Latest news with #HowardGleckman
CNBC
03-06-2025
- Business
- CNBC
6 Nobel prize-winning economists wrote a letter opposing Trump's budget bill: 'We have grave concerns'
The multitrillion-dollar tax and spending package House Republicans passed last month is heading to the Senate, with lawmakers hoping to pass a finalized bill by July 4. If passed in its current form, the bill — dubbed the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" — would, among other measures, make President Donald Trump's 2017 tax cuts permanent and add new tax breaks for tipped and overtime workers as well as older Americans. The bill's critics are hoping it may see some change's in Congress's upper house. Those include six Nobel-prize winning economists, who this week penned an open letter published through the Economic Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank. "As economists who have devoted our careers to researching how economies can grow and how the benefits of this growth can be translated into broadly shared prosperity and security, we have grave concerns about the budget reconciliation bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on May 22, 2025," the letter says. The economists' main issue: cuts to Medicaid (the federal and state health-care program for low-income and disabled Americans) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as food stamps), which they see as essential for American families. The House version of the bill would cut Medicaid spending by $700 billion and slash SNAP by $300 billion — the largest cut in either program's history. "These steep cuts to the social safety net are being undertaken to defray the staggering cost of the tax cuts included in the House bill, including the hidden cost of preserving the large corporate income tax cut passed in the 2017 tax law," the letter says. "But even these sharp spending cuts will pay for far less than half of the tax cuts (not even including the cost of maintaining the corporate income tax cuts of the 2017 law)." These and other critics of the bill cite research that estimates the law will add to the national deficit — to tune of about $3 trillion to $5 trillion over the next decade, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget — while failing to lift up low-income Americans. "Given how much this bill adds to the U.S. debt, it is shocking that it still imposes absolute losses on the bottom 40% of U.S. households," the letter says. It remains to be seen if spending cuts will remain in the bill as-is. "Overall, the [Senate] bill is not going to be that much different," Howard Gleckman, senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, recently told CNBC, but added that he expects "a lot of debate" about the Medicaid provision in particular. One set of provisions — making the tax rates and brackets from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent — would maintain the status quo for taxpayers. That law's tax cuts, which were set to expire at the end of the year, included a major hike to the standard deduction, which "greatly simplified the tax code for millions of taxpayers," say analysts at the Tax Foundation. Proponents of the bill say these and other tax cuts will spark U.S. economic growth and laud the administration for delivering on several campaign trail promises. When it comes to cutting spending on social programs, Trump sees the reductions as an exercise in government efficiency. "We don't want any waste, fraud or abuse," he said in a recent Newsmax interview. "Other than that, we're leaving it." The economic Nobelists don't see it that way. "The House bill addresses none of the nation's key economic challenges usefully and exacerbates many of them," they write. "The Senate should refuse to pass this bill and start over from scratch on the budget." ,
Boston Globe
02-06-2025
- Health
- Boston Globe
How Trump's planned Medicaid cuts would hurt older women
Since women on average live longer than men, they are more likely to have to stretch their more meager savings and retirement income over more years. There are More women than men age 65 and older are low-income, meaning their Advertisement Since women live longer than men, they are also more likely to suffer the ailments of age. According to the Advertisement This brings us to Medicaid, the main public program paying for long-term care. According to KFF, Medicaid accounts for Since many more beneficiaries receiving Medicaid-covered long-term care are women, they would be most affected by cuts to Medicaid. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the anticipated cuts would result in Speaking on the PBS 'NewsHour,' Jennifer Tolbert of KFF explained that the bill rescinds a rule 'that made it easier for seniors and people with disabilities who also have Medicare coverage to enroll in Medicaid, which will then pay for their premiums and cost-sharing, as well as provide them access to supplemental benefits that Medicare doesn't provide, including long-term care, dental benefits, as well as vision care.' Advertisement It could also mean many more seniors being forced to move to nursing homes. As Howard Gleckman, a senior fellow in the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute, explained to me, while Medicaid coverage of nursing home care is mandatory, coverage of home health care is discretionary. So to save funds, states are likely to cut back on the discretionary services they now cover. Without home health care assistance, many more families would have to make the difficult choice of placing parents and grandparents in nursing homes, where the quality of care would be likely to deteriorate as states reduce what they pay providers. This would also adversely affect women who are caregivers, both paid and unpaid. While the statistics vary, up to Further, many family caregivers would be likely to be thrown off Medicaid themselves under the expanded work requirements in the House Republican bill. According to KFF, All these funding reductions are meant to reduce a federal deficit that is projected to balloon with Advertisement Fortunately, the Republicans may not have the votes to put this devil's bargain through. Even Senator Josh Hawley,
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
$4,000 'Senior Bonus' Tax Break Proposed — But Critics Say It's A Consolation Prize For Broken Social Security Promises
A new proposal from House Republicans could give adults age 65 and older an additional $4,000 tax deduction starting this year. Currently being called the "senior bonus," the provision is part of a broader tax bill under consideration — but it's drawing mixed reactions from experts and advocates who argue it falls short of President Donald Trump's campaign promises to eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits. The proposed deduction would apply to taxpayers age 65 and older, regardless of whether they take the standard deduction or itemize. However, eligibility is subject to income limits. The deduction begins to phase out for individuals with modified adjusted gross income above $75,000 and for couples filing jointly who earn more than $150,000. Don't Miss: Hasbro, MGM, and Skechers trust this AI marketing firm — Deloitte's fastest-growing software company partners with Amazon, Walmart & Target – If passed, the provision would be temporary, lasting from 2025 through 2028. Supporters say it would ease the tax burden on seniors living on fixed or modest incomes. "It's not nothing, but it's also not life changing," Howard Gleckman, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, told CNBC. He estimated that a retiree earning around $50,000 annually might save just under $500 a year in taxes with this new deduction. The proposal comes after Trump campaigned on a promise to eliminate federal taxes on Social Security benefits — a pledge that has not materialized. Due to Senate rules, Social Security reforms cannot be included in reconciliation bills, which are often used to pass budget-related legislation. Instead, lawmakers have opted for a smaller, more affordable measure. Andrew Biggs, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, told MarketWatch that eliminating taxes on Social Security would be expensive and hasten the depletion of the Social Security trust fund. "Eliminating benefit taxation was neither affordable nor necessary in the first place," he said. "But retirees looking forward to a big tax cut might be disappointed." Trending: Maker of the $60,000 foldable home has 3 factory buildings, 600+ houses built, and big plans to solve housing — Experts agree that fully removing taxes on benefits would be far more costly. Garrett Watson, director of policy at the Tax Foundation, told CNBC that the senior bonus would cost about $200 billion over 10 years if made permanent, compared to over $1 trillion for eliminating benefit taxes. Many seniors already pay taxes on a portion of their Social Security income. Depending on their combined income — which includes adjusted gross income, nontaxable interest, and half of their Social Security benefits — up to 85% of benefits can be taxed. Because income thresholds for taxing benefits have not changed since the 1980s, more retirees are now paying taxes, even as inflation and wages rise. Advocates argue that the system is due for reform. "While the proposed $4,000 deduction in the tax bill may provide some relief to lower- and middle-income Social Security beneficiaries, it doesn't address the fundamental issue of fairness in taxing Social Security benefits," Shannon Benton, executive director of the Senior Citizens League, told MarketWatch. Benton emphasized that many seniors will continue to face a significant tax burden despite the proposed House Ways and Means Committee has started reviewing the legislation. If it moves forward and gains support in Congress, the senior bonus could take effect next year. Still, critics caution that while the deduction may offer short-term tax relief, it doesn't resolve long-standing concerns about Social Security's financial future — or the taxes retirees continue to pay on benefits they've already earned. While the proposed $4,000 "senior bonus" deduction could slightly reduce taxes for some older Americans, it is far from the sweeping reform that many had hoped for. As Social Security's trust funds inch closer to depletion, the debate over how best to support retirees is far from over. Read Next: Nancy Pelosi Invested $5 Million In An AI Company Last Year — 'Scrolling To UBI' — Deloitte's #1 fastest-growing software company allows users to earn money on their phones. Image: Shutterstock UNLOCKED: 5 NEW TRADES EVERY WEEK. Click now to get top trade ideas daily, plus unlimited access to cutting-edge tools and strategies to gain an edge in the markets. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? APPLE (AAPL): Free Stock Analysis Report TESLA (TSLA): Free Stock Analysis Report This article $4,000 'Senior Bonus' Tax Break Proposed — But Critics Say It's A Consolation Prize For Broken Social Security Promises originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
28-01-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
‘An exercise in political abuse': Republicans face legislative gantlet with reconciliation
Top Senate Republicans want to pass their party's wide-ranging agenda with two different acts by using a legislative process called budget reconciliation, a technical workaround that avoids the Democratic filibuster in the Senate and allows a law to be passed with a simple majority. But legislative experts are warning that even doing a single bill through reconciliation is a daunting task that exposes the majority party to procedural pitfalls and political vulnerabilities. With only the narrowest of majorities in the House, an agenda that could be too expansive for a single bill constrained by reconciliation, pointed resistance from Democrats, and a requirement to raise the debt ceiling, Republicans are attempting to thread the thinnest of congressional needles. 'They almost never do two,' Howard Gleckman, senior fellow with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, told The Hill. 'It's such a heavy lift to do one. It's a real challenge to do two in one year. Technically, you could do it — but not easy.' Whether House Republicans can get on the same page enough to do a single bill will be a primary focus this week as they meet with President Trump in Florida. Lawmakers on various committees are expected to meet and then deliver reports to leadership on what they can agree on for budget reconciliation by midweek. While Trump has expressed a preference for moving his entire agenda through 'one big, beautiful bill,' he said he would accept splitting it up into two bills if that would be easier for lawmakers to manage. Among more than 200 budget cuts and tax changes, Republicans have been considering provisions that include requiring school attendance for Social Security benefits, making the consumer price index for urban consumers the permanent index for national poverty programs, and levying a 10 percent general import tax that could bring in $1.9 trillion over 10 years. They have also looked at lowering the corporate tax rate to 15 percent from 21 percent at a cost of $522 billion, repealing Democrats' Inflation Reduction Act corporate alternative minimum tax at a cost of $222 billion, and eliminating the home mortgage interest deduction at a savings of about $1 trillion. The first hurdle on the reconciliation obstacle course requires the Senate and the House to agree on the same budget resolution, as opposed to different versions that can be stitched together later. If they fail to clear it, the two-bill contingency plan could be triggered, with extensions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) kicked to later in the year. Since some of the 2017 Trump tax cuts expire at the end of this year, an eleventh-hour reconciliation process is likely to make a lot of Republicans nervous. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has said he wants a budget resolution passed by the last week of February. Another fence Republicans need to clear is the debt ceiling. If they choose to do this in the reconciliation process, it would need to be raised by a specific amount rather than simply suspended, a move that is sure to get pushback from Republican deficit hawks. In place of the debt ceiling hike back in December, Republicans agreed to increase the borrowing cap by $1.5 trillion in exchange for $2.5 trillion in spending cuts in the upcoming reconciliation package, sources told The Hill. This prompted Trump to threaten deficit hawk Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) with a primary challenge for 'getting in the way' of a formal debt ceiling increase. Reconciliation is also subject to the so-called Byrd Rule, named after the late Sen. Robert Byrd ( The Byrd Rule requires that policies included in reconciliation instructions can't add to the deficit beyond a 10-year cutoff. Prior to that cut-off, the bill can add to the deficit, but not after it. The Byrd Rule is the reason that parts of the 2017 tax law are expiring in the first place. The main thrust of the $1.5 trillion law was the reduction in the corporate tax rate, which was made permanent at 21 percent from an initial 35 percent. But the individual cuts were made temporary so as not to expand the deficit after 10 years. Similar temporary measures that satisfy the Byrd Rule are likely to be used by Republicans in the current legislative debate, analysts say. 'That's going to be in play again,' Gleckman said. 'The idea that people often talk about is making the TCJA permanent. But they can't make the TCJA permanent [in reconciliation] because of the Byrd Rule. All they can do is extend provisions for a limited amount of time, and then they're going to run into the same problem again.' Whether it's one bill or two, Republicans in the Senate will have to face down at least one 'vote-a-rama,' a part of the reconciliation process in which Democrats can propose any amendment they want to the bill. Knowing these will be voted down, the minority party usually picks the most politically barbed amendments that they can think of. 'The vote-a-rama, for the majority, is typically an exercise in political abuse,' Rohit Kumar, national tax office co-leader at PwC who spent more than a decade as a top GOP Senate aide, told reporters last week. 'The minority comes up with its most conniving, politically sharp-edged amendment and makes the majority vote on it — there's no way out.' Last week, amid so many procedural brambles sticking to Republicans, Trump floated the idea of getting Democratic support on the extension of his tax cuts, a notion many Democrats immediately dismissed out of hand. 'We have to get Democrats to approve it,' Trump said. 'If the Democrats didn't approve it, I don't know how they can survive with about a 45 percent tax increase, because that's what it would be.' 'We've been working along with them pretty well,' he added. Several top Democrats in the House told The Hill last week there was little to no chance they'd consider working with Republicans, though chief Democratic tax writer Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.) said, 'let's hear what they've got to say.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
28-01-2025
- Business
- The Hill
‘An exercise in political abuse': Republicans face legislative gantlet with reconciliation
Top Senate Republicans want to pass their party's wide-ranging agenda with two different acts by using a legislative process called budget reconciliation, a technical workaround that avoids the Democratic filibuster in the Senate and allows a law to be passed with a simple majority. But legislative experts are warning that even doing a single bill through reconciliation is a daunting task that exposes the majority party to procedural pitfalls and political vulnerabilities. With only the narrowest of majorities in the House, an agenda that could be too expansive for a single bill constrained by reconciliation, pointed resistance from Democrats, and a requirement to raise the debt ceiling, Republicans are attempting to thread the thinnest of congressional needles. 'They almost never do two,' Howard Gleckman, senior fellow with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, told The Hill. 'It's such a heavy lift to do one. It's a real challenge to do two in one year. Technically, you could do it – but not easy.' Whether House Republicans can get on the same page enough to do a single bill will be a primary focus this week as they meet with President Trump in Florida. Lawmakers on various committees are expected to meet and then deliver reports to leadership on what they can agree on for budget reconciliation by mid-week. While Trump himself has expressed a preference for moving his entire agenda through 'one big, beautiful bill,' he said he would accept splitting it up into two bills if that would be easier for lawmakers to manage. Among more than 200 different budget cuts and tax changes, Republicans have been considering provisions that include requiring school attendance for Social Security benefits, making the consumer price index for urban consumers (CPI-U) the permanent index for national poverty programs, and levying a 10-percent general import tax that could bring in $1.9 trillion over ten years. They have also looked at lowering the corporate tax rate to 15 percent from 21 percent at a cost of $522 billion, repealing Democrats' Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) corporate alternative minimum tax at a cost of $222 billion, and eliminating the home mortgage interest deduction at a savings of about $1 trillion. The first hurdle on the reconciliation obstacle course requires the Senate and the House to agree on the same budget resolution, as opposed to different versions that can be stitched together later. If they fail to clear it, the two-bill contingency plan could be triggered, with extensions of 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) kicked to later in the year. Since some of the 2017 Trump tax cuts expire at the end of this year, an eleventh-hour reconciliation process is likely to make a lot of Republicans nervous. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has said he wants a budget resolution passed by the last week of February. Another fence that Republicans need to clear is the debt ceiling. If they choose to do this in the reconciliation process, it would need to be raised by a specific amount rather than simply suspended, a move that is sure to get pushback from Republican deficit hawks. In place of the debt ceiling hike back in December, Republicans agreed to increase the borrowing cap by $1.5 trillion in exchange for $2.5 trillion in spending cuts in the upcoming reconciliation package, sources told The Hill. This prompted Trump to threaten deficit hawk Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) with a primary challenge for 'getting in the way' of a formal debt ceiling increase. Reconciliation is also subject to the so-called Byrd Rule, named after the late Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.V.). The Byrd Rule requires that policies included in reconciliation instructions can't add to the deficit beyond a 10-year cutoff. Prior to that cut-off, the bill can add to the deficit, but not after it. The Byrd Rule is the reason that parts of the 2017 tax law are expiring in the first place. The main thrust of the $1.5 trillion law was the reduction in the corporate tax rate, which was made permanent at 21 percent from an initial 35 percent. But the individual cuts were made temporary so as not to expand the deficit after 10 years. Similar temporary measures that satisfy the Byrd Rule are likely to be used by Republicans in the current legislative debate, analysts say. 'That's going to be in play again,' Gleckman said. 'The idea that people often talk about is making the TCJA permanent. But they can't make the TCJA permanent [in reconciliation] because of the Byrd Rule. All they can do is extend provisions for a limited amount of time, and then they're going to run into the same problem again.' Whether it's one bill or two, Republicans in the Senate will have to face down at least one 'vote-a-rama,' a part of the reconciliation process in which Democrats can propose any amendment they want to the bill. Knowing that these will be voted down, the minority party usually picks the most politically barbed amendments that they can think of. 'The vote-a-rama, for the majority, is typically an exercise in political abuse,' Rohit Kumar, national tax office co-leader at PwC who spent more than a decade as a top GOP Senate aide, told reporters last week. 'The minority comes up with its most conniving, politically sharp-edged amendment and makes the majority vote on it — there's no way out.' Last week, amid so many procedural brambles sticking to Republicans, Trump floated the idea of getting Democratic support on the extension of his tax cuts, a notion that many Democrats immediately dismissed out of hand. 'We have to get Democrats to approve it,' Trump said. 'If the Democrats didn't approve it, I don't know how they can survive with about a 45 percent tax increase, because that's what it would be.' 'We've been working along with them pretty well,' he added. Several top Democrats in the House told The Hill last week there was little to no chance they'd consider working with Republicans, though chief Democratic tax writer Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.) said, 'let's hear what they've got to say.'
