tv Washington Journal 11032017 CSPAN November 3, 2017 6:59am-9:01am EDT
don't you think it's a big hurdle when it comes to places like new york, and california were properties cost more money? sec. mnuchin: we are sensitive to these economies. thank you very much for being here. >> today on c-span, "washington his life. jorunal" the u.s. house continues to work on funding a bill for the children's health program. over on c-span2 ways and means committee chair will sit down with anna palmer to discuss the tax reform proposal. and coming up in about 30 minutes, bloomberg tax reporter
laura davidson and washington posts might the bonus will discuss the tax reform bill and its host: good morning on this friday. a house republicans unveiled their long awaited tax proposal. they wanted to reduce the number of tax brackets from 74, lowering the corporate tax rate in giving businesses other tax reductions. thepresident has endorsed planet, but others are not on board. we will get your take on plan. here are the phone numbers. .emocrats dial in at
join us on twitter as well. you can post your comments on facebook. the phone lines are open so start dow it in. we will begin with the president yesterday who had the committee over at the white house. this is what he had to say. >> we are working to give the american people a giant tax cut for christmas. we are giving them a big beautiful christmas present in the form of a tremendous tax cut. it will be the biggest cut in the history of our country. it will create jobs. today, the house ways and means committee unveils a tax reform bill that will create tremendous prosperity for our nation. we will provide a massive tax
cut for american families and make the tax code simpler grid -- simpler. we will restore our competitive edge. back trillions and trillions of dollars that is parked overseas so money can be put to work rebuilding the united states of america as opposed to rebuilding other parts of the world. host: here are the details. this is according to acts he us.
helps you. what do you make of this plan? let's go to margaret in kansas. aller: host: let's go to james in kentucky. caller: thank you for c-span. my whole thing on the tax plan, why do corporations get anything if they don't make sure they -- share it with workers? they are not going to give anybody anything, they are just going to line their pockets. it's not going to help anybody. trump needs to have a clause in
their, they get it if they share it with the employees, all the employees. nine times out of 10 that's not going to happen. have a nice day. host: did you vote for president trump? caller: i voted for trump. i would like to talk with them. i know that's not going to happen. i did vote for him. i am on board for having the tax cuts. of dave got to share it with the people. it host: do you think the president would listen? caller: we are going to margaret in kansas. back to you. caller: good morning. i was very disappointed to hear this. there,n't trust anybody especially miniature and --
steve mnuchin. secretary?reasury caller: yes. they want to give away foreign investors, big tax cuts to foreign investors. a that's a scary thought. we need to keep everything as it is until we get new people that are not crooks. they don't want to just take things, they are not going to use the money. they already have it so much money. they don't want to raise wages. like peoplerams going to college, things that would actually help people, food in kansas the taxes highest in the country. they look like greedy piglets at the trough. host: they want to shrink the
tax breaks down. caller: i am already poor. i don't think they can hurt me anymore. i got cancer and i got really poor. i just have my social security. i have paid taxes in my life. i pay a lot of food tax. i don't trust them at all. host: who don't you trust? people, paul ryan so giddy. he can't wait to do this. i'll bet they cut medicare and medicaid in the future. i think it's terrible. it doesn't say we are going to have so many jobs not go to the top eeo's. -- ceos.
corporations will get big tax breaks. why are we giving away our country to that? host: lauren is in minnesota. caller: i do think simplification has to be the basis. it is way too complicated for the individual and war small businesses. i think everybody should rally around that. host: when you look at this, where do you think they are simplifying by reducing the amount of brackets? small: i think there are bits and pieces, simplifying the brackets is one example. i do think creating a channel that allows corporations to move some of that money back to the u.s. so we can get some capital investment in the united states
is another example. i would have to read the entire thing. it has got to be more simplistic. as a citizen, i should be able to do my own taxes. i really don't want to see class warfare in this discussion. we need to recognize we need more vestment within our orders so we can create opportunities for entrepreneurs. thanks for the opportunity. host: what do you say to the wall street journal and others who say republicans by keeping 39%, theyx rate at are capitulating to democrats class warfare rhetoric? caller: i tend to agree.
this is the art of compromise. there is going to have to be give-and-take on both sides. host: this is the wall street journal's editorial. they say the disparity is on the individual side. they would double the standard deduction. this would improve simplicity for millions and it compensates with the elimination of the personal exemption. nearly half own no income taxes are in a this would make it more dependent on smaller pools of taxpayers.
this would become the fourth tax bracket and kick in at $1 million for couple. mark inar from philadelphia. he for you speak, if you're interested in reading the tax proposal, you can go to www.c-span.org to our congressional chronicle page or in go ahead. caller: i really don't understand what the wall street journal is complaining about.
they are playing santa claus to the 1% or's. tact -- taxedhest in the country. elimination of the itemized deductions, forget about a tax cut. costinggoing to wind up my wife and i more in tax, we will be subject to the estimated tax penalty. if we have high liability, we will get nailed with a tax penalty. why eliminate that? why phaseout the estate tax? , theyf the trump voters don't pay income tax anyway because their incomes are so low.
they elected a president who said he is going to be for them, he does the opposite. host: when you look at this, where do you see your taxes going up? for which specific deductions that are used to take? the senate still has to have their own plan and they have to negotiate. be enacted into law, where do you see your taxes going up? caller: i'm a professional. i have a professional license. we take a lot of itemized deductions. credits as weing take our licenses current. we can deduct those as miscellaneous itemized. we can also take the state and
local tax deduction. we have a 4% income tax. combined,e $100,000 tax.y $4000 in city taxave a 3% state income and property taxes. things are going to be eliminated. host: what about the mortgage interest deduction? if you already own a home, you are already grandfathered in. caller: our home is paid off. it's about the only thing that saves us financially. i don't know if we can live in the city any longer. think that's not a good thing. you have people with multiple
that, these millionaires are taking advantage of this. host: a lot of callers this morning talking about what this plan would do for corporate america. this is from a wall street journal. republicans propose to chop the corporate tax rate to keep up with cuts around the world. and theynt rate is 35 want to reduce it to 20. interests, currently businesses can deduct business expenses. they are proposing special rules for real estate and small businesses that would be exempt from this. businesses can depreciate over time with bonuses at the first of the year. be expiring after
five years. they have a special induction that would be repealed. u.s. companies pay foreign taxes so they can defer u.s. taxes. no taxes on active warned profits, but attacks on high profit foreign subsidies. pay 35% to bring back foreign profit. proposinglicans are is a one-time tax on existing casht stock piles, 12% on and 5% on liquid assets. let's hear from mike in north carolina. think something had to be done. the last time i got out of college we had tax reform. that was 1986.
the world has changed drastically. it probably should have been addressed during the obama illustration. less taxenerally, brackets, lowering the corporate tax where we are out of whack with the rest of the world. that impacts american productivity and the starting of is this here. for me, it's probably a wash. projectedt where the tax brackets will be. i will probably make out a little bit. it's not going to be a windfall. i'm looking at this from a macro respective. -- perspective. there are going to be some winners and losers. the gentleman from philadelphia , hedoes a lot of itemizing might take a hit.
he made a wonderful point whether he knew it or not, if the package goes through and you will not be able to deduct any longer local and state taxes, places that it will impact are generally high tax blue states. california, new york, connecticut. they do have very high income taxes. it might make them realize that's not trump's fault. you might see a mass exits of people from those places fleeing to places that don't have income tax like florida and texas. will see what comes out with the reconciliation it. the bottom line is something had to be done.
we were long overdue for some type of tax restructuring. host: what is your confidence level that republicans to get this passed? caller: that's the million-dollar question. i don't know. some of them said it's half-and-half. some say it won't get done by the smiths. some said it will get done it. i think the general consensus is after the failure of any age or dieslation, this is a do or deal going into the midterm election year. as ahey pull it off christmas gift? they are using that as a sales technique. i think it will get done. they have to do it. their backs are against the law
legislatively. host: mike's comments are echoed in this headline in the washington post. blue states would bear the brunt of the tax plan limits on the directions. republicans want to tax the amount of deductions you can claim for mortgage interest. these are the states that would be mostly impacted. states benefite more from the salt deduction. post. in the washington stewartstown pennsylvania. caller: good morning.
to bring to the attention of these young families with children is it may sound good that they are increasing standard deduction so you don't have to worry about whether you have enough to itemize or not. you have to have at least $10,000 in itemized reductions. when they take away the personal attention, if you look at $4000 per exemption, if you have more , you've already that onlyirections covers three people. per exemption. that gets you to $12,000.
if you have more than one child, every child, you are losing $4000 in reductions area. host: what do you want democrats to fight for? caller: i want them to fight for the middle class, younger people coming up in the world. i have been through it. i've done my own taxes. my husband and i paid off our home. standardn the reduction. we can't generate that much in itemized deductions. thatersonal exemption, is going to affect the earned income credit? that is based on children. the other thing i want to get
out there in the airwaves is we as republicans and democrats are being pitted against one another not by the parties, but by the corporate interests and the rich people. ask,ast thing i want to why are they giving the rich before theyears repeal the estate tax? my best guess is so they can all move their money around from where they been protecting it into more useful areas. they know that in six years, the estate tax is gone and that money will be safe. sanders says giving up huge tax cuts is backed by the koch brothers. he is sitting down with senator warren.
you can see the video they put together. 44 million americans claim the state and local tax deduction. let's not forget we have to yet to see potus tax returns. says gop like a plan corporate taxes and tax reform under president reagan was bipartisan and revenue neutral. we can do this right. unveilingrepublicans their tax reform plan. they went to the white house and set down with the president.
now, the ball is in the senate court. -- senate's court. they begin marking it up next week. you can look or our coverage if you go to www.c-span.org. a a are promising to have vote on it. more of your comments coming up. the washington times front page formering, donna brazil, dnc chair who took over from sheie wasserman schultz, saw obama debt and clinton control. she says the primary was rigged against sanders. she says president obama decimated the party finances and the hillary clinton campaign took control of the dnc.
washington times. the in other news, here is wall street journal with this headline. the justice department identified six members of the russian government involved in hacking dnc computers and stealing sensitive information. there is this in usa today, manafort response to charges. his lawyer calls the case embellished in court. prosecutors argued that charges are serious and the case is strong and the risk he will flee is important. both men have substantial money at their this bozo.
while half believe he is not worried it is likely he committed a crime. there is also this in the washington post. senate democrats want jeff sessions to explain his meeting with papadopoulos. he was the foreign advisor that was part of the campaign. he pled guilty in early tovar and senate democrats want to hear from sessions about a meeting he had with mr. papadopoulos where the russian encounter was said to come up. let's get back to our conversation and go to maryland in louisiana. think it's
disingenuous for the republicans to say they are giving an extra $6,000 in the standard deduction for single people and not theion a are taking away personal exemption. party actsee my own like that. they should put both figures out there. host: michigan. caller: good morning. host: what are your thoughts on this? caller: i've been saying before haven'tthe plan, my television or anything on. i don't understand why this is echoing so much in might year?
pennsylvaniao to on our line for democrats. caller: host: we will straighten out the phone lines. we have some other like headlines. the president announced his pick for the federal reserve chair and that is jay powell. he has been on the order of governors already. the pic is pragmatic and low-key. you will see with the president had to say about his pick if you go to our website www.c-span.org . house isl hill, the slated to vote on children's health care. the senate is unlikely to agree. the house is acted to refinance the health insurance program that sends federal money to community centers.
state governments and millions of children will get little relief from the uncertainty that is facing the program. you can go to the york times. today is heading out for his trip to asia. he will be gone until november 14. he has an ambitious agenda, but little to offer. closing arguments were made yesterday in the case against bob menendez. -- you can read more if you go to their. coming up, we are going to take a short break. we are continuing with our conversation about tax plan. next, we will talk to reporters.
history of native american citizenship in the u.s.. >> tribes have sovereignty. the have the authority from their pre-constitutional existence of self-governing sovereigns. they are within their territory. >> author of the book outlawed dakota about the frontier justice. >> if you were caught stealing a horse, if you are away from any settlement. they would hang you. that happened quite frequently. that is what you call frontier justice. will to her fourth dakota. -- or dakota.
t dakota. >> it was established throughout the region. it was established to provide a sense of safety and security for the settlers here. >> we will take a driving tour of sioux falls with a historian it. >> this is named for one of the first settlers of the coda territory. the c-span cities tour, working with our cable partners as we explore america. c-span, where history unfolds daily.
>> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, cspan was created as a public service of the american cable television companies and is brought to you today by your able or satellite provider. >> washington journal continues. host: we are continuing with our tax discussion. republicans unveiled their proposal with the u.s. tax code. this is not the end of the story. they still need senate republicans to get on board. here to talk to us about where the legislation stands, the capitol hill reporter from bloomberg and the reporter from the washington post. what do you think the major changes are? guest: this is touching 100% of the american economy in every taxpayer will be affected.
for individuals, they are changing the structure of the brackets. people who take the standard adduction will get a larger standard deduction. many of the credits and deductions people are used to taking will be eliminated. side, business toporations will go from 35% 20%. let businesses will earnings pastor to individuals. changes on the international earnings of american companies. thingsre a lot of little that have an effect on lives. credit, vehicle tax people who bought an electric
, if you buy a tesla january 2 next year, it's going to cost $7,500 more. that's a big change. it's a big change or a lot of people. you first saw what they were trying to do, what was your thought? guest: homeowners are going to be affected by this. two of the revenue raisers are eliminating these eight in local deduction. now, you can write off taxes from your state and city. if you are from a high-tech state, that's a big deal. that.re curbing that was a compromise made between higher tax state
republicans. you can write off $10,000 for property tax. they are capping a mortgage deduction. it used to be $1 million. that would get you a huge beautiful home. ame of these, $500,000 is fixer-upper. you may not have wanting or electricity in it. that can really affect people who are looking to buy a home. it is grandfathered in for people who already own a home. host: many of the blue states. we want our viewers to call in with questions. what do you think when you are looking at this? this is how we have divided the lines this morning.
this touches every taxpayer. what does that mean politically for getting this ross the goal line western mark -- line? guest: it means they are doing a lot of individual politically but they willgs, all be lobbying for the business provisions. we have major industries against them. time, this is a big deal, a big priority for the president. it's a big priority for speaker ryan. no individual politically shall
-- issue is going to undermine them. you have those two things working against each other. more of thelt momentum that this is what we said we are going to do. this is the tax reform we promised people. it's really early. while they are trying to do this fast, there is time for the people opposed to make themselves heard. host: this is the house republican plans. what are the senators saying? guest: they are working from the same framework. this is the general direction. senate and was under lock and key. in the senate, each office is
working on specific provisions. the priorities are different because you see things that matter to a particular center. a senator in iowa cares a lot about biofuel. there are some issues they don't care as much about. the estate tax is less of a priority in the senate. you might see the corporate rate , in the senate have other wasted do that that would effectively get the rate lower but doesn't have that statutory rate there. there are a lot of things they can move. the senate wants to put their mark on the bill. they don't want to rubberstamp what the house puts through. host: they are going to make their own proposal? guest: they are going to mark that up. it's an ambitious plan. they will mark up their own and conference the bills.
ways and means committee on the house side begins marking up the legislation. that means amendments, voting on them. it could be a long week. for our coverage of that, go to www.c-span.org. host: good morning to you. meaningthe tax proposal to you? have gone,hink they they are crafting this with dismantling social security and medicare. they're going to have to pay for it somehow. i noticed the republicans are always talking about something needs to be done with entitlements. as far as i am concerned, the term entitlement is a way of making it sound like a giveaway.
it's not a giveaway. we paid for this. that's my concern. host: best the second phone call we have had on this, worried this gets them closer to tackling entitlements. guest: the cost of this is one what five trillion dollars. -- $1.5 trillion. it's a significant number. the national debt is now $20 trillion. people are old enough not to many years ago when it was considered an existential issue for our nation and it provoked some very dramatic political showdowns. it's not hard to see that happening again in the medium to long term. could includeons
spending cuts. democrats point out the republican budget that paved the way for these tax cuts does balance in 10 years. it balances by primarily looking at medicare and medicaid. ins a trillion dollar cut medicaid and the republican budget. the expectation is if you take it to its logical conclusion, they would have to pursue those cuts. are is something democrats warning about. host: good morning to you. caller: good morning to you. i was wanting to say this right here. i am a middle income person.
this affordable health care is killing me. you send in your taxes and you get a refund. not the guy said, you're getting anything. you are paying for everything. the taxpayer pays for everything. when you pay into it and you can't afford the health care, they tack shoup. what they do is take away your refund. a lot of people in the middle income area depend on that refund to go on vacation or paint your house. they taken away because of health there are it you can't solve the tax problem until you solve the health care problem.
that should of been taken care of first. then you could fall in line with the other. , hillary clinton lied about the dnc and taking it over. obama lied about the affordable health care by saying you could be your insurance company. host: we believe it there so we can stick to the tax discussion. theme it's an interesting that's been happening. they are using the same vehicle as the budget reconciliation. it did not work and they did it with health care. could we maybe address health care in the tax bill? as of right now, everything is fluid on this bill.
they're not going to do much to touch any of the health care. there was some discussion the president mentioned. $400would've given them billion in additional tax cuts they could make. they decided it's not going to work. amonghas been a desire republicans to keep it separate. one is difficult as it is. host: the top tax bracket, some 39.6%icans say you have in place are people who make over $1 million. are there going to be some pushback from republicans on this?
guest: there is push back. it's been fairly muted. you should note that the applicability has been reduced. at 420,000. it would go to one million. that is a tax cut for people in that bracket. mind, income that people , a portion of it will be taxed at this rate. that would only apply to people in the 39.6% bracket. thoseare people who have incomes well into six figures. is mean tois
millionaires is not borne out by the facts of the plan. supply-side advocates, they this is not available for investment. this is their argument against certain provisions in the bill. host: welcome to the conversation. caller: this is a con. that mr. trump is made regarding the tax , this is a con. i am ok. i do fairly well. the middle class is going to get screwed. based on the trump taxes
available to be viewed, he is going to save $30 million going forward. break forell of a tax the president to for the average american, it's going to hide the hammer. host: does this hurt the middle class? guest: it's a very unsatisfying answer, but it depends on where you live and what you make and how you file your taxes. analysis coming in shows there is a tax cut too many in the middle class. when you look at the numbers of almost $1there is trillion in tax cuts to individuals. there is less of a tax cut.
most of the benefit is concentrated in those higher income brackets. you can take a portion of your income. that's a big tax cut. the number she mentions is right on the aggregate cut to individuals. if you eliminate the iss-through provision, that $448 billion. 171estate tax is another billion dollars. $310 billion.ith 1/5 of thentially bill. that is to reasonably say is targeted to the middle class taxpayer. host: it depends on where you
live and how you file your taxes, that's a point made in the washington post this morning. there aren't many people with mortgages exceeding $500,000. mortgages. let's hear from michael in pennsylvania. ago,r: about nine years the investment ranks actually stole trillions of dollars from the american tax hair. now they want us to give them a tax break? at the same time, they're going to cut social security and medicare. that's what's going to happen because republicans have been trying to do away with medicare and social security since they were brought into existence. this is another attempt to rid of medicare and social security.
host: we will go to nathan in georgia. caller: you need to quit listening to the politicians. just think about what america needs is a tax program. a rate figures what we owe. people, do away with every the duction except for where people take taxes. that is where your money is spent. host: let's take that. when republicans say we have simplified the tax code, have they? guest: there is a case to make for that. a lot of people who currently
itemize their deductions, you know that can be an arduous process gathering all sorts of records and receipts to claim of various deductions, a lot taxpayers will find it more advantageous to claim the standard reduction. we don't know how much larger that population is going to be. it's probably significant. in terms of businesses and corporations, there are some simple vacation measures in the code. the every day taxpayer is not going to see that. host: republicans want it simplified to the point where taxes on aile your
postcard in. guest: -- >> most americans will be able to file on a single piece of paper. i didn't know i was going to be given a prop. thank you. host: will most americans file their taxes on a postcard? republicansoal that set out, 95% of people will take deduction, 80% are you take the standard reduction. we will see some increase their. it will have to see how the final details shakeout. will it be a postcard has been
debated by tax professionals. haveill still probably read a few pages of instructions included. there will be some simple vacation. h&r block will be losing a business? taxes,people who cover h&r block always seems to come out on the right side of this. they are not especially worried. i think there is still a perception the taxes are hard and you need to see a professional to do it. see if be interesting to this bill passes if there is an erosion in that. host: let's go to eric in atlanta. caller: good morning.
everyone talks about ronald reagan. ronald reagan raised taxes eight times and the debt ceiling 32 times. the interest rate was 18% when he took office. the top rate was 50%. the debt from 290 billion to over $4 trillion under ronald reagan. grantedre illegals amnesty. we had one million new jobs created. the debt has gone up ever since. the only people who bring the debt down our democrats. bill clinton was a deficit hawk and bill clinton brought the
deficit down. reagan, from at the time it took office he left with $4 trillion. rate was 18%. cut social security. thank you. host: take the reagan comparison , let's talk about concerns over the deficit. will that be an issue in trying to pass this legislation? guest: it will, especially in the senate. some have said they will not vote or a bill that will explode the deficit. mostorker has been the outspoken about it. similarke issued a warning yesterday.
let's remind everyone of the math. if they lose more than two senators they are in trouble. there are more like-minded eric made another point about reagan and his tax policies. keep in mind, in his eight years, several bills passed. 1985 and 1986, you have the tax reform act, where there to lower theort rates. that is what republicans like to talk about is what they are
doing now. this is not revenue-neutral. this is adding $1.5 trillion to the deficit on a static basis. they argue that economic growth will make up for that, but that is an open question that is by no means guaranteed. getsthe reagan comparison thrown out, that is something to keep in mind that this is not a direct comparisons. host: laura davison, when it comes to the senate and what the senators are looking at and the deficit, what are they thinking about doing cannot add to the deficit, are not add as much? guest: what they will have to do is either cut less or find more revenue. i ofyou set this expectation lowering the deficit, you can
face a lot of resistance. in the house, there have been members saying these are our red lines. we are not going to vote for it. in the senate, you have more willing next to flexed -- more willingness to flexed on that. thoseill curb some of revenue raises like the estate tax. it gives you a lot of revenue to work with. host: at her table is laura davison who is a reporter from bloomberg tax. she and her colleague wrote a piece, comparing the house tax bill with the gop framework. you can dig into the details. debonis, guest is mike a congressional reporter with "the washington post." to take with this
tax proposal by the house republicans means for you. next, you will go to jimmy's in maryland -- you will go to janice in maryland. caller: my husband and i have a combined income of over $200,000. you are not allowed to get the child tax credit because we make too much money according to the government. our youngest is in day care, which is over $10,000 a year. since they are taking away the standard reduction, i mean, the state deduction, we will pay more money in taxes. like i said before, we cannot get the child tax credit. so, this suppose it tax reform bill is not helping us out. also, we live in a high cost living state -- high cost of living state. to find ard pressed home in a decent area where the
schools are great for under $500,000. you cannot do it. host: laura davison, would you make of her situation? guest: in the upper middle class, when you look at the right kind of combination of factors that are going to see a little bit of an increase. it sounds like she is in one of those buckets. and what she noted about childcare costs, another revenue raised is getting rid of the tax raise for flexible spending for dependent child care. children, thatng is another tax rate going away. host: and how will the child tax rate work under this new proposal? $1000 they are expanding will go to $1600. republicans wanted to double it. there is a new family credit for s about $300.
host: is this supposed to replace flexible funding accounts? guest: it is supposed to replace a lot of things. the child tax credit for one thing, is to make up the loss for personal exemptions. every taxpayer gets to take and0 in 2017 for themselves for the members of their household. that is being replaced with a childcare tax credit and other flexible credit. depending on the makeup of your household and the bracket you are in, it may or may not make up for what you are getting in your personal exemption. keep in mind, either misers and can take itemizers personal exemptions. ofs will have a very sort personalized impact, depending
on a whole lot of factors, but it is clear that there are people who are losers. fits theunds like she category of a loser of this plan. lives in a relatively high-priced state with the cost of living is high and you have a higher mortgage, and there is no doubt that there are people who are going to pay more in circumstances like that. host: what about the under income tax credit? guest: that is another one of the refundable-type credits. they did some kind of touching around the edges to secure that up a little bit. but that is one of those sack rate -- sacred cows of the tax code. guest: they did some compliance things for the earned income tax credit. will beecurity numbers necessary to claim it, which is
a very political issue that gets into immigration politics and things like that. it is something to keep an eye on. host: for the most part, it is -- and your was wondering about that earlier. let's go to howard in new york city. good morning, howard. caller: good morning, c-span. talking about the elimination of the number of deductions. i live in new york and elimination is below taxes. something that you hear little talk of his elimination of medical expenses. i am retired. i have a lot of medical expenses in terms of premiums and co-pays. and we look forward every year to deduct. , but --% of our income can someone explain the logic to me because i don't understand it.
sometimes you are debating health care in congress. eliminating one of the there are to help people do with their medical expenses. i just don't understand it. host: laura davison, medical deductions? alimony deductions, to his introduction, medical deductions are all in this whole bucket of personal deductions that are going away. this gets rid of the core philosophy behind the tax bill is that ok, we will lower rates for everyone and doubled the standard deduction, but give rid of special -- but get rid of special targeted types. every provision was there because people wanted them. is economist's view on this we will look for by broadening the base and make it simpler is the thinking behind that. though he makes a point that especially with the debated
health care, that is tricky for a lot of members. guest: congress over the years have done things with the tax code to encourage people to do things, positive things, to help them pay for, you know, situations in their life. tax politics tend to look at these things and see solutions in the tax code that distort economic decision-making. , shall weefinitely say, a disconnect between the sort of intellectuals on this and people like howard to rely on these the directions in these credits to help them pay their tax bills to make ends meet. , tax some bipartisan credit for an electric car, but what are people going to say? what are senators going to say
tax a look at the repeal of deductions and middle-class americans are more likely to take? student loans, etc.? guest: a lot of this will depend on your state. if you are a senator from florida where you have a lot of older constituents in your state, that is a bigger deal. the senate side is working on different proposals coming together. that is where you will see who's idea wins out. folks higher up on the committee have a little more sway. mike debonis, what about loopholes for businesses? there have been carveouts for certain businesses. you get this. what happens to all of those? guest: a lot of them, but not all of them are being eliminated. bill, page through the you will look at the insurance
industry for instance, will be subject for many billions of dollars of tax increases. they are subject to a lot of special treatment that is going to be eliminated. the energy industry, they are eliminating some, some preferences, but not many. i would say in the aggregate, they did not get touched too badly. look at other, we mentioned the electric vehicle tax credit, that is actually big for automakers -- that is obviously big for automakers. the winners and losers have been picked. there is no doubt about it. that is something we will be hearing about a little more. returning to a previous point really briefly. we look at some of these policy provisions that affect individuals that people rely on. the argument the democrats are making is that some of these individual things can be defended on a policy basis.
but she won a look at the large picture, which is, what is this being used to pay for or accomplish? the democratic message on this is, it is being used to accomplish tax cuts for wealthy individuals. only 20% of this bill is of a middle-class tax cut. that is what you have seen with the tax plan. they typically use them for more middle-class, oriented types. host: one tax break is targeting the nfl. they would lose their ability to claim tax breaks for stadiums and would have two pay for massive endowments and can no longer shield their taxes under the new proposed tax bill. it takes aim at a number of quirks that has developed over the years. in nashville, tennessee, welcome
to the conversation. caller: i know you heard it before, but the middle -- but they are pitting middle-class against each other. i make $50,000 a year. had my right foot cut off and had cancer twice. i have had some medical problems. i don't understand where we get this money. this is not ok in anybody's mind. something is wrong with that person. what happened to america getting a dang about each other? i don't know what is going on in our government at all. int: let's hear from mike california making over one hundred thousand dollars. what you think of the house republican plan? guest: i am a cpa by trade.
i am just focusing on one issue, and that is medical expenses for the very elderly towards the end of their life. and to take that away is going to actually throw some people that like to stay in their home, you take away that medical iras and, there pensions become 100% taxable. and it is nothing short of outrageous. and we're not talking about wealthy people in some situations. this is near and dear to my heart. my mother passed away six years ago. she never made $10 an hour. she was a school secretary. she was able to stay in her home until she passed away. she did not have any income taxes. and the one person that the people who are
slightly clueless as to what is isng on in the world, this -- i have no other word for it other than outrageous. host: laura davison? guest: yeah. these of the fights we are about to see breakout over a lot of guess,ind of very, i sort of deductions that were put in for a reason, and have a lot of sympathy from members of congress. the reason -- one of the reasons they are moving so quickly with this bill is to sort of board on any attacks from the outside. we are going to charge through together. they need all the revenue they can get. they don't have a lot they can give. there is a $1.5 trillion allowed , saavedra have much room to move, so they will barrel through.
-- the budget, so they do not have much room to move, so they will barrel through. something as big as medical deductions, if that becomes an essential issue of the bill, it will cost a lot of money. mike debonis, she is testing out a strategy. we don't know what the details are. they want to move quickly to stop lobbyists from saying wait, wait, wait, don't get rid of that reduction. guest: that is a part of it. but i would say to mike and a lot of other people who are concerned, lawmakers tend to listen to -- it is less lobbyists, but people with personal stories like mike has. -- they may not listen to one individual, but if they start hearing about stories like one's parent, or a loved who is going to get affected by this, the potential listen -- people tend to listen.
is there time enough for that momentum to grow in the timeframe that republican leaders are talking about? i don't know. thanksgiving, the house plans to be home for thanksgiving. that is the only week for congress is going to be back with their constituents between now and the holidays. host: i guess they can listen to this show because they could hear this. many of them do. will this proposed tax don't need 51 or 60 votes to pass? andt: it when he 51 votes is being considered under reconciliation loss. -- unders with reconciliation laws. under the constraint of bills of fiscal-related measures. this are a few things in bill that people are pointing out that may not comply.
the larger issue is that the bill cannot increase the deficit outside of the 10 year window. kevin --ra davison, susan collins is not about to vote for deficit explosion. gop health care plan is dead on arrival. guest: it is not dead until it is dead. flakerker, mccain, jeff who have expressed concerns on this. on the republican side, the strategy is maybe we can take off a couple of democrats who are from states that trump wants. a lot of them said, no, this is not something i can get behind. but within the republican party, there can be some wheeling and dealing to get their members on board. challenge with tax reform. host: one viewer said that why
they rejected a deduction for joint filers for the first $90,000? is another working-class? -- isn't that their working-class? guest: that is a great point. a lot of people will be getting a rate reduction. and democrats have to figure out how to message their opposition who are going to benefit. it is unclear whether just saying well, this is a giveaway to corporations and the wealthy. and people may very well be getting another $500,000, maybe more than that. and that is absolutely right. host: gail in flint, michigan. thanks for waiting. you're next. caller: hi. host: morning. caller: i am a single mom with three kids and make $24,000. out my lasted year's return compared to the new tax plan, i'm going to be paying $737 more in taxes.
$3000 ingoing to lose the child tax credit that i normally do get. i have to fall under the category of taking -- i normally get the additional credit. -- i have to take the normal child tax credit which just reduces my tax and ends up that i will lose the $3000 additional tax credit because i still have tax reduced at the top. i did a bunch of different numbers with just average families, like a family of four making $40,000. everyone loses if they have children. and especially single parents lose the most. host: gail, you are the second call on this. either one of you, can you explain why they would lose,
single parents with multiple children? guest: the loss of the personal exemption is an issue. so, gail, she said three children, single mom, making $24,000. thet now, she could take $12,000 standard deduction, and then $4000 per child is another $12,000. wipes out her $24,000 income and she would not pay tax on any of it. she could take the $24,000 standard deduction. i'm sorry, $12,000. be anot -- there may separate rate for head of household, maybe $18,000 or so. she may be able to claim head of household. and then add in the credits.
it is hard to comment on any individual case. she may end up kind of being ok, you know, but it is hard to say without knowing the details. but it is a change, forit is hay individual sure. anxiety you feel when you know that what you are used to is not going to be what you are facing in the future is difficult. that is a challenge for republicans. host: let's go to dave in irvine, california. caller: how are you doing? good morning. first of all, if you don't tax the rich, you will hurt the poor in the middle class. that is number one. you have to have money to pay. they should pull all of our people out of these other countries, and stop giving our money away. all the tax plan is going to do is help the rich and hurt the poor, and then they are going to start cutting social security and medicare, and medi-cal. they are going to hurt a lot of people. this tax plan is no good, and it is going to raise the deficit by
millions and trillions of dollars. host: laura davison, does this help the rich? guest: it does. there are several provisions you can point to on the uber wealthy atc. like deduction of the instead of itemizing and taking the deductions, they put it in andalternative minimum tax, you have to do a separate calculation and pay the higher of the two. it is not totally filling the purpose it was intended. of asill be gotten rid well as the estate tax that hits your $11 million for a couple. if you fall into that bucket, it is a big chunk of change. also, it is raising the top bracket. if you are in the high six
figures, that will help you as well. will, from this business income break. so if you own a business and you get pass-through income, you will get a 25% rate on a portion of that. host: the wall street journal has a graphically put together, showing the seven current brackets for unmarried , filingals and married jointly, and how that reduces down to four. and 39.6% is for an individual. you only get that if you make over $500,000 as an individual. if you are married, you will hit it if you make over $1 million. that will be a higher threshold to reach. let's go to mark who is in michigan. high, mark -- hi, mark. caller: i was under the
assertion that the taxation of 1920 by our federal supreme court lifted up to offer the public a non-burdensome tax. offering a five-year tax cycle prorated one year for everyone who is working, do not have to face federal tax for one year. they could raise a taxes for as high is they want. since they never put anything down, where does this tax money go to if it is not being put down on the deficit? saw a president take a million dollar tax credit, and hillary was going to leave us with no deductions. a prorated tax is the only way you can attempt to put something
down on the deficit. host: ok, mike debonis, prorated tax rate? guest: not entirely sure what work is referring to. -- not entirely sure what mark is referring to. you talk about adding to the deficit, that could definitely do that. mark pointed out, the deficits are absolutely an issue. we are going to be keeping an eye on that as things move forward. this is anow, complicated bill, and there is a lot of ins and outs. 400 pagescan read all if you so desire on her website at www.c-span.org. west chesterfield, new hampshire. langood morning. caller: good morning.
i love this show. i really do. you have the greatest guests on always. i have two questions about the estate tax. number one, what was the original intent for the estate tax for the ultra rich people when they die, instead of all of their money going to the families, portion of it would go towards the government. i am not sure exactly why i was put into place. i would like to know that. and also about the estate tax, how would not repealing, i'm sorry, how would repealing the estate tax help the poor? i mean, it would certainly help andld trump and his family his wealthy banking friends and their families, but how does it help the poor? host: what do you say to people who argue your attacking these people twice? -- what do you say to people who argue you are taxing these
people twice? caller: there are so many loopholes for the businesses. that is how they become rich. it is not just some hard work. i work hard everyday. i own my own business. it has been 12 years since i had a vacation or anything. nonsense if they may all of these billions and -- isns of dollars nonsense if you think they made all of these billions and billions of dollars by going out and scrubbing toilets. what would getting rid of the estate tax or keeping the estate tax, how that benefit the poor and middle class? host: got it. we will take those questions. laura davison, i don't know if you know the history of the estate tax? guest: i don't. it has been a function of the tax code for a. long time and has been controversial there had been years -- it is been a function of the tax code for a long time and is been controversial.
there have been years that it has been repealed. you know, in terms of who it helps, and who it hurts, the thing that is important to understand is that it affects very few people, but raises a lot of revenue. if you get rid of that, you can do a lot with that money elsewhere. republicans in this bill, they delayed the repeal of it for six years. which is something they totally did not want to do. they wanted to get rid of it on day one. to playe them more around on other parts of the individual code and do more cuts there. in terms of how does it help repeal, theoretically help more middle income people for these next couple ofrepeal does theorp more middle income people for these next couple of years. anything that is delayed in congress it is important to point out that it may not actually happen. we may keep this in place.
we have seen this in reverse with health care taxes, the medical device tax. whenever they were set, lawmakers on both sides got together and said, let's delayed up for another couple years and things that are not popular are hard to get through. host: we will hear from richard in minneapolis next. caller: good morning. i believe that tax increases that george herbert walker bush put into effect led to the budget surplus of the clinton years and now trump he says he is running the government like a business, why is he lowering the income of his business. get david stockman on the program. he seems like the smartest guy in the room. host: ok, richard. rick, new york. good morning to you. theer: i am laughing at middle-class republicans who voted for trump who are now
going to get their taxes raised. middle-class people who cannot afford to get their taxes raised. we need to raise our taxes. also if we raise a debt tax and you get a car that gets 40 or 50 miles per gallon, you don't feel it. i don't need a tax break grade where is the businessman? he went bankrupt five times over. especially in atlantic city, we this is just an, joke. this is a tax break for the rich and superrich. it is the same old republican spiel and we should look toward 2018 to get some of these republicans out of office and vote back democrats into office. host: on the politics of this, will any democrats in the house vote for this plan when it comes to the floor? guest: not a one.
no democrat voted for the budget that paves the way for this. i've not heard of any democrats that have shown openness devoting for the plan -- to voting for the plan as is. to doing are open real bipartisan bill where you actually negotiate some guidelines and go from there. the ranking member of the ways and means committee wants to do that. they have no interest in going along with this republican plan as it is coming together. manchin, mentioned joe maybe someone who switches their vote in favor, anyone else? guest: there are few different democrats. heidinnelly of indiana, high camp of north dakota. upot of these democrats are for reelection, reaching out to
them, given speeches about tax reform in their states, brought them along, whether or not they will be along for the full ride is another question. host: we will go to justin in northern california. hi, justin. justin, good morning to you. one last call here for justin. caller: i heard elizabeth warren last night say that the gop tax plan incentivizes corporations to invest overseas. my understanding of it is that , they bring the money back and they will pay a lower tax rate on the money they bring back. that is incentivizing sales. not incentivizing investments overseas. i wondered if your speakers could address that, does the tax plan actually incentivize people to invest overseas or just to make profits overseas? host: laura why don't you take that one. guest: how you work with these,
the goal of it is to have people invest in the u.s. there are different provisions they put in that could, depending on your business, make you put some money overseas. for example there is a foreign minimum tax on overseas income which is 10%. the corporate income tax is 20%. it makes sense you might put some money or assets there and pay a lower rate on a very you would pay the tax rate of that country too. if you need operations there, what the employees are like, what the workforce like, lots of different factors. there is also repatriation, a tax on bringing money you have overseas, meaning you have to pay it, it is not optional right now, you continually can reinvest those funds. maybe you have patents in ireland, i will continue to grow my business in ireland. facebook, apple, tech companies do this.
now the government is saying, on cash you pay 12% on non-cash assets, you are paying 5% on that. approach,stick saying, big multinational companies are keeping high-value overseas and they are looking to tap into that revenue. aboutwe have heard a lot offshore accounts. people having mailboxes, headquartered in the bahamas. does this address anything to do with that? guest: right. it really does completely overhaul the international tax regime. under ay the u.s. is worldwide system which means any dollar earned by a u.s. dollar company, gets taxed by a u.s. rate.
level ofaxed at the that particular nation but there are wrinkles. one of them is the foreign minimum tax. pay, atally, you'll least 10%. you can't pay any less than 10%. on those earnings. the whole repatriation discussion, we hear a lot about policies, abroad, over the course of many years, many attempts to look at ways to bring money back, tax it, use it for various purposes. this sort of jesses that. -- this sort of addresses that. wanting to look at this money like a piggy bank for infrastructure, this would basically make it, paid for for the rest of the plan, you are looking at, it is offsetting the
cost of the other corporate rate cuts rather than being used for any particular purpose. host: joe is calling from alaska. good morning to you. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: doing well. your question or comment? caller: it seems to me that so many offshore accounts in these different islands and everything , so the billionaires can take their money and put it overseas and don't have to pay taxes on it. who set all this up? the lawyers did. officialsment, our are supposed to rain in these people but as long as the finaglingn keep on around the law and they can get away with whatever they can get away with, so, what are you
going to do? money goes out. then they sell our country out. you have the clinton people, i am an independent, not a democrat or republican. host: the house is coming in early today so i will leave it there and laura davison can jump in. guest: this is incredibly complicated. the stuff overseas. one of the biggest criticisms i am hearing from the lawyers in particular about this bill is that they are moving too fast and there will be unintended consequences. you think the bill is doing one thing and it actually leaves a loophole open for someone to exploit or someone sentsomething -- someone me something yesterday that looked like there were typos and errors in the bill. there is a new version coming out this morning. it will fix those little mistakes here and there but when you have a massive 400 page piece of legislation that is incredibly complicated, the mistakes, having
congressman can go back and make technical corrections but policy corrections are much harder and can create problems for the irs and treasury department down the line. host: what is on your mind when it comes to this tax plan? know, are theyto eliminating the personal exemptions? guest: yes they are. depending on your household and the composition of it and whether you will be able to take advantage of the tax credit, it depends on what the effects will be on your own return. host: charles, woodbridge, virginia. [indiscernible] guest: try being a tax reporter. the bottom line, this mess. all i have heard this morning is
deductions. almost every deduction i've heard about has not been repeated. only a couple have been. the bottom line is, [indiscernible] the tax break if you have a child it is on you. if you decide to live in new york city it is on you. pay a flat tax and live your life. the second thing is on corporations. i'm sick and tired of hearing -- [indiscernible] the bottom line is this is now a global economy. it is tied to this. they create these problems. the bottom line is the more corporations we have in this country, forget how much money they are making but if they are jobs and theire paying lesser taxes you will -- you will not be making $15,000 a year.
you'll be making $35,000 a year. otherwise these countries will take these jobs and go to other countries. there will always be a winner and there will always be people who don't win as much. davison, does this proposal by the house republicans recognize a global economy or not? guest: it does recognize a global economy. moving to a territorial system away from a worldwide system, most companies have some sort of international component. whether operations or they're are buying things overseas, it helps alleviate concerns. it does have a big focus on manufacturers, things being made in the u.s. that is something we are seeing. a through line from the president that we have seen. some have criticized it. it doesn't account for technology, pharmaceuticals, things that come out of research and development but not a lot of machines and factories. host: let's go to carol and
queens, new york. i think it is a disgrace these republicans, they want to give money to the rich. what about the seniors? what about the lower income people? we will suffer. with no deductions, even a small family, they look forward to getting that refund back on their taxes. this is really absurd. host: carol, getting feedback. listen through your phone and turned on your tv. guest: carol makes a good point. people are going to lose, excuse me, deductions they have relied on for a long time. they may be in cut for a top marginal rate, taking advantage of a higher standard deduction. in there shengs should be able to benefit from but again it depends on your individual situation. as a new yorker she may take or alocal tax reduction
nice mortgage interest induction. it depends. numbers to scheme out for october, unemployment rate 4.1% and 260,000 jobs added. does this impact the conversation about tax report? whole rationale for this plan for republicans is to increase economic growth. that is what they have said over and over. they want to get from 1% to 2% into the 3% range. that is a big jump in requires a big change in our economic performance. a lot of economists say, the fundamentals of the economy are not there to get that level of growth. republicans say they can do it. on-the-job numbers this morning, economists have said, there has
been, keep an eye on what has happened the last months, the hurricanes, that has depressed growth in some areas and you may be seeing a catch-up now. ,hich is always good advice never look at one particular set of figures in isolation. look at the bigger picture. it is clear that the economy is moving. it is growing, not growing as fast as republicans would like. they are selling this tax bill as something that will change that. we are going to see in the next few weeks, numbers and estimates about how this bill will affect the economy. there will be a big debate about how significant the effect is going to be. host: mark zandi is already giving his opinion. punch but could bruise the economy. by reducing taxes for households and businesses, short-term,
lifting economic growth." but it would also strain the capacity to respond to the surge in activity stoking faster wage growth and inflation. that will leave federal reserve rates to grow more rapidly. branch dale, pennsylvania. caller: my question is, i have a comment and question. my whole adult life, politicians have been helping the middle class yet the middle class is not doing as well as it was. 40 years ago. i do not i read, and have the ability to check my resources but from what i understand, two decades ago, general motors was the largest employer and people were making an average of $50 per hour there. now walmart is the largest. people make eight dollars an hour there.
simple, why it can't they just help those people? years these people won't have to pay taxes or whatever. people in those lower classes spend their money which people save their money. how does this help the economy? if you help rich people? guest: there are a few different schools of thought. and inthe most messed up need of reform is the corporate side of the tax code. compared to other countries, our tax code is out of date and makes u.s. companies not effective. not as able to compete with other companies around the world. doing just a middle-class tax cut, if you asked economists, that does not give you growth. you have to have two pieces working together.
it done, youo get cannot give a big tax cut just to corporations and not individuals because that is a tough sell. it is this balancing act of, how do you give money to middle-class people but have you get that long-term sustained growth through jobs and higher wages? infrastructure and development and having this be a place where companies can come and grow and hire more people and create that long-term cycle? guest: we talked about the 86 bill earlier. it is in struct of to look at what happened there. gotviduals in the aggregate a big cut in the 1986 bill. that was paid for in large part by increasing taxes on corporations. there was a cross subsidization of individual tax cuts by increasing tax cuts on corporations. it is not quite the opposite but it is different this time. 80% of the benefits go to
corporations and wealthy individuals, 20% to the middle class. the everyday taxpayers. just another example of why this , the dynamic is different in taxcomparisons to previous reform, they don't quite apply. host: linda in new jersey. caller: four over four decades there have been tons of tax cuts and increasing profits for people at the top. this does not trickle down or benefit the average worker. case in point, at&t. effective, i believe it was 7% or 8% of corporate tax rate because of all the loopholes. ,ith all that money they saved they did not hire more people or expand their business. in fact they cut 80,000 employees. back tothat money went
the people at the top, the stockholders and shareholders. this is an interesting fact. companies use to reinvest half their annual profits in expanding their businesses and retraining workers and paying them are. the other half went to shareholders. to 2012, 91% went to wall street investors and shareholders. only 9%, to growth. that is all i have to say. host: thank you, linda. trends, she is absolutely right. the trend has been that capital has benefited more than labor from the tax changes that have been made. economy, as it has developed over the past three decades, everyday workers have been left behind.
that is a fact. politicaling phenomenon that we have seen starting with president trump's election and what is going on within the two parties. it will be interesting to see how this tax bill plays out and plays into the politics more generally. democrats are saying, this is a giveaway to the rich. republicans are saying this is a middle-class tax cut and it will help the economy. it will drive up wages. we will see that message play theand see how it effects next year ahead as we look toward a midterm election. host: let's hear from ralph in augusta, georgia. oakham. caller: good morning. congress and the president should lead by example. number one, bringing businesses back from overseas and then giving the people a living wage. start doing that now.
the other thing, the proposal to the president, he should show i amaxes and let us know, leading by example and this is what i want to do. he should give people a living wage. host: buck in your, north carolina. durham, north carolina. caller: most people that make less than $50,000 a year spend all their income every year. they are taxed for their income and then locally with local tax and state tax. theiry people, most of money they do not spend every year because they are not living their taxth because is not taxed at the local level. they are not paying 10% sales tax on their whole income.
i think the federal government needs to realize, we are already taxed. they should lower the tax even greater at the federal level. host: i will have laura davison take that point. about who spends money and who doesn't. before we get to that, the previous collar, the politics of the president releasing his taxes. do you suspect democrats use the opportunity of this markup to put forward an amendment that requires the president to do so? guest: it's possible. they will offer a lot of amendments. we expect that with the exception of the chairman's amendment, there may not be any republican amendments to this bill. the president's tax return is an important point. it is important to look at which parts of this plan would benefit the president. there are several provisions could possibly help the
president and his family and his company. start with, the alternative minimum tax. returns of the presidents that have been leaked to the press, he has paid the amt in the past. that has increased his tax burden from what it would have been otherwise. his business has been organized as a pass-through co he could take advantage of the new lower tax rate. , loopholesness side that were closed on the business side, were not closed for real estate businesses. the interested action was limited. it was maintained for real estate businesses. that is important to developers like the trump organization. like exchanges, the were cracked is a lot in there here that would help the trump family, the organization.
that is something democrats will be talking about. laura davison, when it comes to the wealthy spending of money every day versus the poor. tax isthe sales aggressive that hits lower income people more than higher income people. it goes back to the state and local tax deduction issue. president,a typically, depending on circumstances, lower income people tend to take the standard deduction more than itemize. if you're in a situation where you are lower income and itemizing, the state and local deduction, one of the things you are allowed to do now is it right that off. this is one of the issues, democrats are opposed to this. they don't have clout in congress to fight back on it. , who are republicans saying, this will be a big hit to middle income people. dee is in new york. we have a few minutes left. good morning to you. caller: good morning.
i'm calling about the tax plan. i don't quite understand it. $50,000, if a person makes only $15,000 a year, what happens to them? 15,000, if she is married she would pay no tax. the standard deduction would be tony $4000. if she is single, the first , thereof her 50,000 would be other things calculated in. a very low tax situation. host: what is the rush behind shrinking the bottom two tax brackets into one? host: simple -- guest: simplification is the explanation often given. experts who hear that, they are like, well, not exactly. because, very few people think
about the simplicity of doing their taxes on a number of brackets. today people either use software or the tables where you go and look up and calculate the income and look up the number. no one is individually calculating marginal rates. when you look at the brackets, most people will either be staying the same or getting a decrease. there is one exception. people are who are in the 33% tax bracket, they will be going up to 35%. $200,000. over middle-class people are pretty much going to see, stay in the same bracket or be
lowered. to butler, go on indiana. caller: i do appreciate it. people have to realize 1/10 of 1% of the population of the united states pays for 30% of the taxes. 1% of the united states pays for 70% of the taxes, 40% of the people in the united states when it comes to filing taxes don't pay any taxes at all. when you simplify the tax coding, you heard this knucklehead from new york. i am an old new yorker that ran out of new york 20 years ago. the reason you have to get rid of the salt tax, the democrats, never a tax democrats don't like. the states with ridiculously high taxes, why should a person in indiana be paying for some knuckleheads, $20,000 a year taxes. it will force the people in those states, the government
officials to realize they don't want the rich people leaving the state, they will have to lower taxes and make it more affordable. repatriation, there will be $4 trillion in repatriated money. i have never been hired by portman and if you simplify the tax code and give the -- a tax code,d you will make the united states more interesting. when you hear this nonsense about the middle class, the middle class. they have these write offs and half of them don't pay taxes. 40%. in a few years there will be more people not paying taxes than are. we cannot turn into a bernie sanders world. , the obamaason specialty, they will nitpick everything about president trump and the republicans. i will turn to our guests and talk about what happens next. what happens in the house?
guest: and markup in the ways and means committee starting on monday. chairman brady will have revisions later today. they will probably be modest. negotiations will continue. it is a negotiation until they have enough votes. if they haven't done a formal whip, they are listening closely where the outlines are possible. where opposition may form. a parallel process will start the senate as soon as next week. they had hopes of having a bill by thanksgiving. i've heard less optimism about that on the senate side. is trying to get this done by thanks giving. host: you also mentioned the senate is working on different proposals. follow laurao , washingtonporting
post.com. thank you both. we will take you now to the house, they are gathering early for the legislative session. live coverage here on c-span. the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. almighty god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. we pray for the gift of wisdom to all with great responsibility in this people's house for the leadership of our nation. with the inception of debates and consideration of a tax bill, send your spirit of honesty, clarity and respect upon the members of the people's house. the issue at hand is monumental and the differences that are apparent will need addressing so that a bill that benefits the nation might be produced.