can mentally let Renee know that justice has finally been served for her, and that's mentally what I need. It's always been for her,' he said. 3 When police arrived after the abduction, they found Bates covered in blood with her wedding ring in his pocket. AP Bates was convicted of first-degree murder, kidnapping, armed robbery, and attempted sexual battery in the June 14, 1982 killing of Janet White in Bay County in the Florida Panhandle. Advertisement Bates abducted White from the State Farm insurance office where she worked, took her into the woods behind the building, attempted to rape her, stabbed her to death, and tore a diamond ring from one of her fingers, according to court documents. 'Bates attacked her, but Renee fought back,' according to court records obtained by the outlet. 'Despite her best efforts, Bates overpowered Renee and forced her into the woods behind the office.' Within 15 minutes of saying goodbye to Renee, he got a call from the authorities about an emergency at her office. 'He looked at me and said, 'Mr. White, I don't know any easy way to say this … but your wife's been murdered,'' White remembered. 'I completely lost it.' Advertisement When police arrived, they found Bates covered in blood with her wedding ring in his pocket, documents showed. Attorneys for Bates had filed appeals with the Florida Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court, as well as a federal lawsuit claiming DeSantis' process for signing death warrants was discriminatory. 3 Randy White was only 27 when he lost his wife, who was the youngest of five siblings and always dreamed of having kids and her own business. Family Handout Veterans groups had also asked the Florida Gov to spare Bates from the death penalty because of his six-year military service in the National Guard, the outlet reported. Florida has executed more people than any other state this year, while Texas and South Carolina are tied for second place with four each. Bates declined to give last words at his execution and turned down his last meal, the outlet said. Florida executions are carried out using a three-drug lethal injection: a sedative, a paralytic, and a drug that stops the heart, according to the state Department of Corrections. Advertisement White described the execution as 'straightforward and quick.' With Post wires.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Appeals court blocks New Mexico's 7-day waiting period for gun purchases, saying it violates 2nd Amendment
A federal appeals court on Tuesday halted New Mexico's seven-day waiting period for gun purchases, ruling that it likely infringes on citizens' Second Amendment rights. The 2-1 ruling by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals leaves the law on hold pending a legal challenge and returns the case to a lower court. The waiting period went into effect in May of last year and included violators being subject to a misdemeanor, but it does have an exception for concealed permit holders. Democrats had enacted the measure in an effort to allow for more time for federal background checks on gun buyers to be completed. "Cooling-off periods do not fit into any historically grounded exceptions to the right to keep and bear arms, and burden conduct within the Second Amendment's scope," Judge Timothy Tymkovich wrote for the majority. "We conclude that New Mexico's Waiting Period Act is likely an unconstitutional burden on the Second Amendment rights of its citizens." Nra And Conservative Legal Group Sue Democrat Governor Over 7-Day Waiting Period To Buy Guns The Mountain States Legal Foundation and National Rifle Association filed the lawsuit on behalf of two New Mexico residents, arguing that the law was unconstitutional and delayed access to firearms for victims of domestic violence and other citizens. Read On The Fox News App The lawsuit referenced the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark 2022 decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen in which a new standard to determine whether a gun restriction is unconstitutional was established. To meet that standard, the government must show there is a "historical tradition of firearm regulation" that supports the law. Michael McCoy, director of the Mountain States Legal Foundation's Center to Keep and Bear Arms, celebrated the ruling. "The court found that there was no analogous law from that era that would support the modern day law that's at issue," McCoy said. "For now, it means New Mexicans can go buy their firearms without an arbitrary delay imposed." Federal Appeals Court Rules California Ammunition Background Checks Unconstitutional John Commerford, executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action, also praised the court's decision, saying it "serves as a key piece in dismantling similar gun control laws across the country." In a dissent, Judge Scott Matheson argued that New Mexico's waiting period "establishes a condition or qualification on the commercial sale of arms that does not serve abusive ends." Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, a Democrat, said she was disappointed with the ruling and claimed it would likely cost lives. "New Mexico's waiting period law was carefully crafted to minimize gun violence while respecting Second Amendment rights," Lujan Grisham said in a statement, pointing to other exceptions for gun purchases by law enforcement officers and transactions between immediate family members. "Waiting periods prevent impulsive acts of violence and suicide, giving people time to step back and reassess their emotions during moments of crisis," she added. Since she was sworn in as governor in 2019, Lujan Grisham has signed several gun control measures, including a "red flag" law allowing a court to temporarily remove guns from people suspected of being at risk of hurting themselves or others and restrictions on firearms near polling places. In 2023, the governor suspended the right to carry guns in public parks and playgrounds in Albuquerque in response to shootings across the state that killed children. Lujan Grisham declared a state of emergency in Albuquerque earlier this year, saying that a significant uptick in crime warranted the help of the state's National Guard. She also declared a state of emergency last week over violent crime and drug trafficking across parts of northern New Mexico. Legal experts have said the ruling could have wider consequences because other states, including California, Hawaii and Illinois, have imposed similar restrictions on gun purchases. In New Mexico, the waiting period applies to all licensed dealer firearm sales for handguns and long guns. The only exception applies to concealed carry permit holders, law enforcement and immediate family transfers. Those in support of the waiting period laws argue that research links the law to reduced suicides and crimes of passion limiting impulsive behavior. Officials in New Mexico have not said if they will seek review from the full 10th Circuit or appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Associated Press contributed to this article source: Appeals court blocks New Mexico's 7-day waiting period for gun purchases, saying it violates 2nd Amendment Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
As Democrats wage national redistricting war, Republicans may have the upper hand
WASHINGTON — As California legislators begin the process of reconfiguring its congressional districts and creating a more Democratic-friendly map in next year's midterms, the party could be pushing itself into a national redistricting war — and one that would likely hold them at a disadvantage. The California Legislature will work to pass its proposed version of the state's congressional map this week, which would give Democrats an advantage in five additional House seats in the state. After that, the revised map will be on the ballot in November when California voters participate in a special election for municipal races. That means Democrats' attempt to thwart Republican redistricting efforts in other states, namely Texas, where President Donald Trump is pushing for Republicans to draw more GOP-friendly districts, will come down to whether California leaders can convince enough voters to support the gambit. And that may be easier said than done. Even if California is successful and counteracts the five seats Republicans say they'll flip in the Lone Star State, it could ignite efforts in other states to redraw their maps for partisan leverage. Doing so would be an easier fight for Republican-led states than those led by Democrats, largely because of the laws put in place by party leaders to avoid this exact situation. Democrats face more obstacles than Republicans in redrawing maps As state leaders threaten a redraw of their maps, Republicans have an advantage over their Democratic counterparts due to local laws impeding partisan gerrymandering attempts. Most redistricting efforts are completed through state legislatures and more easily accomplished in states with single-party control, meaning one party controls both chambers of the state legislature and the governor's mansion. In that category, Republicans have the trifecta advantage: There are 26 states under complete GOP control compared to just 15 under complete Democratic control. Once you factor out the states that don't have split congressional representation — for example, Utah, which only has Republican seats so a map redraw wouldn't do anything to change the calculus — you are down to 15 red states and eight blue states with seats available to flip. Even then, at least four of those Democratic-led states require independent commissions (or some hybrid system with state legislators) to change congressional maps in the middle of the decade. That complicates their efforts while the Republican states would only require their legislatures to do the heavy lifting. 'Even if (Democrats) are hell bent on doing this, I don't think it's going to be a very easy thing for them to do as a matter of their various state laws,' John Malcom, the vice president of the conservative Heritage Foundation's Institute for Constitutional Government, told the Deseret News in an interview. 'It's not going to be easy for them to do, and they have less room to maneuver because they've already done a remarkably effective job of redistricting (some states) in a way that … dilutes Republican votes.' California gambles with those obstacles in place Unlike a majority of states, California hands the power of map-drawing not to state legislators but instead to an independent redistricting commission that is meant to draw nonpartisan boundaries based purely on population data. The commission was first enacted in 2010 and is made up of five Republicans, five Democrats and four voters who are not affiliated with either of the major parties. California is mandated by its state constitution to utilize the commission only once a decade, and it already did so in 2021. In order to work around this, California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced last week he would introduce a constitutional amendment circumventing those laws. The catch: California voters, who largely support the independent commission, have to approve throwing away the panel's nonpartisan maps until after the census is taken again in 2030 and new maps are drawn for the 2032 election cycle. A recent Politico/Citrin Center/Possibility Lab survey found 64% of voters support keeping the independent commission, compared to just 36% who said state lawmakers should draw the maps. But some members of the commission who drew the current boundaries support throwing out the map, with the agreement that the panel will be reinstated later. But even with that endorsement, Republicans plan to fight back with accusations that Democrats are defying the will of the voters. 'I think that it will be seen as a negatively partisan thing if they try to go back on what the voters only recently approved,' Malcolm told the Deseret News. 'But you know, Gavin Newsom is making it very clear that the lane he wants to run for president in is the 'I'm the anti-Trump guy.' And so being nakedly partisan is not something that Gavin Newsom is going to shy away from.' Still, Democrats could have some luck as nearly half of the state's voters belong to the party compared to just 24.7% who are registered Republicans, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. Another 21.9% identify as independents. California and Texas could set off firestorm in other states With Texas expected to approve its new map as early as this week and California moving full steam ahead on its proposal this fall, the boundary battle could elevate to an all-out war encompassing several states across the country. More than half a dozen states are publicly considering changes to their congressional maps next November in an attempt to gain leverage — especially as it becomes likely California will simply neutralize Texas and neither party will benefit. Democrats in New York have openly suggested they would look at ways to change congressional maps to squeeze out GOP lawmakers in vulnerable districts while Florida Republicans are considering the opposite in the Sunshine State. But other states are slowly entering the conversation, such as Indiana, where Republicans already hold a 7-2 advantage to Democrats. All seven of those House Republicans came out in support of redrawing the map on Monday after President Donald Trump began looking to the state as another opportunity to secure his majority. 'Now, with President Trump and the entire Hoosier Republican Congressional delegation expressing support for Congressional redistricting, the General Assembly should act swiftly to get the job done,' Rep. Marlin Stutzman, the first Indiana Republican to announce his support, said in a statement to the Deseret News. 'Hoosiers deserve Congressional districts that ensure voting records are reflected accurately in their Congressional districts.' Despite uphill battle, Democrats say they can't give up Although Democrats face more obstacles than Republicans, the redistricting battle is emerging as a war they must wage, strategists say — lest they risk an unenthusiastic base that has already expressed frustration the minority doesn't do enough to thwart Trump's agenda. 'The way I look at it, you have to fight fire with fire,' Brad Bannon, a Democratic strategist based in Washington, D.C., told the Deseret News. 'You just can't let the Republicans gerrymander their way to a House majority that they're going to have difficulty protecting.' Republicans currently hold a 219-212 majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, a historically slim margin that has often made it difficult for the party to advance legislation even with a Republican trifecta. With control of the White House and Senate, Republicans have enjoyed total control of Washington — something that is at risk next November. Historical trends show that the party of the sitting president typically loses control of the House during midterm elections. If Democrats manage to flip the House, it would deal a massive blow to Trump and likely thwart his agenda for his final two years. As a result, Trump is pressing state Republican leaders to deliver additional seats through redistricting — which some strategists say is a sign of political desperation and should motivate Democrats not to let up. 'Democrats have an opportunity to take back the House, and it won't stop the abuses in the Trump regime, but it will slow them down,' Bannon said. 'Democrats will have the opportunity to call hearings and investigations into the Trump administration, and I don't think we can afford to let that opportunity go by. So I think Democrats should go full steam ahead.'
