Secret IRS Files Reveal How Much the Ultrawealthy Gained by Shaping Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Tax Cut”

There have to be enough smart people in Wisconsin to give RonAnon Johnson the boot! :mad:

The Trump administration championed the pass-through provision as tax relief for “small businesses.”​
Confidential tax records, however, reveal that Johnson’s last-minute maneuver benefited two families more than almost any others in the country — both worth billions and both among the senator’s biggest donors.​
In November 2017, with the administration of President Donald Trump rushing to get a massive tax overhaul through Congress, Sen. Ron Johnson stunned his colleagues by announcing he would vote “no.”​
Making the rounds on cable TV, the Wisconsin Republican became the first GOP senator to declare his opposition, spooking Senate leaders who were pushing to quickly pass the tax bill with their thin majority. “If they can pass it without me, let them,” Johnson declared.​
Johnson’s demand was simple: In exchange for his vote, the bill must sweeten the tax break for a class of companies that are known as pass-throughs, since profits pass through to their owners. Johnson praised such companies as “engines of innovation.” Behind the scenes, the senator pressed top Treasury Department officials on the issue, emails and the officials’ calendars show.​
Within two weeks, Johnson’s ultimatum produced results. Trump personally called the senator to beg for his support, and the bill’s authors fattened the tax cut for these businesses. Johnson flipped to a “yes” and claimed credit for the change. The bill passed.​
Dick and Liz Uihlein of packaging giant Uline, along with roofing magnate Diane Hendricks, together had contributed around $20 million to groups backing Johnson’s 2016 reelection campaign.​
The expanded tax break Johnson muscled through netted them $215 million in deductions in 2018 alone, drastically reducing the income they owed taxes on. At that rate, the cut could deliver more than half a billion in tax savings for Hendricks and the Uihleins over its eight-year life.​
But the tax break did more than just give a lucrative, and legal, perk to Johnson’s donors. In the first year after Trump signed the legislation, just 82 ultrawealthy households collectively walked away with more than $1 billion in total savings, an analysis of confidential tax records shows.​
Republican and Democratic tycoons alike saw their tax bills chopped by tens of millions, among them: the Bechtel family, owners of the engineering firm that bears their name; and the heirs of the late Houston pipeline billionaire Dan Duncan.​

My goodness! You certainly are full of envy, Mr. Jelly Belly.
 
If you give tax breaks to the rich they will invest it. If you give it to people like me we will spend it to pay bills. Investment fuels the economy much more than consumerism.
NONSENSE ^

and-then-we-told-them-the-wealth-would-trickle-down.jpg
 
You do not understand how capitalism works. Take a economics class sometime.

Tax cuts for the rich do NOT benefit anyone but the rich. Trickle down has been failing ever since Reagan. The Trump tax cuts do NOT benefit anyone but the mega-rich. And other than adding a butler, a chef, or maybe an additional gardener here and there, they did NOT create jobs.


 
Tax cuts for the rich do NOT benefit anyone but the rich. Trickle down has been failing ever since Reagan. The Trump tax cuts do NOT benefit anyone but the mega-rich. And other than adding a butler, a chef, or maybe an additional gardener here and there, they did NOT create jobs.



investment allows new business to grow. Yes it creates jobs.
 
Tax cuts for the rich do NOT benefit anyone but the rich. Trickle down has been failing ever since Reagan. The Trump tax cuts do NOT benefit anyone but the mega-rich. And other than adding a butler, a chef, or maybe an additional gardener here and there, they did NOT create jobs.




"Based on our research, we would argue that the economic rationale for keeping taxes on the rich low is weak," Julian Limberg, a co-author of the study and a lecturer in public policy at King's College London, said in an email to CBS MoneyWatch. "In fact, if we look back into history, the period with the highest taxes on the rich — the postwar period — was also a period with high economic growth and low unemployment."

That was also a period of very low immigration.
 

Forum List

Back
Top