Latest news with #RICH
Associated Press
23-05-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
UK Blockchain Startup RICH Partners with Estonian Tech Company Vareger Group
London, United Kingdom & Tallinn, Estonia, May 23, 2025 -- British deep tech startup Research Integrity Chain Ltd (RICH) has signed an agreement for a strategic partnership with Estonian technology company Vareger Group OÜ to develop its innovative blockchain platform that allows researchers, authors, and valuable content creators to instantly protect, control, and license their valuable data, research integrity, and copyrights from both humans and AI. 'The partnership with Vareger Group accelerates our mission to create a new standard for intellectual property protection in the digital age,' says Dmytro Shestakov, CEO and co-founder of RICH. 'Our platform provides instant data protection through private publication without requiring public disclosure, creating tamper-proof, verifiable, and immutable cryptographic records with timestamps that serve as evidence in court.' Oleg Pun, co-founder of Vareger Group, explains: 'We're excited to contribute our blockchain expertise to RICH's groundbreaking platform. In an era when AI increasingly blurs the boundaries of content creation, RICH's technology offers critical solutions for verifying human contribution and protecting intellectual property rights.' The RICH platform offers several innovative capabilities: Founded in London in January 2024 by IT entrepreneurs Dmytro Shestakov and Andrii Matiukhin, the company is in the process of raising a seed round of one million US dollars. With the global intellectual property protection market valued in the trillions of dollars, RICH plans to expand its operations in the US, UK, Canada, and EU. Research Integrity Chain Ltd (RICH) is a deep tech startup that provides blockchain solutions for protecting and monetizing intellectual property in scientific and business spheres. The platform creates a secure environment for verifying the authenticity of research and other intellectual assets, with a particular focus on clarifying the human element in AI-assisted work through traceable records of efforts. Vareger Group OÜ is an Estonian technology company specializing in blockchain and AI solutions. The company provides expertise in the integration and implementation of blockchain technologies for businesses with a focus on FinTech and Gaming. Contact Info: Name: Olha Shestakova Email: Send Email Organization: Research Integrity Chain Ltd (RICH) Website: Release ID: 89160770 In case of identifying any problems, concerns, or inaccuracies in the content shared in this press release, or if a press release needs to be taken down, we urge you to notify us immediately by contacting [email protected] (it is important to note that this email is the authorized channel for such matters, sending multiple emails to multiple addresses does not necessarily help expedite your request). Our dedicated team will be readily accessible to address your concerns and take swift action within 8 hours to rectify any issues identified or assist with the removal process. We are committed to delivering high-quality content and ensuring accuracy for our valued readers.
San Francisco Chronicle
11-05-2025
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
Kill California income tax? Republican governor candidate's big promise
Republican Steve Hilton is running to be California governor on a promise that — much like Donald Trump's Republican-crafted tax proposal taking center stage in Washington this week — sounds too good to be true: Hilton wants to eliminate the state income tax. Whooo! No state taxes. Quick show of hands: Who would like to see the state income tax go away? Everybody? What a great idea … if only it wasn't next to impossible to accomplish politically, wouldn't suck money out of public schools and public safety, and wouldn't provide a disproportionate amount of the ensuing tax break to the wealthiest Californians. 'That is going to go,' Hilton of the state income tax in what was essentially a tossed-off line at his campaign launch last month. 'We are going to remove state income taxes for everyone earning $100,000.' Californians earning more than that will pay a flat tax, which has its own problems. A few quick facts to show how tumultuous cutting the state income tax would be. Start with how the state income tax provides $100 billion in revenue each year and makes up more than 40% of state revenue and more than half of state general fund revenue. Hilton told me that he's tackling the tax issues because, rightfully, he is focused on policies that would make our very unaffordable state affordable. Plus, he plans to cut the state budget so much — back to pre-pandemic levels — that the state won't need all that revenue. Cutting the income tax 'is the quickest and simplest way of bringing some relief to people.' So in other words, Hilton's seems-too-simple-to-be-true proposal is a funhouse mirror of the 'big beautiful bill' that President Trump and congressional Republicans are Frankensteining in Washington, only more politically impossible to accomplish in deep blue California. Now, even Trump is having 11th-hour second thoughts about his plan. On Friday, he floated the idea in a social media post of a ''TINY' tax increase for the RICH, which I and all others would graciously accept in order to help the lower and middle income workers.' Trump wants to levy a new tax of 39.6% on people who make $2.5 million per year, the New York Times reported. It's doubtful that it will ever happen as Trump shot down his own idea in that same doublespeak social media post, writing, 'Republicans should probably not do it, but I'm OK if they do!!!' Trump's doublespeak on taxes (in the same paragraph!) shows the difficulty in making sexy-sounding yet poorly thought-out promises when it comes to taxes. Going back to his reelection campaign, Trump has a history of throwing out tax catnip as he calls for 'permanent extension of the 2017 tax cuts, additional policies — including no taxes on tips, overtime pay, and Social Security benefits for retirees — as well as creation of a deduction for auto loan interest for American made cars,' according to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation. We'll soon see what promises actually make it into the plan. A February analysis of Trump's tax plan by the Economic Policy Institute said: 'If these tax cuts for the rich are financed by large spending cuts, this would greatly damage current incomes and future opportunities for the most vulnerable families in the U.S.' After looking at Hilton's tax proposal, Chris Hoene, executive director of the California Budget and Policy Center, told me: 'Big promises are easy to make, but the tax system and government programs are intricate and carefully crafted. Rash decisions lead to complications, mistakes, and real harm. Without clear details, it's hard to judge whether the proposal is even realistic or just an empty promise.' As for realism, let's start with the political challenges Hilton would face. Say Hilton pulls off the upset of the century in 2026 and is elected California's governor. Unless California tumbles into the sea, the Legislature will probably still be controlled by Democrats, whom Hilton will rely on to pass his income tax slashing proposal. Hilton's plan: He conceded to me that if he is elected, it would be 'anyone's measure of a political earthquake in California, and so I genuinely would expect the Legislature to honor that vote and work with me to implement the agenda that I run on.' His supporters would include, he said, 'I don't want to say all Democrats, but many thoughtful Democrats, and so I would expect the Legislature to work with me to enact the will of the people.' Hope is not a plan. More likely the post-Hilton election chaos would resemble what happened in 2003, when the last Republican to hold the office, Arnold Schwarzenegger, was elected after the recall of Democrat Gray Davis. The Legislature, backed by organized labor, opposed him at every turn. When Schwarzenegger tried to go around state lawmakers, whom he derisively referred to as 'girlie men,' to call a special election to implement his agenda, voters opposed all the ballot measures he supported in a special election in 2005. The bad news for Hilton is that the California electorate has grown more lopsidedly Democratic since then. And, unlike Schwarzenegger, Hilton doesn't pack the persuasive charisma of a global superstar actor. Similarly, Hilton would need to ask voters to reform the state's income tax structure, Hoene said. 'The flat tax piece of the proposal would likely have to be approved by voters, since the current income tax rates for higher-income taxpayers approved via Prop 30 and Prop 55 are in the Constitution through 2030,' Hoene said. Translation: Hilton would have to ask voters, through state ballot measures, to roll back taxes on Californians who make more than $2 million that voters previously approved with Prop 30 in 2012 and Prop 55 in 2016. It's easy to predict what the ads created by an opposition campaign to those measures will look like: 'Steve Hilton wants the rich to pay less in taxes.' More troubling is what could happen if this plan were to be implemented. Hilton intends that the taxes would put more take-home money in the pockets of folks making less than $100K. But the economic disparities would start to widen once the flat tax takes effect. A flat tax means that every taxpayer pays the same percentage of income in taxes. So that means that someone making $10 million a year would pay the same percentage of tax as somebody pulling in $101,000. Hilton told me his goal in creating this plan was to simultaneously 'accelerate our rate of growth so the jobs are created, and (make California) a more attractive place for people to invest, and we need to get immediate relief to workers. So that's the balance I'm trying to strike.' He wants big earners to 'not leave' the state because of its tax rate and instead remain here to build their businesses. Hoene said, however, that Hilton's plan is a little too solicitous of rich folks. 'Hilton's state income tax proposal would provide the largest tax break to the highest income Californians and would cost the state tens of billions of dollars in revenue,' he said. 'That loss would have real consequences for every Californian, negatively impacting funding for schools, support for Californians' basic needs, public safety and other vital services.' Cutting the income tax would mean taking billions of dollars off the table and deteriorating state services, Hoene predicted. That could lead to efforts to replace that lost revenue with 'more regressive taxes that do hit the lowest income people the hardest like sales and excise taxes.' So keep all that in mind when you hear politicians pitching tax ideas that sound too good to be true. Because they usually are.
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump says tax raises are ‘good politics,' dismissing GOP critics
As Republicans search for avenues to extend President Donald Trump's 2017 tax cuts, some Republican lawmakers involved in the process have floated the idea that the nation's highest earners could see a tax increase in order to usher in cuts for lower-earners. For his part, the president is sending signals he tends to agree. "You know, they'll go around saying, 'Oh, this is so terrible.' What you're doing is you're giving up something up top in order to make people in the middle income and the lower income brackets save more. So it's really a redistribution," Trump told reporters when asked what his response would be to those Republicans opposed to tax increases on the wealthy. "I would love to be able to give people in a lower bracket a big break by giving up some of what I have," the president added. Trump's Tax Hike Proposal Is 'Déjà Vu' Of George H.w. Bush's 'Read My Lips' Moment, Experts Say He also noted that the move is just "good politics," dismissing comparisons some political experts have made to one-term Republican President George H.W. Bush, whose broken promise to Republicans that there would be "no new taxes" following his 1988 election victory has been blamed Bush's failed re-election efforts. Read On The Fox News App "Read my lips: No new taxes," Bush Sr. said during his acceptance speech at the 1988 Republican National Convention. Subsequently, in the face of a ballooning deficit, Bush Sr. ultimately cut a deal with Democrats that raised taxes. "A lot of people say, don't do it because of the fact that you have the Bush statement about 'Read my lips.' But he lost because of Ross Perot, he didn't lose because of that statement," Trump said. "I actually think it's good politics to do it where richer people give up. And it's a very small – it's like a point – but they give it up to benefit the people on lower income." Trump Pushes Tax Hikes For Wealthy As 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Deadline Looms In a post on his Truth Social platform earlier Friday, Trump struck a slightly more cautious tone about the alleged concern that his willingness to increase taxes on the highest earners could spell trouble for him electorally the way it did for Bush Sr. He complained that Democrats would point to it repeatedly in an effort to discredit him. However, Trump still contended that the elder President Bush lost because of more than just his broken tax promises, and added that while Republicans should probably not increase taxes on the wealthy, he would be okay with it if they were to do so. "The problem with even a 'TINY' tax increase for the RICH, which I and all others would graciously accept in order to help the lower and middle income workers, is that the Radical Left Democrat Lunatics would go around screaming, 'Read my lips,' the fabled Quote by George Bush the Elder that is said to have cost him the Election," Trump wrote Friday on Truth Social. "NO, Ross Perot cost him the Election! In any event, Republicans should probably not do it, but I'm OK if they do!!"Original article source: Trump says tax raises are 'good politics,' dismissing GOP critics
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump's tax hike proposal is 'déjà vu' of George H. W. Bush's 'read my lips' moment, experts say
Americans lambasted President George H. W. Bush for infamously vowing on stage at the 1988 Republican National Convention not to raise taxes on Americans, then supporting a tax hike as president two years later. History could repeat itself as President Donald Trump this week signaled his support for congressional Republicans raising taxes to accomplish the ambitious goals of his "big, beautiful bill," according to experts. "My opponent won't rule out raising taxes, but I will. And the Congress will push me to raise taxes, and I'll say no. And they'll push and I'll say no. And they'll push again, and I'll say to them: 'Read my lips: no new taxes,'" then-Vice President Bush vowed at the 1988 convention, before raising taxes two years later with the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990. While acknowledging the political backlash his fellow Republican faced, Trump signaled in a Truth Social post on Friday his own willingness to raise taxes on Americans, following reports confirmed by Fox News Digital that the president is considering raising the tax rate on individuals making $2.5 million or more by 2.6%, from 37% to 39.6%. Trump Considers Tax Hike On Americans Making $2.5 Million Or More Per Year "The problem with even a 'TINY' tax increase for the RICH, which I and all others would graciously accept in order to help the lower and middle income workers, is that the Radical Left Democrat Lunatics would go around screaming, 'Read my lips,' the fabled Quote by George Bush the Elder that is said to have cost him the Election. NO, Ross Perot cost him the Election! In any event, Republicans should probably not do it, but I'm OK if they do!!!" Trump said. Read On The Fox News App White House Quietly Floats Millionaire Tax Hike Proposal In Congress As Gop Leaders Signal Opposition Ross Perot, the late billionaire Texas businessman and philanthropist, ran an independent campaign as a third-party candidate in the 1992 presidential election, winning an historic 19% of the popular vote. As Trump suggested, the political fallout of raising taxes contributed to Bush losing re-election to President Bill Clinton in 1992. Democrats slammed Bush in campaign ads for walking back his word as conservative Republicans criticized the president for being out of step with the party's traditional tax policies. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich led Republican criticism of Bush's tax hike proposal, and Gingrich has urged Trump to stand down on raising taxes since rumors the administration was floating a small tax hike first swirled. Trump's First Vice President Urges His Old Boss Against Raising Taxes On Wealthy Americans Gingrich recently told Larry Kudlow on FOX Business that Trump is a Ronald Reagan Republican, not a Bush Republican, and raising taxes would be an "act of destruction." "It would absolutely shatter his coalition," Gingrich said. "It would mean the entire conservative movement would rise in rebellion, and it would mean every small business in the country would start recalculating who they are going to lay off, if they are even going to stay in business. It would make no sense at all." Negotiations are ongoing among House Republicans to finalize Trump's "big, beautiful bill," which is expected to include an extension of Trump's 2017 tax cuts and fulfill campaign promises, including no tax on tips, overtime or Social Security. Republican politicians and pundits have joined Gingrich's critique of Trump's potential tax hike, arguing Trump is repeating the same mistakes as Bush. "[House] Speaker [Mike] Johnson and Republican members of Congress must have experienced collective déjà vu when President Trump urged Congress to raise taxes," New England College President Wayne Lesperance, a veteran political scientist and political historian, told Fox News Digital. "Harkening back to the infamous 'Read my lips' pledge made by George H. W. Bush at the 1988 GOP Convention, today's Republicans must be nervous at the president's change on what is a sacrosanct issue for the party — tax cuts. Interestingly, George H. W. Bush's decision to break his pledge was surrounded by notably different circumstances," Lesperance added. But Lesperance reminded Republicans, who currently control the House and Senate, that Democrats could gain an edge in the 2026 midterms if tax hikes prove to be as unpopular among Republicans as they were in 1992. "Facing a Democratically controlled Congress, Bush reneged on his pledge as a compromise to reduce the deficit and pass the 1990 budget agreement. Bush's decision to compromise on taxes is widely credited with costing him his bid for re-election. As Speaker Johnson and Republican members of Congress look ahead to midterm elections, there must be collective worry that President Trump's shifting position on taxes will cost them at the polls," Lesperance said. Longtime Republican consultant David Carney, a veteran of numerous GOP presidential campaigns, said the move by Bush "was probably the single most detrimental thing to his re-election." Carney, who served in the elder Bush's White House and worked on his presidential campaigns, told Fox News "the deal he cut was excellent. He cut spending, balanced out the taxes." But Carney emphasized "all that's inside baseball and the reality is it was a great opportunity for people from the right and the left to make hay out of it, and it was absolutely hurtful." However, fiscal conservatives remain optimistic that Trump won't raise taxes, despite the president softening to the idea on social media on Friday morning. "President Trump campaigned on not raising taxes, and we are confident that's exactly what he'll do," Club for Growth President David McIntosh told Fox News Digital. When reached for comment about the Bush comparison, the White House pointed to press secretary Karoline Leavitt's comments during the White House briefing on Friday. "The president wants tax cuts, the largest tax cuts in history," Leavitt said. "He wants to extend his historic tax cuts from 2017, and he wants to see all the other tax priorities," including no tax on tips, overtime or Social Security. "The president has said he himself personally would not mind paying a little bit more to help the poor and the middle class and the working class in this country. I think, frankly, that's a very honorable position. But again, these negotiations are ongoing on Capitol Hill, and the president will weigh in when he feels necessary," she added. Fox News Digital's Elizabeth Elkind contributed to this report. Original article source: Trump's tax hike proposal is 'déjà vu' of George H. W. Bush's 'read my lips' moment, experts say
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump's ‘big beautiful' spending bill appears on life support as GOP looks to end some tax relief president created
President Donald Trump's hopes to pass 'one big, beautiful bill' seems to be on life support as Republicans seem to put some of the more ambitious tax cuts on ice. On Friday, the president posted on Truth Social that he would be open to raising taxes on the wealthy if Democrats would not demonize it. 'The problem with even a 'TINY' tax increase for the RICH, which I and all others would graciously accept in order to help the lower and middle income workers, is that the Radical Left Democrat Lunatics would go around screaming,'Read my lips,' the fabled Quote by George Bush the Elder that is said to have cost him the Election,' Trump said, referring to former president George H.W. Bush raising taxes after pledging in 1988 'Read my lips: no new taxes.' 'NO, Ross Perot cost him the Election!' Trump said. 'In any event, Republicans should probably not do it, but I'm OK if they do!!!' This comes as Politico reported that Republicans plan to scale back their attempts to cut taxes as they hope to pass a budget reconciliation bill. Specifically, House Speaker Mike Johnson lowered the number of tax cuts he hoped to pass from $4.5 trillion to $4 trillion. 'Republicans talk a big game … about reining in reckless spending,' House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington told reporters. 'You won't get the full permanency in the tax policy on all the provisions if we don't get to the $2 trillion in savings, and that's unfortunate.' When House Republicans passed their budget resolution in February, the bill stipulated that the House would need to cut $1.5 trillion to cut $4.5 trillion worth of taxes. But if they fail to find $2 trillion worth of savings, the amount of money from the tax cuts would be reduced by the difference between $2 trillion and the final number of money saved. Republicans hope to pass a major spending bill that will ramp up spending for immigration enforcement along the US-Mexico border and energy production as well as extending the 2017 tax cuts that Trump signed. They plan to do so using the process of budget reconciliation, which allow them to avoid a filibuster from Democrats as long as all parts of the bill are related to the budget. But Republicans only have a two-seat majority in the House and a three-seat majority in the Senate, making their plans to pass a comprehensive bill more difficult. Trump has specifically called for Republicans to fulfil his 2024 campaign pledge to remove taxes on tips, Social Security and overtime. 'It would be a very bad idea to not give tax cuts to working people who elected Donald Trump and elected us,' Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri told The Independent last week. The House version of the reconciliation bill gave specific instructions to each committee to find a targeted number of spending cuts. By far the most politically contentious has been the instruction for the House Energy & Commerce Committee to make $880 billion in cuts. With the rules for reconciliation forbidding legislation from touching Social Security and Republicans pledging not to touch Medicare, the health insurance program for seniors, many fear they will have to make steep cuts into Medicaid, the health care program that covers children, pregnant women and people with disabilities. Republicans in the Senate also say they do not want steep cuts to Medicaid or other nutrition assistance programs. 'I'm not excited about the proposal, but I have to say, there are a number of people in both the House and the Senate who are, and if the president weighs in favor of it, then that's going to be a big factor that we have to take into consideration as well,' Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt. The tax cuts Trump signed in 2017 expire at the end of this year, meaning Republicans risk seeing taxes increase under their watch. Senate Republicans tend to prioritize cutting taxes even if they do not see major spending cuts while many House Republicans do not want to add to the deficit without substantial spending cuts. At the same time, Republicans face another issue given their small margins: In 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act capped the deduction people can file for state and local taxes to $10,000 for individuals and $20,000 for married couples. Many Republicans in New York, California and New Jersey, which have higher tax rates than red states, hope to reduce the cap for the deduction, known as the SALT deduction, in the next bill. On Thursday, New York Republican Reps. Mike Lawler, Elise Stefanik, Andrew Garbarino and Nick LaLota put out a statement criticizing a proposal by House to lift the cap to $30,000. 'It's not just insulting—it risks derailing President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill,' the statement said. 'New Yorkers already send far more to Washington than we get back—unlike many so-called 'low-tax' states that depend heavily on federal largesse.' The statement shows the numerous moving parts Johnson must navigate to get the bill across the finish line. Last month, Stefanik, the former House Republican Conference chairwoman, was forced to retract her nomination to become US ambassador to the United Nations to help pass the legislation.
