logo
Most US adults think the GOP tax bill will help the wealthy and harm the poor, poll finds

Most US adults think the GOP tax bill will help the wealthy and harm the poor, poll finds

Al Arabiya3 days ago
Republican elected officials are promoting their recently passed tax and spending bill as a win for working Americans, but a new survey shows that Americans broadly see it as a win for the wealthy. About two-thirds of US adults expect the new tax law will help the rich, according to the poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Most—about 6 in 10—think it will do more to hurt than help low-income people. About half say it will do more harm than good for middle-class people and people like them.
Republicans have already begun airing advertisements framing the legislation as a tax cut for all Americans, highlighting new deductions on tips and overtime income. But Democrats have been making the case that the wealthiest Americans will benefit from the legislation, citing cuts to Medicaid and food assistance programs. The new poll indicates that Republicans still have persuading to do. The high price tag may also be turning off some Americans. Trump's approval rating on government spending has fallen since the spring, according to the new survey, and about 6 in 10 US adults across the political spectrum think the government is spending too much.
Americans see little benefit for low-income or middle-class people. Most people have heard at least something about the new law, according to the poll, which found that about two-thirds of US adults have heard or read a lot or some about it. Those who know something about the legislation are more likely to believe it favors the wealthy compared with people who have heard only a little or nothing at all.
Anaiah Barrow, a 25-year-old single mom from North Carolina who doesn't identify with a political party, said she's concerned that the new law will hurt caregivers like her. Barrow – who's juggling a job taking care of two young children and pursuing a degree – is concerned about losing access to day care and food stamps. 'It has a really big effect,' Barrow said of the recently passed legislation, which she has learned about on TikTok. 'It may not be as a big now, but in the long run it's going to have that effect – it's going to hit bad.'
Even many Republicans agree that the wealthy are likely to benefit from the tax and spending law. About half say the law will do more to help the wealthy. A similar percentage say this about middle-class people, while about 4 in 10 Republicans think it will do more to help than hurt low-income people.
Lori Nichols, a 51-year-old caregiver for her elderly mother in Illinois, said the legislation has very little for the older people and people that are on disability. Although Nichols is a Republican, she said she didn't vote in the 2024 presidential election and voted for Democrat Joe Biden in 2020. 'As far as the tax part goes, it seems to me like (Trump's) just making the rich richer,' Nichols said.
Republicans are less likely to think they'll be harmed. Despite the overall sense that wealthy people will be the primary beneficiaries, Democrats and independents are much likelier than Republicans to think the law could harm them personally. Nathan Hay, a shift service manager at an international dealership that repairs trucks, said he thinks lower-income people might see a slight increase in taxes but still supports the bill. 'Personally, it's not helping me a ton,' Hay said, but he believes it will help small businesses, which have been a staple in his own life and his family's.
About half of Republicans expect the legislation to do more to help people like you compared with about 2 in 10 independents and just 6 percent of Democrats. 'I'm not a tax accountant, but it sounds as if it would be more beneficial to (people) in the higher tax level,' said Republican Geraldine Putnam, 87, a Trump voter who lives in the rural south. 'It's not that I would want to take away the incentive to become more wealthy—that's the American dream,' Putnam said. But she also thinks she'll end up paying more in taxes. 'What he's doing, I'm sure he thinks is correct,' she said of Trump. 'It's just the extreme method that he's using.'
Trump approval on government spending. The law's hefty price tag may be factoring into some Americans' assessments of the law. The poll found they are less likely to approve of how Trump is handling government spending since the spring. Just 38 percent of Americans approve of how Donald Trump is handling government spending compared with 46 percent in an AP-NORC poll conducted in March.
Republicans are less likely to say the government is spending too much than they were in March 2023 when Joe Biden was president, but about 6 in 10 still think the government is overspending. A similar share of Democrats say the same thing. Putnam, now a retiree, took issue with Trump's cuts in federal workers, even though she says she approves of being able to trim off people who aren't really doing their jobs. The way she sees it, Trump drew attention to people abusing social services then fires the people in the office that are investigating that very fraud and abuse. 'What's the sense in that?' she asked.
The AP-NORC poll of 1437 adults was conducted July 10-14 using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the US population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 3.6 percentage points.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ex-NYPD commissioner accuses NYC mayor of 'character assassination' in $10 million defamation claim
Ex-NYPD commissioner accuses NYC mayor of 'character assassination' in $10 million defamation claim

Al Arabiya

time38 minutes ago

  • Al Arabiya

Ex-NYPD commissioner accuses NYC mayor of 'character assassination' in $10 million defamation claim

New York City's former interim police commissioner has filed a $10 million defamation claim against Mayor Eric Adams for reportedly suggesting he was mentally unfit for the job of top cop. The filing comes less than a week after the ex-commissioner, Thomas Donlon, sued Adams and his top deputies, accusing them of operating the department as a criminal racket that rewarded unqualified loyalists and punished whistleblowers. Donlon said he was sidelined for trying to clean up the corruption. After that lawsuit was filed, Adams privately told members of a nonprofit business advocacy group at a meeting that he'd fired Donlon, 71, from his brief stint as commissioner last fall because he was rapidly deteriorating mentally, according to attendees. Donlon cited news reports about those comments in his legal claim. The department's former top spokesperson, Tarik Sheppard, who was also named in Donlon's lawsuit, told reporters that his former boss was 'going through some cognitive issues and believed there was this conspiracy against him.' 'Their comments amounted to a defamatory public character assassination intended to weaponize mental health to silence a whistleblower,' Donlon's attorney, John Scola, said Monday. Donlon, a former FBI official, was appointed by Adams in September to lead a department reeling from overlapping federal investigations and high-level resignations. He was replaced by the current commissioner, Jessica Tisch, in November. During his short tenure, federal authorities searched Donlon's home for decades-old documents that he said were unrelated to his work at the department. He has not been publicly accused of wrongdoing in connection with that search. In his short time as commissioner, Donlon said he uncovered systemic corruption by members of the mayor's inner circle, including a scheme to reward unqualified loyalists with lucrative promotions in exchange for political favors. In his lawsuit, Donlon accused Sheppard of misappropriating the commissioner's rubber stamp signature to give himself a raise, then threatening to kill Donlon when confronted about it. Sheppard, who left the department in May, has denied that allegation. Inquiries to City Hall about the defamation claim were not immediately returned. In a statement last week, a spokesperson for Adams, Kayla Mamelak Altus, described Donlon's claims as 'absurd.' 'These are baseless accusations from a disgruntled former employee who – when given the opportunity to lead the greatest police department in the world – proved himself to be ineffective,' she said. The defamation claim adds to a recent spate of litigation brought by police officials against Adams, focusing scrutiny on his leadership as he seeks re-election on a platform emphasizing managerial competence and public safety. Earlier this month, four high-ranking former NYPD officials brought separate lawsuits accusing Adams and his deputies of allowing rampant corruption and cronyism within the police department. In response to those suits, a spokesperson for Adams said the administration holds all city employees – including leadership at the NYPD – to the highest standards.

Over 5.2 million pools sold across the U.S. and Canada are under recall after reports of nine deaths
Over 5.2 million pools sold across the U.S. and Canada are under recall after reports of nine deaths

Al Arabiya

time2 hours ago

  • Al Arabiya

Over 5.2 million pools sold across the U.S. and Canada are under recall after reports of nine deaths

More than 5.2 million aboveground swimming pools sold across the US and Canada over the last two decades are being recalled after nine drowning deaths were reported. The recall covers a range of Bestway, Intex Recreation, and Polygroup pools that were sold by major retailers as far back as 2002. According to Monday notices published by the US Consumer Product Safety Commission and Health Canada, these pools have compression straps running along the outside of the product – which may create a foothold for small children and allow them to access the water unattended. That can pose a serious drowning risk, the safety regulators warn. To date, the CPSC believes nine children across the US have drowned after gaining access to these now-recalled pools in this way. Those deaths occurred between 2007 and 2022, involving children between the ages of 22 months and 3 years old. No additional fatalities have been reported in Canada. Consumers in possession of these pools are urged to immediately contact Bestway, Intex, and/or Polygroup to receive a free repair kit – which will consist of a rope to replace the compression strap. Owners of these pools should otherwise ensure that small children cannot access the pool without supervision, regulators note – and could alternatively drain the pool until the repair is made. All of the pools being recalled are 48 inches or taller – and can be identified by brand and model names listed on both the CPSC and Health Canada's recall notices. Sales of the pools ranged by model and location but date as far back as 2002 and as recently as 2025. About 5 million of these now-recalled pools were sold across the US – including both online and in-stores at major retailers like Walmart, Target, Lowes, Costco, and Amazon. Another 266,000 were sold in Canada.

Harvard Is Hoping Court Rules Trump Administration's $2.6b Research Cuts Were Illegal
Harvard Is Hoping Court Rules Trump Administration's $2.6b Research Cuts Were Illegal

Al Arabiya

time7 hours ago

  • Al Arabiya

Harvard Is Hoping Court Rules Trump Administration's $2.6b Research Cuts Were Illegal

Harvard University will appear in federal court Monday to make the case that the Trump administration illegally cut $2.6 billion from the storied college – a pivotal moment in its battle against the federal government. If US District Judge Allison Burroughs decides in the university's favor, the ruling would reverse a series of funding freezes that later became outright cuts as the Trump administration escalated its fight with the nation's oldest and wealthiest university. Such a ruling, if it stands, would revive Harvard's sprawling scientific and medical research operation and hundreds of projects that lost federal money. 'This case involves the Government's efforts to use the withholding of federal funding as leverage to gain control of academic decision-making at Harvard,' the university said in its complaint. 'All told, the tradeoff put to Harvard and other universities is clear: Allow the Government to micromanage your academic institution or jeopardize the institution's ability to pursue medical breakthroughs, scientific discoveries, and innovative solutions.' A second lawsuit over the cuts, filed by the American Association of University Professors and its Harvard faculty chapter, has been consolidated with the university's. Harvard's lawsuit accuses President Donald Trump's administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university after it rejected a series of demands in an April 11 letter from a federal antisemitism task force. The letter demanded sweeping changes related to campus protests, academics, and admissions. For example, the letter told Harvard to audit the viewpoints of students and faculty and admit more students or hire new professors if the campus was found to lack diverse points of view. The letter was meant to address government accusations that the university had become a hotbed of liberalism and tolerated anti-Jewish harassment on campus. Harvard President Alan Garber pledged to fight antisemitism but said no government should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue. The same day Harvard rejected the demands, Trump officials moved to freeze $2.2 billion in research grants. Education Secretary Linda McMahon declared in May that Harvard would no longer be eligible for new grants, and weeks later, the administration began canceling contracts with Harvard. As Harvard fought the funding freeze in court, individual agencies began sending letters announcing that the frozen research grants were being terminated. They cited a clause that allows grants to be scrapped if they no longer align with government policies. Harvard, which has the nation's largest endowment at $53 billion, has moved to self-fund some of its research but warned it can't absorb the full cost of the federal cuts. In court filings, the school said the government fails to explain how the termination of funding for research to treat cancer, support veterans, and improve national security addresses antisemitism. The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the April demand letter was sent. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel contracts for policy reasons. 'It is the policy of the United States under the Trump Administration not to fund institutions that fail to adequately address antisemitism in their programs,' it said in court documents. The research funding is only one front in Harvard's fight with the federal government. The Trump administration also has sought to prevent the school from hosting foreign students, and Trump has threatened to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status. Finally, last month, the Trump administration formally issued a finding that the school tolerated antisemitism – a step that eventually could jeopardize all of Harvard's federal funding, including federal student loans or grants. The penalty is typically referred to as a 'death sentence.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store