Taxation

Latest story

138 Shares33 Views

Republicans Like to Cut Taxes. With Tariffs, Trump Is Raising Them.

by

President Trump’s tariffs are scrambling the Republican plan for the economy, long centered on tax cuts and growth.The Republican Party embarked this week on a haphazard experiment in economic policymaking, wagering that the United States can weather a monumental tax increase in the form of broad tariffs on imported goods as long as Congress also cuts taxes on income.It’s a mash-up that many investors, economists and even some G.O.P. lawmakers expect to be a failure.“I always think that with gambling, at least you have a chance of winning. This is worse than that,” Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a conservative economist who worked for former President George W. Bush, said. “This is betting with the mafia. You’re going to lose.”President Trump’s plan to charge at least a 10 percent tariff on nearly all imports into the United States — along with much higher rates on goods from many countries — is the culmination of his quest to force companies to manufacture domestically, even if it comes at the expense of a relatively strong economy. Because tariffs are a type of taxation, Mr. Trump’s plan is among the largest tax increases in decades, analysts say, a policy change that sent the stock market reeling, paralyzed corporate investment and shoved the economy closer to a recession.At the same time, Republicans on Capitol Hill are plowing forward with legislation that would lock in lower taxes for American individuals and companies. There’s diminishing hope among Republicans that those cuts can make up for drag created by the tariffs. Some of Mr. Trump’s allies and tax cut enthusiasts, like Stephen Moore, his former economic adviser, have been begging the president for “more tax cuts and less tariffs, please.”Of course, Mr. Trump and the White House argue that tariffs are not taxes on Americans, but rather on foreign companies that will have to lower their prices to maintain access to the U.S. market. Mainstream economists have consistently found that tariffs raise prices for American consumers and companies, including domestic manufacturers who import materials to turn into final products.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

More stories

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Could Run Out of Cash by July, Analysis Finds

    by

    The Bipartisan Policy Center estimates that the so-called X-date could fall between mid-July and early October if Congress does not lift or suspend the nation’s debt limit.The United States could run out of cash to continue paying its bills by mid-July if Congress does not take action to raise or suspend the nation’s debt limit, according to an analysis on Monday by the Bipartisan Policy Center.That deadline, known as the “X-date” — the moment when the United States is unable to meet its financial obligations and might default on its debt — is a fiscal milestone that’s among the most closely watched in Washington and on Wall Street.The date is subject to considerable uncertainty. It relies on estimates of how much wiggle room the Treasury has to use accounting maneuvers — known as “extraordinary measures” — to keep paying the government’s bills by shifting money around. The Bipartisan Policy Center, a think tank, provided estimates suggesting that the X-date could come as late as the beginning of October.Efforts to address the debt limit will likely consume Congress and the Trump administration later this year as Republicans race to enact trillions of dollars of tax cuts.The debt limit is a cap on the total amount of money that the United States is authorized to borrow to fund the government and meet its financial obligations.Because the federal government runs budget deficits — meaning it spends more than it brings in through taxes and other revenue — it must borrow huge sums of money to pay its bills. Those obligations include funding for social safety net programs, salaries for members of the armed forces and paying investors who have bought U.S. government debt in exchange for interest payments.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Tariffs and Trade Wars Leave Investors, Once Optimistic, Feeling Apprehensive

    by

    On Tuesday, President Trump sent markets into another tailspin by announcing additional tariffs on Canada, suggesting a falling stock market is no longer the bulwark investors had hoped.President Trump made a lot of promises on the campaign trail last year. Investors and business leaders enthusiastically cheered some, like lower taxes and relaxed regulation, and expressed wariness about others, like tariffs and reduced immigration.But when Mr. Trump won the election, there was little sign of that ambivalence: Stock prices soared, as did measures of business optimism.Investors at the time offered a simple explanation: They believed Mr. Trump, backed by a Republican-controlled Congress, would follow through on the parts of his agenda that they liked and scale back the more disruptive policies like tariffs if financial markets started to get spooked.It is increasingly clear they were wrong.In his first weeks in office, Mr. Trump has made tariffs the central focus of his economic policy, promising, and at times imposing, steep penalties on allies as well as adversaries. He has threatened to curb subsidies that businesses had come to rely on. And he has empowered Elon Musk’s efforts to slash the federal bureaucracy, potentially putting tens of thousands of federal workers out of jobs and cutting off billions of dollars in government grants and contracts.Most surprising, at least to the optimists on Wall Street: Mr. Trump has so far been undeterred by signs of cracks in the economy or by plunging stock prices.“The idea that the administration is going to be held back by a self-imposed market constraint should be discounted,” said Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at the accounting firm RSM.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Markets and Corporate America Are Unfazed by Washington Chaos, for Now

    by

    The federal budget debate has big implications for the economy. Businesses are betting that tax cuts will be extended and the math will work out.Even by Washington standards, the second Trump presidency has begun in frenetic fashion: mass firings at federal agencies, tariff threats against allies and foes alike, and haggling over how to get a Republican budget through a narrowly divided Congress.Business leaders and corporate investors are confident that things will turn out fine, at least for them. “Markets aren’t showing all that much concern,” Jason Pride, chief of investment strategy and research at the Glenmede Trust Company, noted.But that could change, with high-stakes implications for the markets and the U.S. economic outlook.Investors fully expect the tax cuts from President Trump’s first term, which mostly benefited businesses and the wealthy, to be fully extended before the end of the year. Trade groups including the Business Roundtable and the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors are confident the extension will be taken care of — especially since not doing so “would impose, effectively, a tax increase,” Mr. Pride added.Still, the arithmetic remains tenuous. The cost of extending the tax cuts may total $4 trillion over 10 years. That means Congress is being left to barter over what else can save or raise money, and whose federal benefits might be cut.The bond market — where traders price the risk of both inflation and an economic downturn — has, for its part, shimmied off moments of worry brought on by Mr. Trump’s boomeranging style of negotiation over tariffs. The bet is that the threats of an import tax are more a geopolitical tool than a key revenue raiser, as the administration has portrayed the tariffs in budget discussions.Some of the underlying calm stems from Wall Street’s confidence in Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. A billionaire hedge fund manager before assuming his new position, he has convinced many analysts that the ultimate suite of policies coming from the White House will be beneficial once it coalesces, and he “has also added to some optimism around lower deficits” in future budgets, according to Matt Luzzetti, the chief economist at Deutsche Bank.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 75 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    What Did Trump’s Tax Cuts Do?

    by

    Economic upheaval caused by the pandemic has clouded analysts’ ability to understand the effects of the 2017 tax law. Republicans call it a huge success and want to extend it anyway.Seven years ago, when Republicans passed the most significant overhaul of the tax code in a generation, they were sure the law would supercharge investment, raise wages and shift the American economy into a higher gear.So did it?The answer, at least for now, is largely lost to history.A pandemic and a surge in inflation convulsed the global economy not long after the law passed in 2017, scrambling the data that analysts would have typically relied on to draw conclusions about whether the tax cuts helped the economy grow the way Republicans had promised.As a result, policymakers in Washington are now relying on only a partial understanding of the law’s past as they weigh committing roughly $5 trillion toward continuing it.“Basically, from 2020 the data is kind of useless,” said Alan Auerbach, an economics professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who counts Kevin Hassett, a top economic adviser to President-elect Donald J. Trump, among his former students.Economists have focused on just two years before the coronavirus pandemic, 2018 and 2019, to measure the law’s consequences for the most important economy in the world. But that’s a limited window for trying to discern whether the tax cuts prompted a cycle of investment and growth that can take years to play out.“In terms of looking at longer-run effects, pretty much just forget about it,” Mr. Auerbach said. “There’s just no way to control for the effects of Covid.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares109 Views

    in Economy

    The Economy Is Finally Stable. Is That About to Change?

    by

    President-elect Donald J. Trump’s proposals on tariffs, immigration, taxes and deregulation may have far-reaching and contradictory effects, adding uncertainty to forecasts.After five years of uncertainty and turmoil, the U.S. economy is ending 2024 in arguably its most stable condition since the start of the coronavirus pandemic.Inflation has cooled. Unemployment is low. The Federal Reserve is cutting interest rates. The recession that many forecasters once warned was inevitable hasn’t materialized.Yet the economic outlook for 2025 is as murky as ever, for one major reason: President-elect Donald J. Trump.On the campaign trail and in the weeks since his election, Mr. Trump has proposed sweeping policy changes that could have profound — and complicated — implications for the economy.He has proposed imposing steep new tariffs and deporting potentially millions of undocumented immigrants, which could lead to higher prices, slower growth or both, according to most economic models. At the same time, he has promised policies like tax cuts for individuals and businesses that could lead to faster economic growth but also bigger deficits. And he has pledged to slash regulations, which could lift corporate profits and, possibly, overall productivity. But critics warn that such changes could increase worker injuries, cause environmental damage and make the financial system more prone to crises over the long run.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Can Wall Street Billionaires Deliver on Trump’s Blue-Collar Promise?

    by

    The president-elect has named wealthy financiers for key economic positions, raising questions about how much they will follow through on promises to help the working class.When Donald J. Trump first ran for the White House in 2016, his closing campaign advertisement lamented the influence of Wall Street in Washington, flashing ominous images of big banks and the billionaire liberal philanthropist George Soros.Now, as president-elect, Mr. Trump has tapped two denizens of Wall Street to run his economic agenda. Scott Bessent, who invested money for Mr. Soros for more than a decade, is his pick for Treasury secretary, and Howard Lutnick, the chief executive of Cantor Fitzgerald, will be nominated to lead the Commerce Department. Mr. Trump’s choices to lead his economic team show the prominence of billionaire investors in setting an agenda that is supposed to fuel a “blue-collar boom” but that skeptics think will mostly benefit the rich.As Mr. Trump prepares to assume the presidency in January, business owners and investors are closely attuned to which of his economic promises he will ultimately follow through on. He has promised to slash tax rates, impose hefty tariffs on China and other countries, and deport millions of immigrants who work in American farms and businesses.The selections of Mr. Bessent and Mr. Lutnick cement a hold by Wall Street executives over the two most important economic posts in any administration. The picks are drawing blowback from Democrats and left-leaning groups, who assailed Mr. Trump for giving top jobs to rich donors and suggested that they would soon be working to create new tax breaks for the rich, not those who are struggling.“For all his talk of looking out for working-class Americans, President-elect Trump’s choice of a billionaire hedge fund manager to lead the Treasury Department shows he just wants to keep a rigged system that only works for big corporations and the very wealthy,” said Tony Carrk, the executive director of the government watchdog group Accountable.US.Yet the decision to tap Mr. Bessent and Mr. Lutnick is raising speculation that Mr. Trump could take a more market-friendly approach to many of his economic policies than some had feared because of his professed love of tariffs, which had the potential for igniting a global trade war.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 88 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Tax Proposals Face a Fiscal Reckoning

    by

    No tax on tips? Lower corporate taxes? No tax on Social Security benefits?The slew of tax cuts President-elect Donald J. Trump proposed in loosely defined slogans over the course of his victorious campaign will now face a fiscal reckoning in Washington. While Republicans are poised to control both chambers of Congress, opening a path for Mr. Trump’s plans, the party is now grappling with how far they can take another round of tax cuts.Mr. Trump’s ambitions for a second term will ultimately have to compete with the signature accomplishment from his first: the giant tax package that Republicans passed and Mr. Trump signed into law in 2017. Large swaths of that tax cut expire at the end of next year, setting up an expensive debate that could overshadow Mr. Trump’s other goals.“Nobody wants to acknowledge at all the sheer enormity of the challenge,” said Liam Donovan, a Republican strategist. “There’s a reckoning coming.”Unlike in 2016, when Mr. Trump’s victory surprised many in Washington, Republicans have spent months preparing for their return to power. They have been discussing using a fast-track budget process that skirts the supermajority requirement for legislation in the Senate, a tactic that would allow for a party-line passage of more tax cuts if Republicans ultimately keep control of the House.But lawmakers and advisers to Mr. Trump are undecided about how much money they can commit to lowering the nation’s taxes again. The cost of just preserving the status quo is steep. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that continuing all of the expiring provisions would cost roughly $4 trillion over a decade, and Mr. Trump’s campaign proposals could add trillions more to the debt.In interviews before the election, some Republicans said the party would have to show some fiscal discipline.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    California Tribal Casinos May Sue to Curb City Card Rooms

    by

    In the sprawl of Los Angeles County, a handful of casinos have operated for decades.There’s the crescent-shaped casino in Commerce, an industrial city off Interstate 5. A warehouse-like gambling parlor in Hawaiian Gardens, a short drive south. Two card rooms in Gardena, a nearby suburb.Beyond being places to gamble and unwind, they have two things in common. They generate a large portion of their cities’ revenue. And their existence may soon be challenged in court by California’s tribal nations.After a multimillion-dollar lobbying battle, state legislation signed into law last month allows Native American tribes, which own some of California’s largest and most lucrative casinos, to dispute the legality of certain games played inside these small, privately owned gambling halls.Tribes have argued that such casinos — also known as card rooms because they have only table games and not slot machines — have siphoned millions of dollars away from them.The new law opened a window until April 1 for tribes to take their case to state courts, where they had lacked legal standing. At particular issue is whether the card rooms offer games considered Las Vegas-style gambling, to which the tribes have exclusive rights in California.A group called the California Cardroom Alliance has said the law puts jobs at risk.Recent legislation allows Native American tribes to challenge the legality of certain games played in card rooms.Stella Kalinina for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More