To pay Trump’s tax discounts, House Gop could reduce services for the poor and the working class – Propublica

One of the characteristics of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign was a promise to sweep the tax discounts, for the rich, for workers and for businesses.

Now, the Republicans of Congress have the work to determine which of these cuts to offer. In order to pay the cuts, they started to look at certain objectives to collect funds. Among them: reduce the advantages for single and poor mothers who rely on government health care.

The proposals are included in a menu of tax options and reduction of expenses disseminated this month by the republicans of the house. It remains to be seen whether or not the Republicans implement one of the ideas. Some of the potential objectives are popular tax reductions and the cuts could be politically treacherous. And the reduction in taxes for the rich could risk harming the populist image that Trump has cultivated.

For ultra-rare, the document floats by eliminating tax on federal succession, at the cost estimated at $ 370 billion in government revenues over a decade. The tax, which invoices a percentage of the value of a person’s fortune after their death, is only involved in the fields of more than $ 14 million.

Among these very few Americans who are struck by the tax, almost 30% of the tax is paid by the highest 0.1% per income, according to estimates of the reflection group on the center of tax policy. (Many ultra-rich people already avoid the tax in large part. Over the years, lawyers and accountants have designed ways to pass fortune to heirs free of tax, often using complex trust structures, such as ‘reported Propublica.)

Another proposal aims to reduce the highest tax rate paid by companies by almost a third.

Trump promised such a cup during the campaign. But Vice-President JD Vance came against this before Trump chose him as a running mate. “We are in a way in accordance with the OECD at the moment,” he said in an interview last year, referring to the organization of economic cooperation and development, a group of 38 nations developed rich . “I don’t think we have to further reduce the tax rate for companies.”

Good journalism makes a difference:

Our independent non -profit editorial room has only one job: to keep the powerful to account. Here is how our surveys stimulate real change:

We try something new. Was it useful?

To the first term of Trump, he brought back the highest rate of companies from 35% to 21%, where he is now, passing the United States from a high rate compared to other OECD nations almost at the average. The decrease offered at 15% would make the lowest levels of the United States in these countries.

To pay for new tax reductions, the proposal of the House Republicans is swallowing a series of potential revisions of government programs. A major objective is possible for Medicaid reductions, the health care program for low -income persons that is administered by states. The expansion of Medicaid was a key principle of the affordable care law, adopted under President Barack Obama. Many Republican governors have initially chosen not to take advantage of the new federal subsidies to extend the program. In the years that followed, several states have reversed the course and the program increased the number of people registered in Medicaid by more than 20 million, from last year.

The deep sections of the program floated in the document include the reduction of reimbursements to the States. States should “increase new income or reduce Medicaid spending by eliminating the coverage of certain people, covering fewer services and or) the reduction rates paid to doctors, hospitals and nursing homes”, according to a KFF analysis, an organization health policy.

Trump has been incoherent in his position on Medicaid over the years. He sought to reduce the program during his first mandate. But he has also made statements on protecting it over the years.

No more recently than a campaign event in 2023, Trump promised that “we are not going to play with Medicare, Medicaid”. But it is not clear if the comment was a disposable: while preserving Medicare, the program that covers health care for the elderly, was a goal for Trump, the maintenance of Medicaid was not. The official GOP platform was deployed by Trump last year, for example, promised not to cut “a penny” of Medicare but was silent on Medicaid. In separate remarks during last year’s campaign, Trump seemed to approve reductions in “rights”, after an interviewer asked questions about Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

Other proposals would eliminate tax alleviation for families with children.

Currently, parents can obtain a tax credit of up to $ 2,100 for childcare costs. The House republican plan advances the elimination of this break. The reduction should save $ 55 billion over a decade.

Vance, in particular, had promised economic policies that would reduce the charge on parents. “It is the task of our government to facilitate the end of last week for young mothers and dads,” said last week. (He campaigned on a proposal of more than double the tax credit for children.)

Another proposal in the list of options aims outright parents who raise children by themselves. The provision would eliminate the status of deposit of the “household chief” to receive nearly $ 200 billion more taxes over a decade of single parents and other adults who take care of people with their own own.

The status of “head of household” was created in the 1950s under the justification that single parents should have a lighter tax burden. Eliminating it would affect millions of Americans, largely of women. (Remuneration after tax of people with income between the 20th and 80th centiles, those which earn between $ 14,000 and $ 100,000, would fall the highest percentage, according to an analysis of the tax foundation.)

The Democrats criticized the proposals as a gift to the rich at the expense of the working class. “The Republicans are preparing for a class war against everyday families in America,” Senator Ron Wyden said in a statement.

A White House spokesperson did not answer questions about the details of the GOP of the Chamber, but said in an email that “it is an active negotiation and a process May the president and his team work in a productive manner with the congress. His visit to The House Retreat (Monday) was a sign that he wanted to prioritize the unity and a good deal for American who makes his campaign promises. »»

A spokesperson for the Chamber’s Budget Committee refused to answer specific questions, but said: “This is a menu of political options to authorize the committees to be considered as members sail in the process of reconciliation ”.

Some of the proposals would make Trump’s campaign promises for the working class.

The document includes a plan to eliminate income taxes (but to maintain taxes on payroll) on advice, at a cost of $ 106 billion over a decade. The proposal is a Trump praised during the campaign in Las Vegas to win the support of the huge contingent of city services employees. Trump’s democratic opponent, former vice-president Kamala Harris, then undertook to do the same. Economists have criticized the idea as that which unfairly benefits a group of working class employees compared to other people who are paid in the same way but who work in other sectors who do not deal with advice .

Another promise of a Trump campaign included in the document is the end of overtime taxes, at a price of $ 750 billion over a decade. This proposal was also criticized by tax experts as an ineffective means of relieving less well -paid workers who are eligible for overtime because they are paid every hour and perform repetitive tasks. The provision, according to criticism, would invite games and further complicate tax reports by creating new reporting requirements concerning the hours of work of a taxpayer.

One of the most important proposals to increase new income in the document of the House Republicans was to achieve darling tax relief from the Americans with higher income: eliminate the deduction of mortgage interests. The document estimates $ 1 billion of saving over 10 years by eliminating the break. Due to a complex interaction of different characteristics of the tax code, around 60% of the value of this deduction takes place to Americans who earn more than $ 200,000 per year, according to the Tax Foundation.

The elimination of the deduction of mortgage interests would have an uneven geographic impact: analyzes have found that fiscal relief is more precious for Americans in states with a democratic predominance such as California, Massachusetts and New Jersey.