Though Tax Hikes Will Be Avoided, the House Bill Misses the Bigger Picture
The tax bill prioritizes politics over economic growth, writes Daniel Bunn.
Our commentary is featured in top news outlets throughout the US and Europe, including The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, CNN, and Le Monde.
The tax bill prioritizes politics over economic growth, writes Daniel Bunn.
The Republican party, led by President Trump, has decided that growth is no longer a priority. This is evident in the president’s trade war, the minimal opposition among Republican members of Congress, and the seemingly endless supply of bad policy ideas that will do little to support growth.
Lawmakers should push against efforts to lift the SALT cap, and they should keep an eye toward bringing additional transparency to the tax system.
Political popularity isn’t always a reliable gauge of sound policy—and that’s certainly true of President Donald Trump’s idea to eliminate taxes on tips, bonuses, and overtime pay.
Attempting to defend Trump’s tariffs, the White House points to studies that show they raise prices, cut manufacturing output, and lead to costly retaliation.
The U.S. Constitution grants authority to Congress to “lay and collect” duties and to “regulate commerce with foreign nations.” But Congress has delegated its powers to set tariffs and negotiate trade to the president. For decades, the executive branch has used those powers to reduce barriers to trade and, sometimes, to impose tariffs in limited fashion.
Compromising on the timing and availability of expensing—or offsetting the revenue losses by worsening other parts of the tax code—would squander an opportunity to craft a fiscally responsible, pro-growth tax reform.
According to a new poll from the Tax Foundation and Public Policy Polling, more than half of taxpayers lack basic tax literacy, regardless of educational attainment, income level, or political affiliation.
If voters are being asked to charge state legislators with raising the equivalent of a doubling of the current income and sales tax, shouldn’t they get to know what the plan is first?
As the Senate considers next steps for the House-passed “big, beautiful” tax bill, the battle lines have been drawn for a showdown over the state and local tax (SALT) deduction.
Unlike banks, credit unions remain exempt from most taxes. The credit union tax exemption doesn’t make dollars, and now, it doesn’t make sense.
When governments restrict trade—through tariffs and retaliation—no one truly wins.
The House of Representatives just passed President Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” marking a critical step in the Republican tax agenda. At first glance, the bill might appear to complete the legacy of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). But it falls short of emulating the TCJA’s core strengths in two key respects: it doesn’t prioritize economic growth, and it doesn’t simplify the tax code.
As home values have spiked, Florida and other states are weighing elimination of property taxes.
Lawmakers have a prime opportunity to achieve a more stable economy through the debate about the tax code that is now ramping up.
The tax bill prioritizes politics over economic growth, writes Daniel Bunn.
Political popularity isn’t always a reliable gauge of sound policy—and that’s certainly true of President Donald Trump’s idea to eliminate taxes on tips, bonuses, and overtime pay.
The Republican party, led by President Trump, has decided that growth is no longer a priority. This is evident in the president’s trade war, the minimal opposition among Republican members of Congress, and the seemingly endless supply of bad policy ideas that will do little to support growth.
Lawmakers should push against efforts to lift the SALT cap, and they should keep an eye toward bringing additional transparency to the tax system.
The Trump administration recently announced a new round of so-called “reciprocal” tariffs, ranging from 10 percent to 50 percent, assigned to nearly every US trading partner. There’s a problem with its notion of “reciprocity,” though. The White House’s tariffs are intended to be real, while the so-called tariffs it is responding to are fake.
Attempting to defend Trump’s tariffs, the White House points to studies that show they raise prices, cut manufacturing output, and lead to costly retaliation.
Congressional Republicans are looking for ways to pay for extending the tax cuts scheduled to expire at the end of the year. Repealing the green energy tax subsidies expanded or introduced in the Inflation Reduction Act is an appealing option.
The individual income tax has plenty of problems, but in some respects the tax has improved in recent decades. Unfortunately, several Trump administration proposals would move us in the wrong direction, including the president’s call to drop taxes on tips.
With the imposition of American tariffs on steel and aluminum imports on March 12th, the European Union was officially pulled into the global trade war.
Whether we look at it as consumers of these goods, or as middle-class workers who transform them, low-cost goods have been the underpinning of American prosperity.
President Donald Trump surprised many in the tax community by making the global tax deal a day one issue. His Jan. 20 memorandum gave his Treasury secretary 60 days to recommend interactions with tax treaties and possible protective measures to ensure the minimum tax rules have no force or effect in the US.
Policymakers are right that Kansas has an opportunity to reform property taxes while providing long-term relief. But one idea gaining traction in the statehouse — which would introduce assessment limits that artificially cap valuation increases — would be a step backward.
The U.S. Constitution grants authority to Congress to “lay and collect” duties and to “regulate commerce with foreign nations.” But Congress has delegated its powers to set tariffs and negotiate trade to the president. For decades, the executive branch has used those powers to reduce barriers to trade and, sometimes, to impose tariffs in limited fashion.
Compromising on the timing and availability of expensing—or offsetting the revenue losses by worsening other parts of the tax code—would squander an opportunity to craft a fiscally responsible, pro-growth tax reform.