thefiscaltimes--2020-08-24--Op-Ed of the Day: A Major Problem for the $26.5 Trillion National Debt

The national debt is rapidly running higher as Congress spends trillions on coronavirus relief efforts , but James Clark , the deputy assistant secretary for federal finance in the Treasury Department during the Obama administration , says there are more serious issues than the cost of servicing what is now $ 26.5 trillion worth of U.S. debt .
Writing at Bloomberg Monday , Clark says that the most pressing issue for the debt is more political than financial .
In his experience managing the nation ’ s public finances , the major purchasers of Treasury offerings typically have been more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political system than the ability of the country to make its payments , since the former defines the latter : “ When my team and I met with the biggest buyers of U.S. debt , our conversations centered on the way in which our government functioned .
The cost of servicing the debt and the structure of our portfolio took a back seat to questions about how our government operated .
After the debt limit crisis ’ of 2013 and 2015 , our creditors focused almost exclusively on how we would correct a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ commitments into a domestic political bargaining chip.
” Clark says that debt investors were also interested in how the U.S. spends its public funds : “ Repairing the damage from the 2008 financial crisis , buttressing housing , building infrastructure and expanding access to healthcare were rightly understood by our creditors to pay dividends over the long haul , ” Clark says , and confidence in the U.S. spending wisely and competently has a lot to do with the low interest rates the U.S. pays on its debt .
While this interest in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worked in the U.S. ’ s favor over the last few decades , current political conditions are making some observers worry about what comes next : “ Creditors ’ confidence in the U.S. government is being tested on an almost daily basis .
President Donald Trump ’ s tax cuts were supposed to “ pay for themselves ” and help the middle class , but cost $ 1.9 trillion and contributed to greater income inequality .
Although a few cases of fraud have been uncovered , the full extent of fraud and misuse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is unknown , as the vast majority of the recipient names have not been released.
” Clark warns that the corrosive political polarization the U.S. is experiencing , along with the degradation of public services , is likely a greater threat to the country ’ s standing than the growing debt : “ Rebuilding confidence in our democratic institutions and transparently demonstrating that any stimulus package is used productively is the best way to ensure the sustainability of our national debt , no matter its size .
”

The national debt is rapidly running higher as Congress spends trillions on coronavirus relief efforts, but James Clark, the deputy assistant secretary for federal finance in the Treasury Department during the Obama administration, says there are more serious issues than the cost of servicing what is now $26.5 trillion worth of U.S. debt.
Writing at Bloomberg Monday, Clark says that the most pressing issue for the debt is more political than financial. In his experience managing the nation’s public finances, the major purchasers of Treasury offerings typically have been more concerned about the health of the U.S. political system than the ability of the country to make its payments, since the former defines the latter:
“When my team and I met with the biggest buyers of U.S. debt, our conversations centered on the way in which our government functioned. The cost of servicing the debt and the structure of our portfolio took a back seat to questions about how our government operated. After the debt limit crisis’ of 2013 and 2015, our creditors focused almost exclusively on how we would correct a problematic system that turned fulfilling our financial commitments into a domestic political bargaining chip.”
Clark says that debt investors were also interested in how the U.S. spends its public funds: “Repairing the damage from the 2008 financial crisis, buttressing housing, building infrastructure and expanding access to healthcare were rightly understood by our creditors to pay dividends over the long haul,” Clark says, and confidence in the U.S. spending wisely and competently has a lot to do with the low interest rates the U.S. pays on its debt.
While this interest in the politics underpinning of debt issuance has worked in the U.S.’s favor over the last few decades, current political conditions are making some observers worry about what comes next:
“Creditors’ confidence in the U.S. government is being tested on an almost daily basis. President Donald Trump’s tax cuts were supposed to “pay for themselves” and help the middle class, but cost $1.9 trillion and contributed to greater income inequality. Although a few cases of fraud have been uncovered, the full extent of fraud and misuse of funds within the Paycheck Protection Program is unknown, as the vast majority of the recipient names have not been released.”
Clark warns that the corrosive political polarization the U.S. is experiencing, along with the degradation of public services, is likely a greater threat to the country’s standing than the growing debt: “Rebuilding confidence in our democratic institutions and transparently demonstrating that any stimulus package is used productively is the best way to ensure the sustainability of our national debt, no matter its size.”
Read Clark’s full op-ed here.


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-24--The House Approved $25 Billion for USPS, but Senate Has No Plans to Vote on Bill

The House passed a bill Saturday that would provide $ 25 billion to support U.S .
Postal Service operations and prevent the agency from making a variety of operational changes in the runup to the election .
The vote was largely along party lines , although 26 Republicans crossed the aisle to support the measure , defying GOP leadership and President Trump , who had encouraged lawmakers to oppose the bill in support of his effort to delegitimize mail-in voting .
A mail slowdown : The bill , which received a vote during a rare Saturday session by representatives called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , comes amid charges from Democrats that the Trump administration is intentionally sabotaging the mail system , both for short-term political gain ahead of an election that is expected to involve record levels of mail-in voting and as part of a longer-term , ideologically-driven effort to privatize the postal service .
Whatever the motivation – Postmaster General Louis DeJoy says he simply wants to increase efficiency and improve the agency ’ s finances – the USPS has made a series of operational changes in recent months , including a reduction in overtime hours @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sorting machines and mailboxes .
There have been reports of a slowdown in mail delivery in the wake of these changes , and on Saturday the House Oversight Committee released internal USPS communications that documented recent delays in first-class mail .
Postmaster General says no thanks : DeJoy , a wealthy Trump donor who assumed his position as Postmaster General in June , told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Friday that he doesn ’ t want the funds that the bill would provide , despite the fact that the Postal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ amount earlier this year .
“ If we just throw $ 25 billion at us this year and we don ’ t do anything , we ’ ll be back in two years , ” DeJoy said .
What ’ s next : The White House threatened to veto the bill last week , and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-KY ) said he does not plan to take it up in the Senate .
While the bill has virtually no chance of becoming law , additional funds for the USPS could play @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the next coronavirus relief bill .

The House passed a bill Saturday that would provide $25 billion to support U.S. Postal Service operations and prevent the agency from making a variety of operational changes in the runup to the election.
The vote was largely along party lines, although 26 Republicans crossed the aisle to support the measure, defying GOP leadership and President Trump, who had encouraged lawmakers to oppose the bill in support of his effort to delegitimize mail-in voting.
A mail slowdown: The bill, which received a vote during a rare Saturday session by representatives called back to Washington from their summer break, comes amid charges from Democrats that the Trump administration is intentionally sabotaging the mail system, both for short-term political gain ahead of an election that is expected to involve record levels of mail-in voting and as part of a longer-term, ideologically-driven effort to privatize the postal service.
Whatever the motivation – Postmaster General Louis DeJoy says he simply wants to increase efficiency and improve the agency’s finances – the USPS has made a series of operational changes in recent months, including a reduction in overtime hours for postal workers and the removal of sorting machines and mailboxes. There have been reports of a slowdown in mail delivery in the wake of these changes, and on Saturday the House Oversight Committee released internal USPS communications that documented recent delays in first-class mail.
Postmaster General says no thanks: DeJoy, a wealthy Trump donor who assumed his position as Postmaster General in June, told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Friday that he doesn’t want the funds that the bill would provide, despite the fact that the Postal Service Board of Governors had requested that amount earlier this year. “If we just throw $25 billion at us this year and we don’t do anything, we’ll be back in two years,” DeJoy said.
What’s next: The White House threatened to veto the bill last week, and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said he does not plan to take it up in the Senate. While the bill has virtually no chance of becoming law, additional funds for the USPS could play a role in the stalled negotiations over the next coronavirus relief bill.


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-21--Biden Bashes Trump on Social Security, Taxes and Health Care

Joe Biden ’ s well-received acceptance speech for the Democratic presidential nomination Thursday night may have emphasized his differences with President Donald Trump —with a heavy focus on personal traits such as compassion , trust and moral character — but Biden also touched on some of his proposals on key policy issues , including Social Security , health care and taxes .
Here ’ s what Biden said and what you should know about it .
What Biden said : “ For our seniors , Social Security is a sacred obligation , a sacred promise made , ” Biden said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to break that promise .
He 's proposing to eliminate the tax that pays for almost half of Social Security without any way of making up for that lost revenue .
I will not let it happen .
If I 'm your president , we 're going to protect Social Security and Medicare .
You have my word.
” What you should know : Earlier this month , as part of his effort to unilaterally provide economic relief from the coronavirus pandemic , Trump ordered the deferral of employee ’ s share of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the remainder of the year .
The payroll tax , which is split between employer and employee , covers nearly 90 % of the cost of Social Security , according to government data reported by FactCheck.org .
Last year , the tax produced about $ 945 billion ; the deferral ordered by Trump would reduce the total this year by about $ 100 billion over the next four months , according to an analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget .
While the White House has claimed that deferral would in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lost revenues through December made up for from general funds , Trump has repeatedly said that he wants to eliminate the payroll tax altogether : “ If I ’ m victorious on November 3rd , I plan to forgive these taxes and make permanent cuts to the payroll tax .
So I ’ m going to make them all permanent , ” he said on August 8 .
William Hoagland of the Bipartisan Policy Center says that a temporary cut to the payroll tax wouldn ’ t destroy Social Security , although @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the Social Security trust funds by a year or two .
But if Trump were to “ make permanent cuts to the payroll tax , ” as he has promised to do , it would indeed represent an existential threat to the Social Security system .
For his part , Biden is proposing to boost revenues for the Social Security system and increase benefits for some beneficiaries .
Workers would have to start paying payroll taxes on income over $ 400,000 ( the tax currently applies only to the first $ 137,700 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ minimum payment levels , an increase in survivor benefits and a 5 % boost for those who have received benefits for more than 20 years .
What Biden said : Biden took aim at the tax cuts Republicans passed in 2017 , referring to “ the president ’ s $ 1.3 trillion tax giveaway to the wealthiest 1 % and the biggest , most profitable corporations , some of which do not pay any tax at all.
” What you should know : Biden has promised to roll back some of those cuts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than the $ 400,000 and hiking the corporate tax rate from 21 % to 28 % .
Fact checkers note that the majority of households received a tax cut from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act , with 65 % of households paying less to the IRS in 2018 than they would have otherwise .
But the cuts were considerably larger at higher income levels , and when the individual provisions of the legislation expire in 2026 , the majority of the benefits — 82.8 % , according to an analysis by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the top 1 % .
What Biden said : Biden warned that Trump ’ s “ assault on the Affordable Care Act will continue until its destroyed , taking insurance away from more than 20 million people -- including more than 15 million people on Medicaid -- and getting rid of the protections that President Obama and I passed for people who suffer from a pre-existing condition.
” Biden said that he wants to develop “ a health care system that lowers premiums , deductibles , and drug prices by building on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to rip away.
” What you should know : Most experts agree that the Trump administration ’ s effort to have the Affordable Care Act overturned — arguments will be heard in the Supreme Court shortly after the election — would , if successful , result in upwards of 20 million people losing their insurance and eliminate the protections provided for people with pre-existing conditions .
While Republicans have insisted that they are in fact protecting those with pre-existing conditions , there have taken no concrete steps to do so , while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protections .
Biden also said that as a result of the coronavirus pandemic , “ more than 10 million people are going to lose their health insurance this year.
” While the number is an accurate estimate , the majority of those people are expected to pick up coverage from other sources , including family members , Medicaid or the federal marketplaces established by the Affordable Care Act .
The Urban Institute estimates that about 2.9 million people will be left without health insurance after those transitions are accounted for .

Joe Biden’s well-received acceptance speech for the Democratic presidential nomination Thursday night may have emphasized his differences with President Donald Trump —with a heavy focus on personal traits such as compassion, trust and moral character — but Biden also touched on some of his proposals on key policy issues, including Social Security, health care and taxes.
Here’s what Biden said and what you should know about it.
Social Security
What Biden said: “For our seniors, Social Security is a sacred obligation, a sacred promise made,” Biden said. “The current president is threatening to break that promise. He's proposing to eliminate the tax that pays for almost half of Social Security without any way of making up for that lost revenue. I will not let it happen. If I'm your president, we're going to protect Social Security and Medicare. You have my word.”
What you should know: Earlier this month, as part of his effort to unilaterally provide economic relief from the coronavirus pandemic, Trump ordered the deferral of employee’s share of payroll taxes dedicated to Social Security for the remainder of the year. The payroll tax, which is split between employer and employee, covers nearly 90% of the cost of Social Security, according to government data reported by FactCheck.org. Last year, the tax produced about $945 billion; the deferral ordered by Trump would reduce the total this year by about $100 billion over the next four months, according to an analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
While the White House has claimed that deferral would in no way harm Social Security, with the lost revenues through December made up for from general funds, Trump has repeatedly said that he wants to eliminate the payroll tax altogether: “If I’m victorious on November 3rd, I plan to forgive these taxes and make permanent cuts to the payroll tax. So I’m going to make them all permanent,” he said on August 8.
William Hoagland of the Bipartisan Policy Center says that a temporary cut to the payroll tax wouldn’t destroy Social Security, although it could move up the depletion date for the Social Security trust funds by a year or two. But if Trump were to “make permanent cuts to the payroll tax,” as he has promised to do, it would indeed represent an existential threat to the Social Security system.
For his part, Biden is proposing to boost revenues for the Social Security system and increase benefits for some beneficiaries. Workers would have to start paying payroll taxes on income over $400,000 (the tax currently applies only to the first $137,700). And beneficiaries would see higher minimum payment levels, an increase in survivor benefits and a 5% boost for those who have received benefits for more than 20 years.
Taxes
What Biden said: Biden took aim at the tax cuts Republicans passed in 2017, referring to “the president’s $1.3 trillion tax giveaway to the wealthiest 1% and the biggest, most profitable corporations, some of which do not pay any tax at all.”
What you should know: Biden has promised to roll back some of those cuts by raising taxes on households making more than the $400,000 and hiking the corporate tax rate from 21% to 28%.
Fact checkers note that the majority of households received a tax cut from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, with 65% of households paying less to the IRS in 2018 than they would have otherwise. But the cuts were considerably larger at higher income levels, and when the individual provisions of the legislation expire in 2026, the majority of the benefits — 82.8%, according to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center — will flow to the top 1%.
Health Insurance
What Biden said: Biden warned that Trump’s “assault on the Affordable Care Act will continue until its destroyed, taking insurance away from more than 20 million people -- including more than 15 million people on Medicaid -- and getting rid of the protections that President Obama and I passed for people who suffer from a pre-existing condition.” Biden said that he wants to develop “a health care system that lowers premiums, deductibles, and drug prices by building on the Affordable Care Act [Trump is] trying to rip away.”
What you should know: Most experts agree that the Trump administration’s effort to have the Affordable Care Act overturned — arguments will be heard in the Supreme Court shortly after the election — would, if successful, result in upwards of 20 million people losing their insurance and eliminate the protections provided for people with pre-existing conditions. While Republicans have insisted that they are in fact protecting those with pre-existing conditions, there have taken no concrete steps to do so, while pursuing repeal efforts that would eliminate those protections.
Biden also said that as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, “more than 10 million people are going to lose their health insurance this year.” While the number is an accurate estimate, the majority of those people are expected to pick up coverage from other sources, including family members, Medicaid or the federal marketplaces established by the Affordable Care Act. The Urban Institute estimates that about 2.9 million people will be left without health insurance after those transitions are accounted for.


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-20--Blue Dog Dems Push Pelosi to Reopen Negotiations

A group of moderate Democrats in the House plans to send a letter to congressional leaders urging them to start talking again about the stalled coronavirus relief bill .
`` As the House prepares to vote this weekend on a bill to protect the United States Postal Service , we urge you to restart bipartisan , bicameral negotiations on a fifth COVID-19 relief package that is commensurate with the scale of this public health and economic crisis , '' the group wrote in a draft of the letter , according to Roll Call .
The letter comes from the Blue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 26 members that advocates for fiscal responsibility , national defense and bipartisan consensus .
The group said there is `` considerable common ground '' between the two sides in the negotiations , including an extension for enhanced unemployment benefits , more help for small businesses , funding for education , and another round of stimulus payments .
Where things stand : Negotiations over a new relief bill broke down earlier this month , and there are currently no clear plans for restarting them , though pressure has been building for legislation of some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are growing increasingly worried by the stalemate over a coronavirus aid package , but internal divisions on each side are complicating their efforts to propose new measures , '' The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday evening .
More than half the House Democratic caucus has urged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to add new funding for enhanced unemployment benefits tied to the jobless rate to the bill providing $ 25 billion for the Postal Service .
The House is set to vote on that Postal Service legislation on Saturday .
The White House , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` skinny '' relief package that would include an enhanced unemployment benefit , money for the Paycheck Protection Program of loans to small businesses and another round of direct payments to individuals .
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany said Wednesday that the administration would be open to $ 25 billion in emergency funding for the Postal Service depending on what else was included in the package .
`` We ’ re certainly open to looking at the $ 25 billion .
But we want included in there relief for the American people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entirely uninterested in , '' McEnany told reporters .
Some Senate Republicans have also floated a roughly $ 500 billion package — half the size of the previous GOP proposal — that reportedly is expected to include a $ 300 weekly federal unemployment benefit through December 27 while also providing a liability shield for businesses and hospitals , $ 29 billion in health-care funding and $ 105 billion for education .
But it remains unclear if that skinnier package can garner enough support even among Senate Republicans .

A group of moderate Democrats in the House plans to send a letter to congressional leaders urging them to start talking again about the stalled coronavirus relief bill.
"As the House prepares to vote this weekend on a bill to protect the United States Postal Service, we urge you to restart bipartisan, bicameral negotiations on a fifth COVID-19 relief package that is commensurate with the scale of this public health and economic crisis," the group wrote in a draft of the letter, according to Roll Call.
The letter comes from the Blue Dog Coalition, a House caucus with 26 members that advocates for fiscal responsibility, national defense and bipartisan consensus. The group said there is "considerable common ground" between the two sides in the negotiations, including an extension for enhanced unemployment benefits, more help for small businesses, funding for education, and another round of stimulus payments.
Where things stand: Negotiations over a new relief bill broke down earlier this month, and there are currently no clear plans for restarting them, though pressure has been building for legislation of some sort. "Lawmakers from both parties are growing increasingly worried by the stalemate over a coronavirus aid package, but internal divisions on each side are complicating their efforts to propose new measures," The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday evening.
More than half the House Democratic caucus has urged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to add new funding for enhanced unemployment benefits tied to the jobless rate to the bill providing $25 billion for the Postal Service. The House is set to vote on that Postal Service legislation on Saturday.
The White House, meanwhile, has been pushing for a "skinny" relief package that would include an enhanced unemployment benefit, money for the Paycheck Protection Program of loans to small businesses and another round of direct payments to individuals.
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany said Wednesday that the administration would be open to $25 billion in emergency funding for the Postal Service depending on what else was included in the package. "We’re certainly open to looking at the $25 billion. But we want included in there relief for the American people that thus far Speaker Pelosi has been entirely uninterested in," McEnany told reporters.
Some Senate Republicans have also floated a roughly $500 billion package — half the size of the previous GOP proposal — that reportedly is expected to include a $300 weekly federal unemployment benefit through December 27 while also providing a liability shield for businesses and hospitals, $29 billion in health-care funding and $105 billion for education. But it remains unclear if that skinnier package can garner enough support even among Senate Republicans.


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-26--More Than $1 Billion in Suspicious Coronavirus Relief Grants: Report

In some parts of the country , the federal government has provided coronavirus relief grants to more businesses than are eligible to receive them , at a cost of at least $ 1.3 billion .
An analysis by Bloomberg Businessweek found 52 congressional districts in which the number of recipients of emergency grants made by the Small Business Administration exceeded the number of eligible small businesses .
The grants , made through the now-depleted $ 20 billion Economic Injury Disaster Loan program , were intended to help small businesses keep their doors open during the coronavirus crisis .
Firms could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to $ 10,000 .
But the analysis found that in some cases far more small businesses receiving the maximum grant of $ 10,000 than there were firms with 10 or more employees in the area .
“ The epicenter was six adjacent congressional districts in the Chicago area , where 81,000 grants were approved even though there are only 19,000 eligible recipients , ” Bloomberg Businessweek said .
“ That ’ s more than $ 600 million going to phantom entrepreneurs.
” And the problem could be much bigger .
The SBA says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but also that it had been under pressure to provide loans quickly as the coronavirus closed down the economy in the spring and early summer .
SBA Inspector General Hannibal Ware warned in July that there was “ potentially rampant fraud ” in the grant program , citing $ 47.8 million in suspect loans his office had uncovered .
“ The level of fraud we ’ ve seen in this has been pretty pervasive , ” Ware told Bloomberg Businessweek .
In a preliminary report , Ware said organized fraud rings had targeted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the IG said : “ Various romance scams and social media solicitations persuade people to provide personally identifiable information to ‘ get free money.
’ The information is then used to apply for SBA economic injury loans and portions of the proceeds go to the ringleader.
” The true cost of the many scams may be considerably higher than the $ 1.3 billion identified by Bloomberg Businessweek .
That analysis focused only on grants of $ 10,000 , but not all of them were reviewed .
In addition , the majority of grants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1,000 and $ 9,000 , which raises the possibility that there could be many more suspicious loans to uncover .

In some parts of the country, the federal government has provided coronavirus relief grants to more businesses than are eligible to receive them, at a cost of at least $1.3 billion.
An analysis by Bloomberg Businessweek found 52 congressional districts in which the number of recipients of emergency grants made by the Small Business Administration exceeded the number of eligible small businesses.
The grants, made through the now-depleted $20 billion Economic Injury Disaster Loan program, were intended to help small businesses keep their doors open during the coronavirus crisis. Firms could receive $1,000 per employee, up to $10,000. But the analysis found that in some cases far more small businesses receiving the maximum grant of $10,000 than there were firms with 10 or more employees in the area.
“The epicenter was six adjacent congressional districts in the Chicago area, where 81,000 grants were approved even though there are only 19,000 eligible recipients,” Bloomberg Businessweek said. “That’s more than $600 million going to phantom entrepreneurs.”
And the problem could be much bigger. The SBA says it has fraud safeguards in place – but also that it had been under pressure to provide loans quickly as the coronavirus closed down the economy in the spring and early summer.
SBA Inspector General Hannibal Ware warned in July that there was “potentially rampant fraud” in the grant program, citing $47.8 million in suspect loans his office had uncovered. “The level of fraud we’ve seen in this has been pretty pervasive,” Ware told Bloomberg Businessweek.
In a preliminary report, Ware said organized fraud rings had targeted the program. In one example, the IG said: “Various romance scams and social media solicitations persuade people to provide personally identifiable information to ‘get free money.’ The information is then used to apply for SBA economic injury loans and portions of the proceeds go to the ringleader.”
The true cost of the many scams may be considerably higher than the $1.3 billion identified by Bloomberg Businessweek. That analysis focused only on grants of $10,000, but not all of them were reviewed. In addition, the majority of grants made by the program were between $1,000 and $9,000, which raises the possibility that there could be many more suspicious loans to uncover.


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-25--Has Congress Done Enough to Combat Coronavirus Recession? Economists Are Split

Nearly two-thirds of economists surveyed by the National Association for Business Economics say the U.S. is still in the recession that began in February and eight in 10 see at least a 25 % chance of a double-dip recession .
The economists are split on whether Congress has delivered an adequate fiscal response to the coronavirus recession , with 40 % saying lawmakers have not done enough , 37 % saying the response has been sufficient and 11 % saying it has been excessive .
A majority of economists in the survey say that the next fiscal relief package should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 30 % say it should provide $ 2 trillion or more .
A solid majority ( 60 % ) believes Congress should extend both the federal boost to unemployment insurance and the Paycheck Protection Program of forgivable loans to small businesses .
Nearly nine in 10 economists ( 88 % ) say they are at least “ somewhat ” concerned with federal public debt being on track to surpass 100 % of GDP .
Asked about the best ways for the government to raise revenues , 55 % pointed to a broad-based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over half supported broadening of the individual and/or corporate tax bases .
By a 62 % -to-25 % margin , the economists also say the Joe Biden would be better for the economy than President Trump .
The survey of 235 NABE members was conducted from July 30 to August 10 .

Nearly two-thirds of economists surveyed by the National Association for Business Economics say the U.S. is still in the recession that began in February and eight in 10 see at least a 25% chance of a double-dip recession.
The economists are split on whether Congress has delivered an adequate fiscal response to the coronavirus recession, with 40% saying lawmakers have not done enough, 37% saying the response has been sufficient and 11% saying it has been excessive.
A majority of economists in the survey say that the next fiscal relief package should provide at least $1.5 trillion, and 30% say it should provide $2 trillion or more.
A solid majority (60%) believes Congress should extend both the federal boost to unemployment insurance and the Paycheck Protection Program of forgivable loans to small businesses. Nearly nine in 10 economists (88%) say they are at least “somewhat” concerned with federal public debt being on track to surpass 100% of GDP.
Asked about the best ways for the government to raise revenues, 55% pointed to a broad-based energy or carbon tax, while just over half supported broadening of the individual and/or corporate tax bases.
By a 62%-to-25% margin, the economists also say the Joe Biden would be better for the economy than President Trump.
The survey of 235 NABE members was conducted from July 30 to August 10.


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-25--Terminating Payroll Tax Could Wipe Out Social Security by 2023, Chief Actuary Says

Eliminating payroll taxes could drain the Social Security trust funds within a few years if no alternative source of funding is provided , the Social Security Administration ’ s chief actuary said in a letter released Monday .
Sens .
Bernie Sanders ( I-VT ) , Chuck Schumer ( D-NY ) , Ron Wyden ( D-OR ) , and Chris Van Hollen ( D-MD ) requested the analysis after Trump earlier this month signed a memorandum allowing payroll taxes to be deferred from September through the end of the year .
The president also said he would “ terminate ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` We will be , on the assumption I win , we are going to be terminating the payroll tax after the beginning of the new year , '' Trump told reporters earlier this month , adding that he would pay into Social Security through the Treasury Department ’ s general fund .
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany said the following day that Trump was just referring to having deferred payroll taxes forgiven .
“ The president is very clear on this matter that he wants a permanent forgiveness of the deferral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ’ s gone , and he ’ s gone even further to say he ’ s going to make sure that Social Security is fully funded.
” Trump would not be able to eliminate payroll taxes or transfer money from the general fund without legislative action by Congress , and lawmakers in both parties have pushed back against the idea .
Stephen C. Goss , the Social Security Administration ’ s chief actuary , noted in his letter to the senators that he was not aware of anyone proposing the hypothetical legislation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote that if no alternative revenue source was provided , Social Security ’ s disability insurance trust fund would be depleted by the middle of next year and its retirement trust fund would be exhausted by the middle of 2023 .
The programs would stop paying out benefits once those reserves are depleted .
If general fund transfers were used to make the Social Security trust funds whole , the programs ’ benefits and financial condition “ would be essentially unaffected , ” Goss wrote — though , again , absent some other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ raise the federal budget deficit and Trump ’ s proposal would represent a massive change to the structure of a popular safety net program .
A plan to draw money from the general fund is unlikely to pass a divided Congress .
Why it matters : As the senators surely expected , the analysis will give Joe Biden and Democrats another cudgel to use against Trump .
“ President Trump continues to play fast and loose with the health and well-being of America ’ s seniors , ” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ analysis today shows the swift potential devastation of President Trump ’ s reckless call to ‘ terminate ’ the payroll tax : shattering the sacred promise of Social Security.
” And Schumer warned : “ President Trump ’ s plan to eliminate Social Security ’ s dedicated funding would endanger seniors ' Social Security and could mean the end of Social Security as we know it by 2023.
” The Trump campaign insists that the president will protect Social Security benefits ( though his budget proposals have included cuts to disability insurance ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are dusting off the old Social Security scare tactic playbook and talking about hypothetical legislation that does not exist , '' said Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh , according to The Hill .
The bottom line : The chances that payroll taxes are permanently eliminated appear slim at best , at least right now .
And Trump ’ s payroll tax deferral is not expected to have much effect either , as employers are still awaiting guidance from the Treasury Department as to how the deferred taxes would be handled once they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ questions surrounding the deferral , most businesses are not expected to stop withholding payroll taxes .

Eliminating payroll taxes could drain the Social Security trust funds within a few years if no alternative source of funding is provided, the Social Security Administration’s chief actuary said in a letter released Monday.
Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) requested the analysis after Trump earlier this month signed a memorandum allowing payroll taxes to be deferred from September through the end of the year. The president also said he would “terminate” payroll taxes if he wins reelection.
"We will be, on the assumption I win, we are going to be terminating the payroll tax after the beginning of the new year," Trump told reporters earlier this month, adding that he would pay into Social Security through the Treasury Department’s general fund.
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany said the following day that Trump was just referring to having deferred payroll taxes forgiven. “The president is very clear on this matter that he wants a permanent forgiveness of the deferral. That’s as far as he’s gone, and he’s gone even further to say he’s going to make sure that Social Security is fully funded.”
Trump would not be able to eliminate payroll taxes or transfer money from the general fund without legislative action by Congress, and lawmakers in both parties have pushed back against the idea.
Stephen C. Goss, the Social Security Administration’s chief actuary, noted in his letter to the senators that he was not aware of anyone proposing the hypothetical legislation they requested be analyzed. But he wrote that if no alternative revenue source was provided, Social Security’s disability insurance trust fund would be depleted by the middle of next year and its retirement trust fund would be exhausted by the middle of 2023. The programs would stop paying out benefits once those reserves are depleted.
If general fund transfers were used to make the Social Security trust funds whole, the programs’ benefits and financial condition “would be essentially unaffected,” Goss wrote — though, again, absent some other source of revenue, such transfers would raise the federal budget deficit and Trump’s proposal would represent a massive change to the structure of a popular safety net program. A plan to draw money from the general fund is unlikely to pass a divided Congress.
Why it matters: As the senators surely expected, the analysis will give Joe Biden and Democrats another cudgel to use against Trump.
“President Trump continues to play fast and loose with the health and well-being of America’s seniors,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a statement. “The new analysis today shows the swift potential devastation of President Trump’s reckless call to ‘terminate’ the payroll tax: shattering the sacred promise of Social Security.”
And Schumer warned: “President Trump’s plan to eliminate Social Security’s dedicated funding would endanger seniors' Social Security and could mean the end of Social Security as we know it by 2023.”
The Trump campaign insists that the president will protect Social Security benefits (though his budget proposals have included cuts to disability insurance). “Joe Biden’s allies are dusting off the old Social Security scare tactic playbook and talking about hypothetical legislation that does not exist," said Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh, according to The Hill.
The bottom line: The chances that payroll taxes are permanently eliminated appear slim at best, at least right now. And Trump’s payroll tax deferral is not expected to have much effect either, as employers are still awaiting guidance from the Treasury Department as to how the deferred taxes would be handled once they come due next year. Given the questions surrounding the deferral, most businesses are not expected to stop withholding payroll taxes.


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-28--Trump’s Plan to Benchmark Drug Prices Probably Won’t Do Much to Lower Costs: Report

President Trump signed four executive orders in July that propose ways to lower drug costs , one of which calls for the federal government to use the typically lower prices set in some other countries as a benchmark for U.S. prices .
That approach has long been opposed by pharmaceutical firms , and in an unusual move , the text of the executive order was held back for 30 days to give drug companies a chance to come up with a counterproposal .
The 30-day period has lapsed but the text of the executive order , which Trump has referred @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” proposal , has still not been released .
The drug industry has reportedly pitched an alternative proposal that would cut some drug prices in Medicare Part B by roughly 10 % and cap some out of pocket expenses for people in Medicare Part D , at a purported savings of $ 100 billion over 10 years .
But it ’ s not clear if Trump has been briefed on the counteroffer , and he continues to talk up his own proposal , claiming that it will bring drug prices down for American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to an analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation , which says the proposed plan may not have much of an effect on drug prices for most Americans .
Assuming the proposal is similar to one made by the Trump administration in 2018 — and a photo of the text of executive order captured during the signing ceremony suggests that it is — the plan would apply only to Medicare Part B drug spending , which accounts for just 7 % of all prescription drug spending in the U.S .
The plan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 4 million people in Medicare Part B , Kaiser said , but do nothing for the 45 million Medicare Part D beneficiaries , the 157 million people with employer-provided insurance and the millions more who lack coverage altogether .

President Trump signed four executive orders in July that propose ways to lower drug costs, one of which calls for the federal government to use the typically lower prices set in some other countries as a benchmark for U.S. prices. That approach has long been opposed by pharmaceutical firms, and in an unusual move, the text of the executive order was held back for 30 days to give drug companies a chance to come up with a counterproposal.
The 30-day period has lapsed but the text of the executive order, which Trump has referred to as the “most favored nation” proposal, has still not been released. The drug industry has reportedly pitched an alternative proposal that would cut some drug prices in Medicare Part B by roughly 10% and cap some out of pocket expenses for people in Medicare Part D, at a purported savings of $100 billion over 10 years. But it’s not clear if Trump has been briefed on the counteroffer, and he continues to talk up his own proposal, claiming that it will bring drug prices down for American consumers.
That’s not likely, according to an analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation, which says the proposed plan may not have much of an effect on drug prices for most Americans. Assuming the proposal is similar to one made by the Trump administration in 2018 — and a photo of the text of executive order captured during the signing ceremony suggests that it is — the plan would apply only to Medicare Part B drug spending, which accounts for just 7% of all prescription drug spending in the U.S.
The plan would potentially lower drug prices for about 4 million people in Medicare Part B, Kaiser said, but do nothing for the 45 million Medicare Part D beneficiaries, the 157 million people with employer-provided insurance and the millions more who lack coverage altogether.


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-27--Trump’s Payroll Tax Plan Is Hung Up in a Dispute With the IRS: Report

President Trump ’ s effort to suspend employee Social Security taxes starting September 1 is hung up over a dispute over who should be responsible for making the tax payments once the suspension is over at the end of the year .
According to Bloomberg Thursday , the White House wants employers to be on the hook for paying the suspended payroll taxes , not employees .
The IRS , however , says that both employers and employees would be responsible and subject to collections efforts .
The dispute between the White House and the Treasury Department over the issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ businesses say they need to decide whether to participate in the program .
Many companies have expressed concerns about delaying tax bills until next year , and last week the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said the plan is “ unworkable.
” Eliminate the suspended taxes ?
Top White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said last week that the Trump administration is considering forgiving the payroll tax of 6.2 % that employees pay to help fund Social Security .
The taxes “ essentially can be forgiven if you stretch it out five years , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Trump has also said that he would urge Congress to forgive the taxes if he wins a second term , though few believe that lawmakers would embrace the idea .
Few companies expected to participate .
The tax suspension was already a bit rushed , and the delay in providing guidance means that few companies are expected to start suspending payroll taxes when the program begins next month .
“ It ’ s unlikely that many employers will be able to make the programming changes by September 1 , ” Pete Isberg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FOX Business .
“ We ’ ve advised Congress and Treasury that anything like this normally requires at least six months for an orderly programming transition.
” Companies wary of the proposed program may be relieved that the delay is making the whole thing easier to avoid .
“ The fact that there hasn ’ t been guidance is , in some ways , a positive for a lot of clients who really were not looking forward to having to deal with it , ” tax attorney Adam B. Cohen of Eversheds Sutherland @ @ @ @

President Trump’s effort to suspend employee Social Security taxes starting September 1 is hung up over a dispute over who should be responsible for making the tax payments once the suspension is over at the end of the year.
According to Bloomberg Thursday, the White House wants employers to be on the hook for paying the suspended payroll taxes, not employees. The IRS, however, says that both employers and employees would be responsible and subject to collections efforts.
The dispute between the White House and the Treasury Department over the issue has delayed the publication of guidelines that businesses say they need to decide whether to participate in the program. Many companies have expressed concerns about delaying tax bills until next year, and last week the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said the plan is “unworkable.”
Eliminate the suspended taxes? Top White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said last week that the Trump administration is considering forgiving the payroll tax of 6.2% that employees pay to help fund Social Security. The taxes “essentially can be forgiven if you stretch it out five years, eight years,” Kudlow said.
President Trump has also said that he would urge Congress to forgive the taxes if he wins a second term, though few believe that lawmakers would embrace the idea.
Few companies expected to participate. The tax suspension was already a bit rushed, and the delay in providing guidance means that few companies are expected to start suspending payroll taxes when the program begins next month. “It’s unlikely that many employers will be able to make the programming changes by September 1,” Pete Isberg of the payroll processing firm ADP told FOX Business. “We’ve advised Congress and Treasury that anything like this normally requires at least six months for an orderly programming transition.”
Companies wary of the proposed program may be relieved that the delay is making the whole thing easier to avoid. “The fact that there hasn’t been guidance is, in some ways, a positive for a lot of clients who really were not looking forward to having to deal with it,” tax attorney Adam B. Cohen of Eversheds Sutherland LLP told Bloomberg.


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-27--'We're Not Budging': Pelosi and Meadows Make No Progress on Covid Relief

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows resumed talks on a coronavirus relief package on Thursday , but their 25-minute afternoon phone call failed to produce any progress in breaking a weeks-long impasse .
Pelosi said afterward that she told Meadows Democrats would be willing to meet halfway , splitting the difference between their $ 3.4 trillion proposal and the White House ’ s offer of about $ 1 trillion .
“ We have said again and again that we ’ re willing to meet them in the middle — $ 2.2 trillion .
When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we ’ ll be willing to discuss the particulars , ” Pelosi told reporters .
In a statement released after the call , Pelosi said the funding Democrats are insisting on would help combat the coronavirus and boost the economy .
“ This conversation made clear that the White House continues to disregard the needs of the American people as the coronavirus crisis devastates lives and livelihoods , ” she said .
“ The Administration ’ s continued failure to acknowledge the funding levels that experts , scientists and the American people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a tragic impasse.
” Earlier in the day , Pelosi told reporters that Democrats aren ’ t willing to go any lower .
“ We ’ re not budging , ” she said .
McConnell says the country needs another coronavirus bill : “ We need another one , the country needs another one , ” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-KY ) reportedly said during a visit to a hospital in Pikeville , Kentucky .
The Associated Press ’ s Lisa Mascaro reports that “ McConnell faces his own difficulties because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ senators appear satisfied , for now , that there remains enough existing aid available and new money is not needed .
The split in his ranks gives Pelosi an upper hand in talks because she has been able to bring most of her Democrats on board with her proposals.
” The bottom line : Congress remains on recess until September and Meadows said this week he ’ s “ not optimistic ” about reaching a deal before the end of next month , when a relief package could be combined with talks on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Thursday ’ s talks did nothing to change that .

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows resumed talks on a coronavirus relief package on Thursday, but their 25-minute afternoon phone call failed to produce any progress in breaking a weeks-long impasse.
Pelosi said afterward that she told Meadows Democrats would be willing to meet halfway, splitting the difference between their $3.4 trillion proposal and the White House’s offer of about $1 trillion.
“We have said again and again that we’re willing to meet them in the middle — $2.2 trillion. When they’re willing to do that, we’ll be willing to discuss the particulars,” Pelosi told reporters. In a statement released after the call, Pelosi said the funding Democrats are insisting on would help combat the coronavirus and boost the economy.
“This conversation made clear that the White House continues to disregard the needs of the American people as the coronavirus crisis devastates lives and livelihoods,” she said. “The Administration’s continued failure to acknowledge the funding levels that experts, scientists and the American people know is needed leaves our nation at a tragic impasse.”
Earlier in the day, Pelosi told reporters that Democrats aren’t willing to go any lower. “We’re not budging,” she said.
McConnell says the country needs another coronavirus bill: “We need another one, the country needs another one,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) reportedly said during a visit to a hospital in Pikeville, Kentucky.
The Associated Press’s Lisa Mascaro reports that “McConnell faces his own difficulties because many, if not most, GOP senators appear satisfied, for now, that there remains enough existing aid available and new money is not needed. The split in his ranks gives Pelosi an upper hand in talks because she has been able to bring most of her Democrats on board with her proposals.”
The bottom line: Congress remains on recess until September and Meadows said this week he’s “not optimistic” about reaching a deal before the end of next month, when a relief package could be combined with talks on must-pass funding to prevent a government shutdown. Thursday’s talks did nothing to change that.


Once Again, Infrastructure?

Real interest rates are negative , which means the federal government is essentially getting paid to borrow money right now @ @ @ @ @ into account .
Writing at Bloomberg Monday , Wall Street analyst Paul Podolsky argues that @ @ @ @ @ or a balance of payments crisis , the only thing that could push real interest @ @ @ @ @ massive public investment in infrastructure .
Doing so would kill two birds with one stone @ @ @ @ @ public goods while restoring interest rates to a more normal range .
While both Republicans @ @ @ @ @ about infrastructure investment , the problem – aside from their notable inability to get anything @ @ @ @ @ proposals in the range of $ 1 trillion to $ 2 trillion are too small @ @ @ @ @ above its economic potential of about 1.5 % a year and match estimates of what @ @ @ @ @ on infrastructure , an investment of around $ 4 trillion , or close to 20 @ @ @ @ @ , is warranted , ” Podolsky says .

Real interest rates are negative, which means the federal government is essentially getting paid to borrow money right now, once inflation is taken into account. Writing at Bloomberg Monday, Wall Street analyst Paul Podolsky argues that short of widespread social chaos or a balance of payments crisis, the only thing that could push real interest rates back above zero is massive public investment in infrastructure. Doing so would kill two birds with one stone by making much-needed investments in public goods while restoring interest rates to a more normal range.
While both Republicans and Democrats have talked enthusiastically about infrastructure investment, the problem – aside from their notable inability to get anything done – is that their proposals in the range of $1 trillion to $2 trillion are too small. “To boost growth above its economic potential of about 1.5% a year and match estimates of what is needed to be spent on infrastructure, an investment of around $4 trillion, or close to 20% of gross domestic product, is warranted,” Podolsky says.
Read Podolsky’s analysis here.


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-28--The Truth About Trump’s and Biden's Tax Plans

In his speech Thursday night accepting the GOP presidential nomination , President Trump , like many other speakers at the Republican National Convention this week , unleashed a flood of falsehoods and misleading statements .
Trump ’ s overarching message was a stark and disturbing one : Joe Biden would be a Trojan horse for socialism , opening the door for the “ wild-eyed Marxists ” on the radical Left to transform America into a socialist dystopia , undermining the greatness that Trump had restored before the coronavirus pandemic struck — greatness that Trump will quickly restore again now that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a vaccine will soon be ready under his unparalleled leadership .
The reality : That message , and the various claims underlying it , may resonate with Trump ’ s ardent base of supporters , but it distorts reality .
For one thing , more than 42,000 new Covid-19 cases were reported Wednesday alone and 2,700 more Americans have died since the week began , the Associated Press reports .
CNN counted more than 20 “ false , exaggerated or misleading claims ” by Trump .
The Washington Post ’ s fact-checkers listed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of what they called the president ’ s “ tidal wave of tall tales , false claims and revisionist history.
” The distortions go well beyond politics as usual .
“ While all political confabs involve some level of spin and revisionism , the Republican National Convention this year has stood out for its brazen defiance of facts , ethical guidelines and tradition , according to experts on propaganda and misinformation , ” the Post ’ s Toluse Olorunnipa reports .
Trump bashes Biden on taxes : The GOP claims about a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American way of life focused largely on stoking fears about public safety , with Trump claiming that under Biden , “ the radical Left will defund police departments all across America , ” even though Biden has said he opposes defunding the police .
But as part of his warnings , Trump also touched on taxes as a key difference between him and his rival .
Here ’ s what Trump said on Biden ’ s tax plan , and his own : '' [ Biden ] has pledged a $ 4 trillion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which will totally collapse our rapidly improving economy .
... On the other hand , just as I did in my first term , I will cut taxes even further for hard-working moms and dads .
I will not raise taxes .
I will cut them , and very substantially .
And we will also provide tax credits to bring jobs out of China back to America , and we will impose tariffs on any company that leaves America to produce jobs overseas.
” The facts : It ’ s true that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to raise about $ 4 trillion over a decade , but analyses by the Tax Policy Center and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget ( CRFB ) say that the increases would be heavily focused on top earners and corporations .
Biden has pledged that he will not raise taxes on people earning less than $ 400,000 .
The Tax Policy Center projects that more than 90 % of the tax increases under Biden ’ s plan would be borne by the top fifth of income earners , and two-thirds of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of earners .
`` The Biden tax plan is highly progressive , increasing taxes for the top 1 percent of earners by 13 to 18 percent of after-tax income , while indirectly increasing taxes for most other groups by 0.2 to 0.6 percent , '' the CRFB said in a report last month .
As for Trump ’ s tax plan , well , there isn ’ t one per se .
The president has talked about cutting taxes on capital gains and for the middle class , and he has said he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end of the year by executive action to be forgiven .
But he hasn ’ t released details of what he would do .
A bullet-pointed list of Trump ’ s second term agenda released this week by his campaign includes vague promises to “ Cut Taxes to Boost Take-Home Pay and Keep Jobs in America ” and enact `` Made in America ” tax credits and “ Tax Credits for Companies that Bring Back Jobs from China.
” “ The Trump campaign has promised more detail on his second-term agenda , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tax plan…but we 're not holding our breath waiting for that to happen , ” Kiplinger ’ s Rocky Mengle wrote this week .
“ Unfortunately , there 's a good chance we 'll have to make do with the scant information currently available when trying to figure out what the president would do about taxes during a second term .
Plus , adding to the confusion , the president has occasionally come out in favor of a particular tax proposal , only to reverse course or walk back support for it later.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ project what tax policies Trump might pursue if re-elected .
“ Without further details or clarification , it is difficult to fully analyze President Trump ’ s second term tax policy agenda , ” the Tax Foundation ’ s Erica York wrote this week .
It 's safe to say Trump won ’ t be looking to raise taxes , but it ’ s also worth noting that any large-scale tax changes or cuts the president might seek to enact would have to be done through congressional legislation , meaning they would more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Read more about Biden ’ s tax plan at the Tax Policy Center or Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget .
Read more about Trump ’ s possible tax plans at Kiplinger or the Tax Foundation .

In his speech Thursday night accepting the GOP presidential nomination, President Trump, like many other speakers at the Republican National Convention this week, unleashed a flood of falsehoods and misleading statements.
Trump’s overarching message was a stark and disturbing one: Joe Biden would be a Trojan horse for socialism, opening the door for the “wild-eyed Marxists” on the radical Left to transform America into a socialist dystopia, undermining the greatness that Trump had restored before the coronavirus pandemic struck — greatness that Trump will quickly restore again now that the virus has been effectively controlled and a vaccine will soon be ready under his unparalleled leadership.
The reality: That message, and the various claims underlying it, may resonate with Trump’s ardent base of supporters, but it distorts reality. For one thing, more than 42,000 new Covid-19 cases were reported Wednesday alone and 2,700 more Americans have died since the week began, the Associated Press reports. CNN counted more than 20 “false, exaggerated or misleading claims” by Trump. The Washington Post’s fact-checkers listed 25 statements that caught their attention as part of what they called the president’s “tidal wave of tall tales, false claims and revisionist history.”
The distortions go well beyond politics as usual. “While all political confabs involve some level of spin and revisionism, the Republican National Convention this year has stood out for its brazen defiance of facts, ethical guidelines and tradition, according to experts on propaganda and misinformation,” the Post’s Toluse Olorunnipa reports.
Trump bashes Biden on taxes: The GOP claims about a sinister socialist agenda under Democrats upending an American way of life focused largely on stoking fears about public safety, with Trump claiming that under Biden, “the radical Left will defund police departments all across America,” even though Biden has said he opposes defunding the police.
But as part of his warnings, Trump also touched on taxes as a key difference between him and his rival. Here’s what Trump said on Biden’s tax plan, and his own:
"[Biden] has pledged a $4 trillion tax hike on almost all American families, which will totally collapse our rapidly improving economy. ... On the other hand, just as I did in my first term, I will cut taxes even further for hard-working moms and dads. I will not raise taxes. I will cut them, and very substantially. And we will also provide tax credits to bring jobs out of China back to America, and we will impose tariffs on any company that leaves America to produce jobs overseas.”
The facts: It’s true that Biden’s tax proposals are expected to raise about $4 trillion over a decade, but analyses by the Tax Policy Center and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) say that the increases would be heavily focused on top earners and corporations. Biden has pledged that he will not raise taxes on people earning less than $400,000. The Tax Policy Center projects that more than 90% of the tax increases under Biden’s plan would be borne by the top fifth of income earners, and two-thirds of the increases would hit the top 1% of earners.
"The Biden tax plan is highly progressive, increasing taxes for the top 1 percent of earners by 13 to 18 percent of after-tax income, while indirectly increasing taxes for most other groups by 0.2 to 0.6 percent," the CRFB said in a report last month.
As for Trump’s tax plan, well, there isn’t one per se. The president has talked about cutting taxes on capital gains and for the middle class, and he has said he wants payroll taxes he deferred through the end of the year by executive action to be forgiven. But he hasn’t released details of what he would do. A bullet-pointed list of Trump’s second term agenda released this week by his campaign includes vague promises to “Cut Taxes to Boost Take-Home Pay and Keep Jobs in America” and enact "Made in America” tax credits and “Tax Credits for Companies that Bring Back Jobs from China.”
“The Trump campaign has promised more detail on his second-term agenda, and we certainly hope that includes a formal tax plan…but we're not holding our breath waiting for that to happen,” Kiplinger’s Rocky Mengle wrote this week. “Unfortunately, there's a good chance we'll have to make do with the scant information currently available when trying to figure out what the president would do about taxes during a second term. Plus, adding to the confusion, the president has occasionally come out in favor of a particular tax proposal, only to reverse course or walk back support for it later.”
That all makes it difficult to project what tax policies Trump might pursue if re-elected. “Without further details or clarification, it is difficult to fully analyze President Trump’s second term tax policy agenda,” the Tax Foundation’s Erica York wrote this week. It's safe to say Trump won’t be looking to raise taxes, but it’s also worth noting that any large-scale tax changes or cuts the president might seek to enact would have to be done through congressional legislation, meaning they would more than likely need substantial Democratic support.
Read more about Biden’s tax plan at the Tax Policy Center or Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Read more about Trump’s possible tax plans at Kiplinger or the Tax Foundation.


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-28--$62 Million in Small Business Aid Fraud Just the ‘Tip of the Iceberg’

From $ 52,000 watches to six-figure Italian sports cars , some crooks are making it easy to detect fraud in the Paycheck Protection Program , a $ 525 billion effort to help small businesses remain open during the coronavirus pandemic .
The Justice Department has charged nearly 60 program participants with fraud worth about $ 62 million , according to a report in The New York Times Friday .
The fraudulent schemes were easy to spot , investigators said , thanks to ostentatious spending and poorly faked documents .
Here ’ s one case , as described by the Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with convictions for forgery and robbery sought loans from six lenders using shell companies with no employees and , in one application , the stolen identity of a wine-shop owner who died in April .
He collected $ 1.6 million and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on booze , nightclubs , a Rolex and a 2019 Lamborghini Urus , according to the complaint filed against him in federal court in Houston.
” The problem is that the fraudulent activity uncovered so far is just “ the smallest , tiniest piece of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ware , the inspector general of the Small Business Administration , told the Times .
More than 5 million businesses received loans through the program , which were forgivable if they were used to cover payroll and , to a lesser extent , rent and utilities .
About 29,000 of the loans were for more than $ 2 million , and investigators say they will all receive scrutiny in a process that could take years .
Investigators have plenty of leads to work with .
The Small Business Administration , which oversees the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its fraud hotline , a huge jump from the 800 or so it received all of last year , before the program was created .

From $52,000 watches to six-figure Italian sports cars, some crooks are making it easy to detect fraud in the Paycheck Protection Program, a $525 billion effort to help small businesses remain open during the coronavirus pandemic.
The Justice Department has charged nearly 60 program participants with fraud worth about $62 million, according to a report in The New York Times Friday. The fraudulent schemes were easy to spot, investigators said, thanks to ostentatious spending and poorly faked documents.
Here’s one case, as described by the Times:
“[A] Texas man with convictions for forgery and robbery sought loans from six lenders using shell companies with no employees and, in one application, the stolen identity of a wine-shop owner who died in April. He collected $1.6 million and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on booze, nightclubs, a Rolex and a 2019 Lamborghini Urus, according to the complaint filed against him in federal court in Houston.”
The problem is that the fraudulent activity uncovered so far is just “the smallest, tiniest piece of the tip of the iceberg,” Hannibal Ware, the inspector general of the Small Business Administration, told the Times.
More than 5 million businesses received loans through the program, which were forgivable if they were used to cover payroll and, to a lesser extent, rent and utilities. About 29,000 of the loans were for more than $2 million, and investigators say they will all receive scrutiny in a process that could take years.
Investigators have plenty of leads to work with. The Small Business Administration, which oversees the PPP, has received 42,000 tips on its fraud hotline, a huge jump from the 800 or so it received all of last year, before the program was created.


thefiscaltimes--2020-09-08--SALT Cap Isn’t Scaring Away Blue-State Millionaires: Report

The $ 10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions imposed as part of the 2017 Republican tax law is not causing high-income taxpayers to flee high-tax blue states , according to Carl Davis , research director at the progressive Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy .
In a blog post last week , Davis said that new IRS data show that states including California and New York added a significant number of millionaires to their tax rolls from 2017 to 2018 .
“ California and New York saw more growth in millionaire tax returns than any other state in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Taken as a group , California , New York , New Jersey , Massachusetts , and Illinois saw 40 percent of the nation ’ s growth in millionaire tax returns occur within their borders , despite the fact that these states are home to just 27 percent of the nation ’ s population.
” But Politico ’ s Weekly Tax notes that “ it ’ s also undeniable that traffic is more going away from high-tax states and toward low-tax ones ” and analysts on the other side of the political divide argue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such decisions .

The $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions imposed as part of the 2017 Republican tax law is not causing high-income taxpayers to flee high-tax blue states, according to Carl Davis, research director at the progressive Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.
In a blog post last week, Davis said that new IRS data show that states including California and New York added a significant number of millionaires to their tax rolls from 2017 to 2018. “California and New York saw more growth in millionaire tax returns than any other state in 2018,” Davis wrote. “Taken as a group, California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Illinois saw 40 percent of the nation’s growth in millionaire tax returns occur within their borders, despite the fact that these states are home to just 27 percent of the nation’s population.”
But Politico’s Weekly Tax notes that “it’s also undeniable that traffic is more going away from high-tax states and toward low-tax ones” and analysts on the other side of the political divide argue that taxes play a sizable part of such decisions.


thefiscaltimes--2020-09-08--Social Security Trust Fund Depleted by 2031: CBO

The Social Security Old Age and Survivors Insurance fund will be depleted by 2031 , according to a report released @ @ @ @ @ Office .
The CBO said the surplus in the fund , which pays Social Security @ @ @ @ @ from $ 2.8 trillion this year to $ 533 billion in 2030 , and run @ @ @ @ @ The CBO also estimates that the Highway Trust fund will be depleted in 2021 , @ @ @ @ @ Fund will run dry in 2024 , and the Social Security disability fund will run @ @ @ @ @ economic slowdown caused by the coronavirus pandemic has put a dent in the federal government @ @ @ @ @ CBO said .
In January , the trust funds as a whole were projected to @ @ @ @ @ 57 billion in fiscal year 2020 , but now are projected to record a $ @ @ @ @ @ a swing of $ 100 billion .
The change in the estimate was driven largely @ @ @ @ @ by the Unemployment Trust Fund .

The Social Security Old Age and Survivors Insurance fund will be depleted by 2031, according to a report released Wednesday by the Congressional Budget Office.
The CBO said the surplus in the fund, which pays Social Security retirement benefits, would drop from $2.8 trillion this year to $533 billion in 2030, and run out the following year.
The CBO also estimates that the Highway Trust fund will be depleted in 2021, Medicare's Hospital Insurance Trust Fund will run dry in 2024, and the Social Security disability fund will run out by 2026.
The economic slowdown caused by the coronavirus pandemic has put a dent in the federal government’s trust funds, CBO said. In January, the trust funds as a whole were projected to record a surplus of $57 billion in fiscal year 2020, but now are projected to record a $43 billion dollar deficit – a swing of $100 billion. The change in the estimate was driven largely by an increase in payouts by the Unemployment Trust Fund.


thefiscaltimes--2020-09-01--70% of Americans Support Additional Coronavirus Payments: Survey

Although lawmakers and the Trump administration have been unable to agree on the next coronavirus relief package , which could potentially include stimulus checks , most Americans think the federal government should issue another round of economic impact payments .
In a survey conducted between August 3 and August 11 , 70 % of respondents said they supported the payments , while just 17 % said they did not .
The proposal received majority support from those in both political parties and independents , as well as from those in all age groups ( see the chart below ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , most said they should be $ 900 or larger .
In a separate set of questions , Gallup asked about unemployment insurance payments and their effect on people ’ s willingness to return to work .
Respondents were shown different levels of supplemental benefits payments , ranging from $ 150 per week to $ 450 per week , and asked whether they would return to their previous jobs .
Similar to numerous other studies that examined the effect of the $ 600 per week supplement paid by the federal government until the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ found that the level of unemployment support had little effect on their interest in returning to work .
“ The survey results may not indicate how people might actually behave under the different circumstances , but to the extent they do predict behavior , they suggest relatively few workers would choose to stay home due to greater federal assistance rather than head back to work , ” Gallup said .

Although lawmakers and the Trump administration have been unable to agree on the next coronavirus relief package, which could potentially include stimulus checks, most Americans think the federal government should issue another round of economic impact payments.
In a survey conducted between August 3 and August 11, 70% of respondents said they supported the payments, while just 17% said they did not. The proposal received majority support from those in both political parties and independents, as well as from those in all age groups (see the chart below).
Aske about the size of the checks, most said they should be $900 or larger.
In a separate set of questions, Gallup asked about unemployment insurance payments and their effect on people’s willingness to return to work. Respondents were shown different levels of supplemental benefits payments, ranging from $150 per week to $450 per week, and asked whether they would return to their previous jobs. Similar to numerous other studies that examined the effect of the $600 per week supplement paid by the federal government until the end of July, the Gallup researchers found that the level of unemployment support had little effect on their interest in returning to work.
“The survey results may not indicate how people might actually behave under the different circumstances, but to the extent they do predict behavior, they suggest relatively few workers would choose to stay home due to greater federal assistance rather than head back to work,” Gallup said.


thefiscaltimes--2020-09-01--Investigators Flag Billions in Questionable Small Business Aid

The Paycheck Protection Program lent more than $ 1 billion to small businesses that violated the rules of the program , a House investigative committee said Tuesday .
In a preliminary report , investigators said the PPPP “ helped millions of small businesses and non-profit organizations stay afloat during the coronavirus crisis , but a lack of oversight and accountability from the Treasury Department and Small Business Administration ( SBA ) may have led to billions of dollars being diverted to fraud , waste , and abuse , rather than reaching small businesses truly in need.
” • More than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 1 billion that went to companies that received multiple loans from the PPP , in violation of the rules .
• More than 600 loans worth nearly $ 100 million made to small businesses that have been debarred or suspended from doing business with the government .
• More than 350 loans worth nearly $ 200 million made to contractors that have had problems with performance or integrity .
• More than 11,000 loans worth nearly $ 3 billion made to companies whose information doesn ’ t match other federal databases .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ report on the PPP Tuesday , which praises President Trump ’ s “ swift action ” on the PPP and declares the program a “ resounding success .
”

The Paycheck Protection Program lent more than $1 billion to small businesses that violated the rules of the program, a House investigative committee said Tuesday.
In a preliminary report, investigators said the PPPP “helped millions of small businesses and non-profit organizations stay afloat during the coronavirus crisis, but a lack of oversight and accountability from the Treasury Department and Small Business Administration (SBA) may have led to billions of dollars being diverted to fraud, waste, and abuse, rather than reaching small businesses truly in need.”
Problematic issues identified by the investigators include:
More than 10,000 loans worth a total of over $1 billion that went to companies that received multiple loans from the PPP, in violation of the rules.
More than 600 loans worth nearly $100 million made to small businesses that have been debarred or suspended from doing business with the government.
More than 350 loans worth nearly $200 million made to contractors that have had problems with performance or integrity.
More than 11,000 loans worth nearly $3 billion made to companies whose information doesn’t match other federal databases.
Hundreds of loans with missing information.
Republicans on the committee released their own report on the PPP Tuesday, which praises President Trump’s “swift action” on the PPP and declares the program a “resounding success.”


thefiscaltimes--2020-09-01--Mnuchin Says Trump Wants a Deal on Covid Relief

Appearing before a House panel investigating the federal response to the coronavirus pandemic , Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin told lawmakers Tuesday that the White House is ready to renew the stalled negotiations over the next relief bill .
“ Let me say , I very much agree with you and those other experts that more fiscal response is needed , ” Mnuchin said .
“ The president and I want to move forward with more fiscal response .
I 'm prepared to sit down with the Speaker at any time to negotiate.
” He told Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-CA ) as soon as the hearing was over .
The size of the relief package is still very much an issue , however .
Mnuchin said he did not support the $ 2.2 trillion package proposed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-CA ) , which was offered as a compromise position .
Republicans have offered $ 1.3 trillion , but have shown no interest in going higher , and may not have solid internal support for any additional relief spending .
Still , Mnuchin highlighted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to agree .
“ I believe a bipartisan agreement still should be reached , ” Mnuchin said , “ and would provide substantial funds for schools , testing , vaccines , PPP for small businesses , continued enhanced unemployment benefits , child care , nutrition , agriculture , and the U.S .
Postal Service , along with liability protection for universities , schools , and businesses.
” Senate eyes “ skinny ” bill .
Senate Republicans hope to introduce a slimmed down $ 500 billion coronavirus relief bill next week , White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The bill will be “ more targeted ” than the $ 3.4 trillion package Democrats approved in the House , Meadows said , and would be constructed to pass on its own or serve as a starting point for a larger deal .
Meadows said he met with President Trump and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin Monday and that the president told them “ to get as creative as we can within the confines of the law to put forth as much money as we can so we can keep this economy going.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of passing a “ skinny ” relief bill , though , and Senate Democrats are expected to prevent the GOP bill from getting a vote absent some kind of deal in place with the speaker .
A major stumbling block .
Meadows said aid for state and local governments is “ probably the biggest stumbling block ” for the next round of negotiations .
Pelosi has requested $ 915 billion in aid to help avoid layoffs of public workers including teachers , firefighters and police officers .
But Republicans have rejected anything like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ portray as spendthrift , Democratic-led states and cities .
Even so , Mnuchin told lawmakers that the White House would back some kind of funding for states and local governments .
“ Nobody thinks the right outcome is zero , '' Mnuchin said .

Appearing before a House panel investigating the federal response to the coronavirus pandemic, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin told lawmakers Tuesday that the White House is ready to renew the stalled negotiations over the next relief bill.
“Let me say, I very much agree with you and those other experts that more fiscal response is needed,” Mnuchin said. “The president and I want to move forward with more fiscal response. I'm prepared to sit down with the Speaker at any time to negotiate.” He told Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) that he would call House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) as soon as the hearing was over.
The size of the relief package is still very much an issue, however. Mnuchin said he did not support the $2.2 trillion package proposed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), which was offered as a compromise position. Republicans have offered $1.3 trillion, but have shown no interest in going higher, and may not have solid internal support for any additional relief spending.
Still, Mnuchin highlighted the areas where the two sides appear to agree. “I believe a bipartisan agreement still should be reached,” Mnuchin said, “and would provide substantial funds for schools, testing, vaccines, PPP for small businesses, continued enhanced unemployment benefits, child care, nutrition, agriculture, and the U.S. Postal Service, along with liability protection for universities, schools, and businesses.”
Senate eyes “skinny” bill. Senate Republicans hope to introduce a slimmed down $500 billion coronavirus relief bill next week, White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said Tuesday. The bill will be “more targeted” than the $3.4 trillion package Democrats approved in the House, Meadows said, and would be constructed to pass on its own or serve as a starting point for a larger deal.
Meadows said he met with President Trump and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin Monday and that the president told them “to get as creative as we can within the confines of the law to put forth as much money as we can so we can keep this economy going.”
Pelosi has repeatedly rejected the idea of passing a “skinny” relief bill, though, and Senate Democrats are expected to prevent the GOP bill from getting a vote absent some kind of deal in place with the speaker.
A major stumbling block. Meadows said aid for state and local governments is “probably the biggest stumbling block” for the next round of negotiations. Pelosi has requested $915 billion in aid to help avoid layoffs of public workers including teachers, firefighters and police officers. But Republicans have rejected anything like that level of assistance for what they portray as spendthrift, Democratic-led states and cities.
Even so, Mnuchin told lawmakers that the White House would back some kind of funding for states and local governments. “Nobody thinks the right outcome is zero," Mnuchin said.


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-31--Trump’s Payroll Tax Deferral Gets Rolling

The IRS issued guidance late Friday that provides details on President Trump ’ s executive action to allow employers to stop collecting Social Security taxes for employees starting September 1 through the end of the year .
According to the guidance , employers who choose to participate in the program will stop collecting the 6.2 % payroll tax that is the employee ’ s share of Social Security taxes for the next four months for workers who earn up to $ 104,000 per year .
The employers will then be required to collect twice as much from January to April @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of The Wall Street Journal , a worker making $ 75,000 a year would save about $ 1,550 by December 31 – but then would owe the same amount in 2021 .
“ The government ’ s action doesn ’ t actually change the underlying taxes , because only Congress can do that , ” Rubin said .
“ Employees would still owe the taxes eventually .
Many businesses have expressed their doubts about the plan , Federal workers drafted into program .
One employer that will participate is the government .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ payroll tax deferral by all federal payroll providers , so all federal employees who meet the income threshold will see savings , ” a senior administration official told Federal News Network Monday .
The deferral is expected to begin with the second paycheck of September , and will apply to those with gross Social Security wages of less than $ 4,000 per pay period .
Unions representing federal workers spoke out against the plan .
“ Either way , the employee loses , ” said Randy Erwin , president of the National Federation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tax deferment becomes permanent , and provided it is legal , the employee could get a lower payout in retirement .
If the deferment is temporary , the employee risks getting a huge tax bill plus interest and penalties early next year.
” Rep. Don Beyer ( D-VA ) , whose district includes thousands of federal workers , also criticized the move .
“ The Trump administration ’ s plan to initiate payroll tax deferrals for civil servants treats the federal workforce as a guinea pig for a bad policy that businesses already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said .
“ This payroll tax deferral does not really put money in workers ’ pockets , it simply sets up the members of the federal workforce who can least afford it for a big tax bill that many will not expect .
”

The IRS issued guidance late Friday that provides details on President Trump’s executive action to allow employers to stop collecting Social Security taxes for employees starting September 1 through the end of the year.
According to the guidance, employers who choose to participate in the program will stop collecting the 6.2% payroll tax that is the employee’s share of Social Security taxes for the next four months for workers who earn up to $104,000 per year. The employers will then be required to collect twice as much from January to April next year.
According to Richard Rubin of The Wall Street Journal, a worker making $75,000 a year would save about $1,550 by December 31 – but then would owe the same amount in 2021.
“The government’s action doesn’t actually change the underlying taxes, because only Congress can do that,” Rubin said. “Employees would still owe the taxes eventually.
Many businesses have expressed their doubts about the plan,
Federal workers drafted into program. One employer that will participate is the government. “The federal government will implement an across-the-board payroll tax deferral by all federal payroll providers, so all federal employees who meet the income threshold will see savings,” a senior administration official told Federal News Network Monday. The deferral is expected to begin with the second paycheck of September, and will apply to those with gross Social Security wages of less than $4,000 per pay period.
Unions representing federal workers spoke out against the plan. “Either way, the employee loses,” said Randy Erwin, president of the National Federation of Federal Employees. “If the tax deferment becomes permanent, and provided it is legal, the employee could get a lower payout in retirement. If the deferment is temporary, the employee risks getting a huge tax bill plus interest and penalties early next year.”
Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA), whose district includes thousands of federal workers, also criticized the move. “The Trump administration’s plan to initiate payroll tax deferrals for civil servants treats the federal workforce as a guinea pig for a bad policy that businesses already rejected as ‘unworkable,’” he said. “This payroll tax deferral does not really put money in workers’ pockets, it simply sets up the members of the federal workforce who can least afford it for a big tax bill that many will not expect.”


thefiscaltimes--2020-08-31--Biden Eyes Trillion-Dollar Stimulus as Negotiations Hit a Wall

September is just around the corner , but the impending arrival of fall has done little to inspire lawmakers and the Trump administration to come to an agreement on the next coronavirus stimulus bill .
White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said late last week that the Trump administration would support a $ 1.3 trillion bill , moving up from the $ 1 trillion he has cited in the past – and higher than some Senate Republicans have said they would support .
Saying she was willing to meet Republicans halfway , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi indicated that she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stimulus bill from $ 3.4 trillion to $ 2.2 trillion .
But that still leaves an enormous gap between the two parties .
On “ Meet the Press ” Sunday , Meadows sounded like he had reached his limit , accusing Pelosi of being “ willing to turn down $ 1.3 trillion of help that goes to the American people because she would rather them have nothing than to give way ” on her offer .
‘ Bad blood ’ not making things easier .
Part of the problem , The Hill ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is the fundamental lack of respect between Meadows , a tea part insurgent who has embraced President Trump , and Pelosi , the ultimate Washington insider .
“ As the parties scramble for an elusive deal on another round of coronavirus relief , mistrust and bad blood between two of the principal negotiators ... have snarled the talks and complicated the path to a timely agreement , ” they wrote Monday .
While some of the sniping between the two leaders could be dismissed as political maneuvering that aims to motivate voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fundamental political and philosophical issues at stake .
The dispute highlights “ the stark ideological differences between the sides when it comes to the government ’ s role in responding to the public health and economic crises sparked by the coronavirus pandemic — differences all but epitomized in the figures of Pelosi and Meadows , ” Lillis and Wong say .
Biden mulls his own coronavirus relief package .
If negotiators are unable to move beyond the current stalemate , Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden may need to move quickly on a coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win the election , Axios reported Monday .
Biden ’ s economic advisers are “ are growing increasingly worried that the economy is deteriorating by the day , ” Axios ’ Hans Nichols and Felix Salmon said , and are warning that “ problems can compound and cascade — including business bankruptcies , supply chain disruptions , mass evictions , and huge shortfalls in state and local budgets.
” Jake Sullivan , a senior policy adviser to Biden , told Axios that , “ We have always contemplated the need for additional stimulus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ find in January.
” While Biden ’ s team hasn ’ t discussed the plan publicly , advisers say the stimulus package would be in the $ 1 trillion to $ 2 trillion range , depending on what Congress is able to do before January .
And that ’ s completely separate from Biden ’ s previously announced plan to spend roughly $ 3.5 trillion on clean energy , infrastructure , education and a host of other initiatives designed to revitalize the economy and combat inequality .
One thing motivating Biden ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Obama administration , is the perceived failure of the fiscal response to the Great Recession .
“ They feel that the 2009 stimulus package — the $ 787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act — was woefully inadequate , ” Nichols and Salmon said .
“ And they 're determined not to make the same mistake twice.
” Republicans have also said that they would push more relief spending in January , should Trump win the election .
“ Trump 's call for a $ 2 trillion infrastructure bill back in March @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2021 stimulus , ” Nichols and Salmon said .

September is just around the corner, but the impending arrival of fall has done little to inspire lawmakers and the Trump administration to come to an agreement on the next coronavirus stimulus bill.
White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said late last week that the Trump administration would support a $1.3 trillion bill, moving up from the $1 trillion he has cited in the past – and higher than some Senate Republicans have said they would support.
Saying she was willing to meet Republicans halfway, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi indicated that she would reduce the size of her proposed stimulus bill from $3.4 trillion to $2.2 trillion. But that still leaves an enormous gap between the two parties.
On “Meet the Press” Sunday, Meadows sounded like he had reached his limit, accusing Pelosi of being “willing to turn down $1.3 trillion of help that goes to the American people because she would rather them have nothing than to give way” on her offer.
‘Bad blood’ not making things easier. Part of the problem, The Hill’s Mike Lillis and Scott Wong say, is the fundamental lack of respect between Meadows, a tea part insurgent who has embraced President Trump, and Pelosi, the ultimate Washington insider. “As the parties scramble for an elusive deal on another round of coronavirus relief, mistrust and bad blood between two of the principal negotiators ... have snarled the talks and complicated the path to a timely agreement,” they wrote Monday.
While some of the sniping between the two leaders could be dismissed as political maneuvering that aims to motivate voters ahead of the election, there are fundamental political and philosophical issues at stake. The dispute highlights “the stark ideological differences between the sides when it comes to the government’s role in responding to the public health and economic crises sparked by the coronavirus pandemic — differences all but epitomized in the figures of Pelosi and Meadows,” Lillis and Wong say.
Biden mulls his own coronavirus relief package. If negotiators are unable to move beyond the current stalemate, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden may need to move quickly on a coronavirus relief package in January, should he win the election, Axios reported Monday.
Biden’s economic advisers are “are growing increasingly worried that the economy is deteriorating by the day,” Axios’ Hans Nichols and Felix Salmon said, and are warning that “problems can compound and cascade — including business bankruptcies, supply chain disruptions, mass evictions, and huge shortfalls in state and local budgets.”
Jake Sullivan, a senior policy adviser to Biden, told Axios that, “We have always contemplated the need for additional stimulus. We will confront the situation we find in January.”
While Biden’s team hasn’t discussed the plan publicly, advisers say the stimulus package would be in the $1 trillion to $2 trillion range, depending on what Congress is able to do before January. And that’s completely separate from Biden’s previously announced plan to spend roughly $3.5 trillion on clean energy, infrastructure, education and a host of other initiatives designed to revitalize the economy and combat inequality.
One thing motivating Biden’s advisers, many of whom served in the Obama administration, is the perceived failure of the fiscal response to the Great Recession. “They feel that the 2009 stimulus package — the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act — was woefully inadequate,” Nichols and Salmon said. “And they're determined not to make the same mistake twice.”
Republicans have also said that they would push more relief spending in January, should Trump win the election. “Trump's call for a $2 trillion infrastructure bill back in March would be a starting point for a 2021 stimulus,” Nichols and Salmon said.