|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
US Congress nears approval of $800 billion tax cut for the
rich
By Martin McLaughlin
30 July 1999
Use
this version to print
The tax cut legislation passed by the US House of Representatives
last week and scheduled for a final vote July 30 by the US Senate
is one of most brazen pieces of class legislation ever adopted
by an American Congress. It proposes to cut $792 billion in federal
taxes, with the vast majority of the windfall going to the wealthiest
families.
Different versions of the bill were passed by the House and
Senate, which must now be reconciled in a conference committee,
but either way the legislation would provide the biggest tax break
for the wealthy since the notorious Reagan tax cut approved by
a Democratic-controlled Congress in 1981.
The major provisions in the House version, and their estimate
cost in lost revenue, are as follows:
* A 10 percent cut over ten years in the rate of income tax
levied on all income levels. The majority of taxpayers, taxed
at a 15 percent rate, would see their rate drop gradually to 13.5
percent, a reduction of 1.5 percent. Those in the top tax bracket
would enjoy a much larger reduction, from 39.6 percent to 35.7
percent, a cut of 3.9 percent. Cost: $405.1 billion.
* The complete repeal of all taxation on inheritances. At present,
estates of less than $1 million are tax-free. Under the House
bill billionaires could bequeath their entire wealth without paying
a penny of tax. Cost: $75.2 billion.
* Elimination of the alternative minimum tax, which was established
to ensure that corporations and wealthy individuals could not
make use of tax credits and other loopholes to evade all taxation.
Cost: $94.1 billion.
* Cut the capital gains taxthe tax on profits from the
buying and selling of stockfor individuals from 20 percent
to 15 percent and for corporations from 35 percent to 25 percent.
Cost: $69.0 billion.
* Tax cuts and credits for specific industries and industry
groups. Cost: $100 billion.
* Reduction in the so-called marriage penalty, a consequence
of progressive taxation, in which some married couples pay a greater
tax in a joint return than if they filed separately, because their
joint income places them in a higher tax bracket. Cost: $44.5
billion.
The bulk of the benefits go to the wealthiest families, and
the numbers are truly staggering. According to estimates by the
Treasury and the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, and
accepted by the congressional Republicans, the House bill would
award 33 percent of the cuts, some $264 billion, to the richest
one percent, those families making above $350,000 a year.
Nearly all the tax cut, 80 percent, or $634 billion, would
go to the top 20 percent, those families and individuals making
above $82,000 a year. Another 13 percent of the tax cut, about
$103 billion, would go to the second 20 percent, those making
between $50,000 and $82,000, while the remaining 60 percent of
the people, everyone making less than $50,000 a year, would get
7 percent of the total cut, about $55 billion. This works out
to about $300 per person, spread over ten years, for the majority
of the American peopleless than ten cents a day.
Concealed in the structure of the bill are even greater tax
cuts for the wealthy. For example, the phase-out of the inheritance
tax in the House bill is calibrated so that the tax only falls
to zero in ten years, the end of the period for which an accounting
is required under congressional budget rules. The accumulated
cost of this provision is $75.2 billion over those ten years.
But in the following ten years, when no inheritance tax will be
collected at all, the cost to the Treasury balloons to $570 billionmore
than half a trillion dollars which the American plutocracy will
be able to pass on to its younger generation tax-free.
The Senate version differs in some provisions from the House
bill. It eliminates the marriage penalty entirely, instead of
reducing it, and makes no cuts in the capital gains tax. Instead
of an across-the-board cut in income tax rates, it cuts the lowest
bracket only, from 15 percent to 14 percent. Estate taxes are
reduced but not eliminated, and the tax breaks for favored industries
are smaller. The overall effect is still a bonanza for the wealthy.
The Senate bill provides 67 percent of the cuts for the top 20
percent, 21 percent for the second 20 percent, and only 12 percent
for the bottom 60 percentabout 17 cents a day.
Corporate lobbying
Corporate lobbyists in Washington have had a field day with
the tax legislation. As the Washington Post noted, in an
analysis of the House bill: Capitalizing on the new era
of government surpluses are multinational corporations, utility
companies, railroads, oil and gas operators, timber companies,
the steel industry, and small business owners.
A single tax break, a provision that would allow multinational
corporations more favorable treatment of deductions for interest
and foreign taxes, will pump $34 billion into corporate coffers.
The American Council of Life Insurance won a $5 billion provision
to extend for five years a temporary tax deferral on income the
insurance and financial industries earn abroad. Another provision
gives a $1 billion windfall to utilities involved in certain kinds
of mergers.
Parenthetically, a report from the Center on Responsive Politics,
issued July 28, notes that $1.42 billion was expended last year
to support lobbying by 20,512 registered Washington lobbyists,
the vast majority employed by corporate and business interests.
This means 38 lobbyists and $2.7 million for each member of the
House and Senate.
Congressional Republicans accompanied the tax cut legislation
with a torrent of demagogy about returning money from Washington
bureaucrats to ordinary citizens. But focusing the tax cut on
the income tax, one of the few remnants of progressive social
policy in America, ensures that ordinary working people will gain
virtually nothing. Three quarters of all taxpayers pay more in
payroll taxes, for Social Security, Medicare and disability insurance,
than they do in income tax. There is no cut at all in the highly
regressive payroll tax.
There is another political motive in the tax bill, besides
the crass determination to give as much money as possible to those
who already have more than enough. That is to drain the finances
of the federal government so that there are no resources available
for domestic social spending.
Mandatory budget cuts
The projection of $3 trillion in budget surpluses over the
next two decadesof which $2 trillion is excess Social Security
taxes to be reserved to bail out the retirement system in the
long-termis a fraud maintained by both big business parties
for their own political purposes. Treasury and Congressional Budget
Office estimates assume that the terms of the 1997 budget agreement
between Clinton and congressional Republicans will be carried
out, including a 20 percent across-the-board cut in discretionary
spendingi.e., spending not required by entitlement programs
like Social Security and Medicare.
Since both parties support an increase in military spending,
the largest discretionary item, the actual cuts in domestic programs
required to meet the spending targets would mount to 30 percent
or more. This would mean the effective gutting of programs such
as pollution control, highways and other infrastructure, air traffic
control, veterans' benefits, social services for Native Americans,
housing and aid to education.
None of these cuts have yet been spelled out, and most will
likely be postponed until after the November 2000 elections. Even
without a tax cut, spending cuts of unprecedented dimensions will
be required to meet the budget targets.
President Clinton has already pledged to veto the tax bill
in either the House or Senate version. More importantly, from
the standpoint of big business politics, the bill has already
been vetoed by an even more authoritative figure, Federal Reserve
Board Chairman Alan Greenspan, who sharply criticized a tax cut
of such a magnitude in testimony before House and Senate committees
over the past two weeks.
John Feehery, spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, declared
of the tax bill: This is who we are. This defines us as
a party. In that case, the Republican Party has defined
itself as the party that specializes in pandering to the most
short-term profit lust of the wealthy.
The Democratic Party defends the wealthy just as fervently,
but more cautiously. It advises the moneyed elite to look back
over their shoulders at the vast majority of the people who are
not profiting from the stock market boom, and throw a crumb or
two to avoid a social explosion.
Both Clinton and Greenspan are concerned, moreover, that a
huge tax cut now, when the financial markets are already overheated,
could lead to an inflationary explosion. They advise holding the
tax cut in reserve as a measure to deal with the financial crisis
that lies ahead.
See Also:
Clinton's "anti-poverty" tour
covers up deepening social polarization
[10 July 1999]
The Forbes 200 list: billions
for the privileged few
[30 June 1999]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |