tv House Ways Means Committee Votes on Tax Cut Bills Part 1 CSPAN September 13, 2018 8:09pm-1:46am EDT
7:00 eastern. take you back to capitol hill were members of the house ways and means committee met this morning to debate and vote on three tax bills being called tax reform to point out. the hearing began at 10:00 a.m. this morning and ended just before 5:00 p.m. eastern time. >> the committee will come to
order. the tax cuts and jobs back change the trajectory of our economy for the better. since president trump was an economic and historic records setting this is not real change for real people with nearly 1.7 million new jobs created since the beginning of the year in wages rising at their fastest rate in almost a decade. so many more americans are hopeful again about their financial future. i saw this on the courthouse when the two owners of local walker's restaurant on the square who bought it and renovated, told me two weeks ago they came out to give me a hug and higher tumor people this week because the economy is so much better in the small town. i think because of tax cuts the
160 workers. because of the new tax code, they gave a million dollars out in bonuses. they raised all their workers, gave them a 10% raise. they bought $5 million of new equipment and when you ask they greenlighted a new headquarters for their pretty worn-out building. and if you asked them what time of year they are having from his answer is simply the best ever. but we can't stop there. we have to keep tilting off the momentum from last year's tax reform to ensure our economy keeps building and that our tax code stays competitive. we are here today to change the culture of washington from one with an entire generation to modernize the tax code and keeps improving every year, and it keeps our code ahead of the rest of the world and the best in the world. this is after all how our successful organizations and
businesses operate. how do we come more innovative and better. we look at our tax code and how could we make our businesses more competitive and encourage more innovation here in america, make a better for families in mainstream businesses. it's about time this was done in washington because the stakes couldn't be higher. if we fail to keep competitive, we will fall behind our foreign competitors again. american families will want again suffer the consequences of slow growth and outsourced jobs we saw over the past decade. that is why this committee is committed to ensuring we continue to work for all americans had been smarter for families, fair and more competitive for businesses. the three bills that make up the tax reform update will do just
that. tax reform to play knows her commitment to american workers. their code will remain the most competitive in the world for them. never again will america fall so far behind. the first bill protecting family and small business tax cuts at 2018 will lock in the family of small business tax cuts from the tax cuts and jobs ax. this is only fair. it will give american families, workers in mainstream small businesses certainty and fueled economic growth we've witnessed over the past year. the team is middle-class and mall cuts will create increased the economy over 2% on top of what we are already seeing an increase paychecks again on top of what were already enjoying. that's on top of the 1.7 million new jobs we party scene created. the second part of tax law to
plano, the savings act of 2018 led by congressman mike kelly would help families save more and save earlier throughout their lives by expanding access to new and existing savings vehicles. this will help families and individuals save for their future where their retirement, education or health care. so to make sure as they see their paychecks increase in the economy improve that they are keeping more of their hard-earned money and planning for the future. in addition, promoting the family savings act will help local businesses provide retirement plans to the workers and will help workers participate more in those plans. the third and last part is the american innovation act of 2018 sponsored by the tax subcommittee chairman vern buchanan. this bill will help hard-working americans, our smallest
entrepreneurs move the family business from their kitchen table for their guest bedroom to the first office by allowing them to write off more of the startup cost in those critical early years and to help them grow and expand to their businesses. so while tax reform one was only change in the church are jury, and tax reform to us about changing the culture here in washington. the size of today's important update. if we have our way we look to modernize, improve, make fair and more competitive to america's tax code. now we finally have one of the most competitive tax cut on the planet they were going to take another bold step to keep it that way. with that, recognize the ranking member neil for the purposes of an opening statement. thank you, mr. chairman. when we leave here this afternoon or this evening it's important to recognize that our
republican colleagues would've brought the rise barring $3 trillion for the purpose of tax cuts that overwhelmingly have been devoted to the high income earners in america and large corporations. without a single democratic vote. he wasn't paid for and is heavily skewed to the corporations would harm our economy and damage important programs like medicare and social security. see what is coming through. insurance companies state after state while health coverage for those with preexisting conditions is on the chopping block. the medicare trustees got three or the life of the medicare trust fund because of the
republican tax bill. after showering large corporations with billions of dollars in tax cuts, corporations across the country are using the money for stock buybacks and dividends laying off workers in india shipping operations to other countries. in one particular egregious case and executive at a well-known company stated the savings the company received from the republican tax laws allow them to restructure and indeed lay off hundreds of workers. despite all of this republicans are doubling down with another round of tax cuts while often the well-heeled. in fact the, republicans are cutting taxes for the second time by making permanent the cut to the clayton obama boehner -- they are providing tax cuts for a fraction of the top 5% of taxpayers. the gop has disguised as massive giveaway to millionaires by calling it a new benefit for small businesses. in fact, half of the benefits the republicans so-called small
business tax would embrace will go to millionaires. at the same time, republicans have doubled down on the middle class by making limits on state and local tax reduction, mortgage interest seduction and casualty loss deduction, which i anticipate we will have a full throttle discussion of both the morning and afternoon move on. by eliminating personal exemptions alone, 290 million individuals will no longer be able to claim $1.4 trillion in tax savings. this tax plan repeals these and many others tax incentives that help the middle-class families get ahead while lavishing benefits on the wealthy and large corporations. furthermore come with today's build the so-called party of fiscal conservatism and wreck is to will once again as i noted earlier offered $3 trillion in tax breaks in less than a year.
in january 2001 took over total surplus from 202-2211 was $556 trillion. the federal government ran deficits and six by $1 trillion. republicans taxes cut in 2003 by another trillion and there was a repatriation. republicans call themselves fiscal conservatives, but nothing at this moment based upon what we are doing could be further from the truth. history doesn't lie and we see it again with the addition of more than $3 trillion to the nations that. this package like the one before is being rushed through. not a single hearing, not a single witness and no input from stakeholders. a rushed and lopsided process resulted in the previous
disaster is tax law and in fact my staff has identified over 100 problems with the republican tax for. this exercise with those that are guaranteed to be dead on arrival in the u.s. senate. another reckless tax cut for the wealthy and leaves behind average americans. hard-working families are once again being shut out and therefore on our side we intend to impose unanimously 6760 and we encourage our republican friends. redo this in a bipartisan manner with hearings. ring for something we can find common ground on a less as some expert witnesses. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back my time. >> protecting family small business tax cut back 28 team with the tax cut fact of their
paychecks. this bill will lock in low tax rates for american families and the workers than main street businesses, which are already having a huge impact. the choice we have before us today is simple. we can either go back to high tax rates on families and businesses, which led to america's lowest economic recovery ever where we can have tax cuts for middle-class families and small businesses and keep the economic boom going. the committee will now proceed to consideration of h.r. 6760. without objection will be brad and consider for a minute. mr. substitute distributed in advance, along with the green sheet explaining it without objection the subsidy shall be considered as red at any point and considered de facto purpose of amendments. tom bartel for a taxation provide the technical description with an emphasis on
the changes made since the introduction. i asked the members of all the questions until after his presentation. your recognize. thank you, mr. chairman. members of the committee have before you for joint committee documents, jay c. x 69, 70, 71 and 72 in which describe the underlying legislation by 6760 protecting family small business tax cuts after 2018. the chairman of the man and the substitute and the analysis of this legislation. let me just highlight what the legislation is about as was noted. roughly nine months ago the congress passed 11597 known as the tax cuts and jobs act. within that, it provided expiration of most of the
provisions on the individual income tax side of the internal revenue code. generally, those provisions would expire after calendar year 2025. the legislation before you would extend all of those provisions permanently and so that includes all of the changes in marginal tax rates, personal exemption, child credit from a standard, itemize deductions. in addition, it extends the increased exemption under the individual alternative minimum tax and extend the doubling of the exempt amount under the estate and gift taxes. one item to note that is not a permanent extension is the medical expenses itemized deduction for expenses above the 7.5% adjusted gross income for under present law would expire after this calendar year the legislation before you would extend that for an additional two years through calendar year
2020. the chairman cemented nature substitute makes a clerical change in terms of reference in the underlying legislation. that concludes my brief description of the legislation before you. i'd be happy to answer any questions that members might have. >> thank you. substitute -- your recognize. thank you, mr. chairman. the chairman has said that this bill would lock in tax cuts for middle-class families. so i want to ask you mr. narthold about the distribution and in one basket, and i'm not description of the chairman, just talk about the facts, okay? you have over the last year recently provided distribution tables and i want everybody here
and everybody in the country to understand them. so here are the questions. is it correct that the republican tax law that was enacted last year will provide earning over $1 million a year an average aggregate tax cut of over $64,000 in 2019. >> mr. levin, i believe you're referring to analysis that my colleagues provided to the members last december in the distribution analysis of 6817 and your calculation, which seems to be accurate is based on the total change in federal taxes projected from the calendar year is divided by the roughly 600,000 taxpayers we
estimate will have incomes above $1 million. >> okay, so the answer is yes. not the short answer is yes. >> now, the tax bill included both individual and corporate. i want to ask you about the impact of the extension here just for individuals. your chart shows for taxpayers between 75 to 100 rows then by 2028 that would be a tax reduction of $1158 for those who didn't come over a million dollars or $38,148. is that correct? >> yes, for the members benefit, mr. levin is referring to the
distribution table that we provided this morning, jcx providing the total income tax change reported on that table by the number of taxpayers with projects in each income group and so for the income group of 75,000, 100,000, the average change in federal taxes represented on jcx 72 is a reduction of $1158 as mr. levin stated. >> 39,000 -- >> in the income category of 1 million over reduction of $39,148 is the average reduction. >> so that is 30 times larger. let me just ask you about the
pass-through. on the deduction of pastor incomes, joint tax estimates show the extension of that provision under the bill before today would provide over 93% of this tax benefit to those earning 100,000 a year in 2026. is that correct? >> approximately in the low 90%. yes, mr. levin. >> and it also shows your tax table that this bill would provide 56% of the tax under the pass-through to those earning over $1 million a year. in other words, the top one third of 1% would get over 50%
of the benefit. is that correct? >> yes. roughly 55, 56, 57%, sir. >> okay, when we get to speak i will show how it is just your propaganda to say that this bill blocks in tax cuts for middle-class families rather than for the very wealthy. i yield back. >> thank you. the gentleman yield back. mr. barthold, i would note the average family of four in mr. levin's district was the tax relief of $17,100 when the next day. over this bill. mr. barthold, looking at the new distribution, and for taxpayers making between 20,030,000, your numbers show a tax cut, tax reduction of 19.1% for those over a million dollars they see
a reduction of 2.3%. is that accurate? >> that's correct. that's reported in the first set of columns on the left of the jcx 72. >> so that is not much of a minimum wage or two families. they are seen almost 10 times the tax relief percentage as those in the millionaires pit in the 30,000 to 40,000 from under tax reduction is 10%. >> that's correct. >> about five times more. i noticed overall families earning between $50,075,000, which can be middle-class and many states will see 6.9% reduction of federal taxes were a millionaire again seized about 2%. is that accurate in your statistic? >> that is correct, mr. chairman. >> suis paying the burden of taxes in america?
who shoulders the burden? i noted under your estimate their families today earning under $75,000 with middle income families that this provides so much relief to comment they pay optionally a negative 2% of the individual income taxes in america. but they received 18% of the individual tax relief from the new tax bills. so, even though they frankly get a little bit more than they pay again, they actually receive an 18% tax relief. a notice telling contrast to my millionaires pay 32% of individual taxes in america, but only receive 9%. ..
will actually share more of the burden of the overall individual tax amount then read before tax reform, is that correct? >> that is correct, mr. chairman. >> thank you.does anyone wish to ask questions about the amendment and the nature? does anyone wish to strike the last word? yes, sir? just have to raise your hand. >> thank you. we talked a little about the tax cut bill that the committee passed in the house and it was signed into law that cut taxes
for corporations and the richest people in the country. was the bill paid for? >> the legislation was passed under -- >> was it paid for?>> it provided for a net tax reduction. there were not specific, while there were revenue raising provisions in the legislation it was a net tax cut. >> was it paid for? >> no. >> thank you. today we have this new tax cut bill that will benefit some of the richest people in the country. tax 2.0. is the bill paid for? >> this legislation extends some of the tax reductions, relative to baseline is that it would reduce taxes in future years. there are not specific offsets. >> is this bill paid for? >> no, sir, it is not.
>> this one is not paid for either. by my calculation, that means that by the last action of the republicans on this committee, and today's action by the republicans on this committee, we're going to add about $3 trillion to our national debt. is it correct to say that that is only considering the 10 year budget window of the bill? >> what we reported in jcx71 is the 10 year projection. >> the cost of interest of the debt financing to these tax cuts, they are not included in this. so the number could actually grow to more than $3 trillion added to the national debt. is that correct? >> our conventional estimates
don't include interest cost. it might arise from the legislation. >> so if there is going to be interest cost, going to the national debt, notwithstanding the fact that you don't calculate that, it is pretty safe to say that the republicans actions on this committee will add more than $3 trillion to the national debt. >> i should add one refinement, mr. thompson. the size of the legislation before you constitutes major tax legislation under the house rules. so my colleagues are presently working on a macroeconomic analysis of the legislation. the analysis would include interest cost effects. >> i'm anxious to see that. when that is done i hope that you are forthright with it. -- the idea of adding $3 trillion to the national debt
is mind-boggling. if it is more than that we should certainly know. mr. chairman, i have a chart that calculates the average salt deductions that will be paid by congressional district as a result of your legislation. and i would like to ask unanimous consent to add that to the record. >> without objection. >> i think it's important to point out, you know, all you have to do is look at the average deduction on this chart for any of the districts and then subtract the $10,000 that people will be able to continue to write off. then the difference is going to be the tax burden that the republicans in this committee will be adding to the tax bill of every american in one of
these districts. thank you, mr. chairman.i yelled back. >> thank you, the gentleman yields back. -- the fifth district of california $22,700. you are recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman.i want to highlight a little bit more in focus because i'm not going to let this go unanswered to. what the chairman is talk about regard to the percentages. when you're talking about the millionaire or above income tax payer and have a 30,000 number which i think are the testimony three. that is the amount of the reduction. what is the tax liability for the taxpayer? were they paying each and every year? >> as we report on jcx72 we calculate taxpayers for an
income group and average tax rate on taxpayer in the a million and over is 33.4 percent under present law it will be 32.3 percent. >> and so how much -- do the math, it is one of the problems with this committee. i am sure the american people know how to do math. let's do the math. what is the tax bill for the taxpayer each and every year? >> if it were $1 million it would be what? $333,000 a year the taxpayer is paying to the federal government. and their taxes are going down 30,000. go to the $1100 tax reduction you are referring to in the tax charts if you would.what is the tax liability for that family or that individual?
>> okay. we are looking at 75,000 to 100,000. the average tax rate is approximately 17 percent under present law. 16 percent under the proposal. if it were a $100,000 income under present law would be approximately $17,000. >> what would it be reduced to? >> $16,000. >> a relative term i'm looking at, they're trying to make the argument $30,000 is a bigger number for millionaires and 1100 is a smaller number for the lower income tax folks. relative about where the taxable income is that's where
the percentage of 30 percent of 2.2 percent for the millionaire versus the working family person. isn't it accurate? >> yes, sir. >> what we are trying to illustrate in these numbers i think is that they want to maybe talk about bigger numbers, those taxpayers are paying $333,000 a year. as a tax liability. in what we trying to do is make the argument that a relative basis, those numbers show me a 30 percent reduction for the working family as opposed to a 2.2 percent reduction for the millionaire individual. and that is i think the point that needs to be illustrated here. that this sham of not doing the math is being portrayed to the american people. thank you. i yield back. >> unless there are other members i would like to question i will go to strike
the last word. does anyone wish to question him? if not, we will begin by striking the last word. you are recognized to strike the last word. >> mr. chama, it is well-known that our republican colleagues don't believe in climate change. but this week we had some demonstration that they question hurricanes or at least letting hurricanes get in the way of another type of disaster. which is this bill. at least we finally do have a week in washington where stormy refers to something natural in terms of disasters. this bill is about whether rising and protecting tax breaks that were adopted last year to try and ensure that the special benefits that were available to the wealthiest people in our country and the
largest multinationals are protected on long-term basis. the cost of the bill today, the cost of the bill that was adopted last year is very high. more than half $1 trillion this year with this proposal. but the cost is not measured in dollars alone. silence is one of the big costs of this bill. silence from republicans daily, silence about this president and all of the wrongs that are being committed. republicans will pay any price, they will bear any burden, they will ignore any tantrum as long as millionaires are protected. and the ceiling lifts to seal the tax bill. you can have trump hugging
thugs, silence, a helsinki bearhug for vladimir putin is and as he repudiates the findings of our own community, crickets. the press is the enemy of the people. duck and cover. denying the former cia director security clearance which only endangers our security, not a peep. insulting the late senator john mccain, even as he lay dying. no comment. estimated 7 and a half major lives per day silence. behind closed doors, we know that those who are there most closely working at the white house, day in, day out, thanks to bob woodward and others reporting, we know what life is like there. not my words, but there is. the mayor of crazy town.the intelligence of 1/5 or sixth grader and even stronger terms. the threat to our security, our economic security, our national security, the threat to our democracy has never been higher but all we have is silence. as the warning lights keep
flashing, a bright yellow into red. they just cannot find their voice. it is more important to enact bills like that we have today that are designed to line the pockets of the wealthy. and it is okay if along the way you can keep rolling back some protections to keep the air cleaner and water safe. and if you can eviscerate the financial rules that protect families and their financial security from wall street. what is the total cost of this bill and this republican silence? we don't really know yet. we have not yet apparently hit the bottom of what the presidential behavior is that these republicans are willing to tolerate. with each new low, the silence grows a little more deafening. so we have something that is truly disastrous heading our way and it is not just a hurricane. it is a deficit busting tax
giveaway that might one day lead us to having the full credit of the united states being declared a disaster area. the first tax scam adopted here through the congress has not met with great public approval. in fact, it's probably the most unpopular tax bill in recent memory. but it sure was a budget buster. trillions in additional debt so that those at the top and large multinationals can get tax breaks for today they dress up a little to try and gain broader support for protecting the privileged position. they dress it up a little as president trump and his family are enriched by the legislation that was passed previously. and are enriched by freezing into place, the protection for pastor entities in today's bill. afraid of any sunlight of course, no official from the
trump administration have the courage to come and sit at that desk and answer questions about this bill and the implementation of this tax bill. as with the initial bill, no witnesses from business, academia or anyplace else. instead, as close a process as possible because the bill is truly a sorry addition and a disaster for our future. i yield back. >> time has expired. it is known to strike the last word. >> thank you, mr. chairman. colleagues, i strongly support this bill. the passage of this bill today the committee is truly making a difference in the lives of everyday americans. colleagues on the other side throughout miss leading information about my constituents in south dakota don't buy it and they know the truth. they seen the benefits of the tax cuts firsthand. the work we are doing will make permanent the gains that we secured in the tax cuts and jobs act. giving american families
certainty into the future. under the historic tax cuts in the tax cuts and jobs act a married couple in south dakota making a teacher's salary have another $2600 in their pocket each and every year going forward. today, we're going to ensure that his permanent policy. the average police officer in south dakota saves $991 a year thanks to our tax cuts. and today we are making that permanent. the south dakota family of five with the father drives a truck, maybe a mother who is a nurse. with three kids their family they save over $3000 each year. thanks to the tax cuts. today we are making that permanent for that family as well. a single mother south dakota may be working as a realtor, she will save over $2000 a year. today we are making that permanent. an electrician father, hairstylist mother, they save $1800. that means 9500 diapers for their newborn baby. according to one family that i
visited with. and today we are making the savings permanent. mr. chairman the facts are undeniable. protecting family and small business tax cuts act does exactly what its title implies. and i am proud to support today. i urge all my colleagues to put their country over petty partisan politics and support the bill. with that, i yield back. >> mr. thompson you are recognized to strike the last word. >> thank you, mr. chairman. when this committee considered tax 1.0 we did not have any hearings. we heard from no witnesses. we had a markup similar to this one where we talked about winners and losers. and now we are right back at it again today. now, nine months after the passage of that first bill, we've had some time to hear from the experts and the economists who were left out of the process by our republican majority. we know that the first bill put us $2.3 trillion deeper in
debt. $2.3 trillion. that is real money. that is money for our troops, our kids, medicare, social security, highway infrastructure, national security. $2.3 trillion. and for what? to give it to millionaires and billionaires. to give them a tax break. 10 years down the road. and a tax cut that they didn't even ask for. this isn't good public policy. and given the fact that we having this markup prior to the midterm elections, some might say that it is political. and some more cynical me might suggest that this is being done to troll for votes in the midterm election. as a nation, we are already borrowing to make ends meet. and the bill before us today
would make things worse. right now, interest rates are low. so the yearly cost of servicing our debt are relatively low. compared to the amount of that debt. that is going to change and we all know it's going to change. and it could change quickly. because as we all know, interest rates are low right up until they are no longer low. if interest rates were to go up quickly, all of that debt could put a lot of pressure on the rest of our budget. and jeopardize important programs that we all care about. the republican leadership has shown us that we don't even have to wait for the interest rates to go up. matter fact last december, the speaker blamed medicare and medicaid for our growing debt. asking seniors to pay for our
shrinking federal, -- if we get nothing out of this market today let's remember that our national debt is not the fault of low income seniors. it is the result of policies like the one we are talking about today drafted by members in this room.the people we represent deserve better. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields. mr. smith, you are recognized. the last word. >> thank you. i have a question. on the 199 a issue, there was actually took i believe in a bipartisan manner as well. to address the issue that has come to be known as the grain glitch. that fix of the grain glitch would be permanent. is that correct?
>> under this legislation, that is correct. >> it will be needed in order to make that permanent. >> if by making the 199 a provision permanent that congress enacted in february, it would be made permanent as well. yes, sir. >> thank you i appreciate that. and i think it shows that we can come together to get some things done here and i think that the productivity of tax reform certainly speaks for itself with numbers coming in. and they will always be critics and probably politically motivated. but i hope that we can for the good of our country, and together and focus on issues that can bring more opportunity and to the american people. a lot of folks in the silence of our economy. now is the time to get as many people as we can onto the playing field that we would call the economy. and i hear from my constituents up and down the line that they
need more employees. now is the time. not only with this bill, but other pieces of legislation that we come together to address the needs of our country and bring folks off the sidelines of our economy so they can prosper and have a brighter future. thank you. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. i would notice the family for in the district of mr. smith, $15,100. over the life of 2.0. with that i yield to mr. lewis to strike the last word. >> thank you, mr. chairman. -- i joined to respond to the needs of the people in the fifth district of georgia and people throughout america. when i'm in my district and traveling across our country, i'm listening to their concerns. you cannot help but feel their pain, frustration, and sadness of being left out in left behind. you cannot escape the fear from
the future and the direction of our country. they hope, they dream, they pray for congress to do the right thing. to be right. to open their eyes, their ears, their hearts, threats facing the nation. the sick and elderly cannot afford their medicine and healthcare. people are struggling to keep a roof over their head and food on their tables. you cannot escape the fear of gun violence at work, at schools or even in places of worship. innocent children, tiny babies, ripped from their arms. and the arms of their mothers and fathers. and tomorrow, tomorrow is 1/17 anniversary of the longest war in our nations history. and there is no end in sight.
mr. chairman, when you have the power to do good, you cannot, he should not withhold it. each and every one of us have a moral obligation to lead and face the responsibility and look at it, deal with it. i want the record to be clear and reflect what each and every one of us knows. this bill is not going anywhere. it is desperate, a message for your campaigns. this exercise -- our duty is the same. it will only continue the harsh reality of the first tax bill. these tax bills destroy the hopes of those who dream of
affordable quality healthcare. social security and medicare are on the chopping block. it is not right. it is not fair. it destroys bipartisan solution for transportation needs, affordable housing and didn't debt will be out of reach. how can you turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to the desperate cries of the people? how can you ignore a moral and constitutional responsibility? how can you -- our children, grandchildren and generations yet unborn. it is not right. it is not fair. and history will not be kind to us if we continue down this road. i urge each and every member of this committee to vote no and
we may return to the serious work of the people and for the people. with that mr. chairman, i yield back. >> john yields back. you are recognized for the last word. >> thank you, mr. chairman. just wanted to talk about our friends on the other side of the aisle with deficits. all of this came in a different period of time but i came in 2006. if you look at what happened through 2007 for the next 10 years, we can talk about the deficits today but the bottom line, with no growth for 10 years. there are multiple reasons. we ran up 10 trillion in debt, there's a big deal but 800 trillion or $800 billion stimulus. they had a $10 trillion stimulus in that time. you might say was eight or not but we will remain to have trillion back then to $21 trillion today. so what's happened? we continue to do we're doing we are going backwards. at least here i think we have got one of the best economies we have had. i've been in business 40 years. one of the best economies and part of it is because people are excited about the political leadership.
about being more pro-business, his lowest unemployment, we are growing at three percent. people are very bullish and being in business is that am i willing to make the investment in the future. they feel confident today. what we got for 10 years and 10 trillion in debt, we can't go back there. i would love to have a constitutional balanced budget amendment. i think it is something both sides should work on. the bottom line, people are bullish, unemployment is down, record stock market. it is one of the best economies we've had in a long time. you will see bigger paychecks. with that i yield back. >> german yields back. you are recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i thought it was -- this like dcjcvu all over again except it is doubling down on double taxation. it is hard to sit here and listen. especially when you see people
in your own state who are going to pay more in taxes so that the very wealthy amongst us can borrow $3 trillion, have working families in connecticut pay for it and tell them not to worry they will get a break. maybe not you if you're in a blue state. on the east coast or west coast. somehow you are a different american if you happen to live in one of the states. you don't qualify for that. i thought settled law was something we talked about in the supreme court cases. but apparently, settled law with irs and their recognizing states that pay their share,
step up to the plate to make sure the fund education and the healthcare systems and maintain the roads and bridges. they wouldn't be double taxed. there is going to be a revolt across this country. and the more that people turn to their accountants, you better be doing nightly novenas that they don't do so. as he turned to accountants and find out what it is they're actually going to pay. and if you live on the east coast or the west coast, and find out that what you are doing just for your little estate tax benefit, where 5500 households in the whole country get $7 billion. who pays for that? you borrow it and have the working class of america on the east and west coast. pay for it.people have not seen this in their paychecks. and everybody knows that the longer that this is around, the longer that this double
taxation exists, it is blatantly unfair and i would dare say, unconstitutional as well. i look forward to a number of the amendments that are coming up here today and in terms of the ability to talk about the soft provisions. and what's happening. but just for any person, listening to this in the east coast, to all of you citizens having to pay taxes on a regular basis, and recognize at the end of the day that you are getting nothing, in fact, you are financing the tax cuts and the ensuing dessa for test taking place and he was being asked to pay for it? you are. i yield back. >> thank you, the gentleman yields back. i would note that the average family of four in the district of connecticut will receive a
tax cut -- you are recognized. >> thank you. mr. chairman. my colleague from california wanted to yield because i want to be clear on the record and applaud hits recognizing the deficit and debt crisis we have on the horizon in regards to the interest rate policy of america. as i talk here in this committee room, as i've talked outside of the committee room and as i travel the country, this is something that i share a grave concern about as we go forward. i understand what we're doing with tax cuts. i understand what we are doing to spread economic growth and we have maybe a different opinion in regards to where we are positioning ourselves, growing the economy and being a part of the solution to take on the crisis. but i would look forward to working with my colleagues on the other side to recognize this common thread.
to us as americans, this national debt is posing to us and presented to us, especially, as we enter an era where inflation is starting to show, show his face again and one of the tools we have in our toolbox to deal with inflation is interest rate policy. and i'm afraid if we do not become true leaders in washington, both sides of the aisle, and address this in an open and honest fashion, i think the crisis will go off and it will be a very serious consequence to our country. and so i disagree with the concern that the other side may raise in regards and how it may contribute to the deficit issue. because i don't think it takes into consideration the growth impact, the opportunity to grow the economy and revenue that
comes from that. that we can deal with. but i am open to the conversation if we include everything on the table. everything. that means we need to balance the budget not only from a revenue perspective but also from a spending perspective. i want to applaud him for raising concerns and join in the shared sentiment that we need to address is practically and not wait for the crisis to go off. i yield back. >> german yields back. you are recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think it was a sad chapter in the history of this committee when last year, we rushed through major changes to the tax code obligating over $2 trillion of additional debt. when the committee was not fully aware of the impact, unintended consequences, i feel strongly that people look at the committee proceedings and wonder how there can be such a
difference. i think one of the reasons there such a difference is because we have really not had the committee operate, bring in independent experts to testify and have the bill in front of the american public. so the experts and the public, and i daresay, each member of the committee, they know what we are voting on. we did not do that. and it is sad. we've added obligations are probably $2.3 trillion in deficits as a result of the action. so the first 11 months of this, since last year with a deficit gap increased 895 billion and it is estimated that trillion dollar deficits will continue as long as the eye can see. and the republicans pivoted
after that and acted to use the deficits to rationalize cuts to programs that americans care deeply about. in terms of social security. medicare and medicaid. and all of the public has to do is look at the republican budget. it was put forth immediately after our work. there is a connection. and now, we are looking at a similar act, extending portions of these tax reductions. the estimate over 10 years, probably $3 trillion additionally, and we are doing so again with no public input. they didn't see this bill,
there has not been a single hearing and we are moving in again. it is no way to run a railroad, it is no way for this storied committee to operate. we should not have these gaps in terms of understanding and factual basis. which would not be as great if we actually knew what we were voting on, we heard from the public, we heard from independent experts who don't have an ax to grind. other than being able to stand by their research and their analysis. i don't know about your experience. i have gone home and i've talked to groups of tax attorneys, accountants, financial planners who are mystified about what we did. they don't understand the
rationale, it certainly hasn't simplify the tax code. it has made it hopelessly more complex. and everybody who is involved with a capital intensive business who rely on the ability to borrow, to be able to function and grow, they are deeply concerned about the path that you have launched a song. i find this troubling. rumor has it that not only are we not going to be here tomorrow, for adjourning early, rumor has it that we are going to give back most of october if not all of it. so people can go out and campaign before the election. there was plenty of time, mr. chairman. we could have had this legislation in its entirety available for a few hearings.
allowing the public and independent experts to critique and explain so we know what we're getting into. last but not least i identify with my friend from connecticut. many americans are going to get an unexpected tax surprise from you. because they are limited to $10,000 deduction. under the provisions. this republican tax is going to not just be in blue states, coastal states, you all have communities where there are high property tax values. and it is going to affect their taxes. may be fewer in your districts but you will have thousands of them. and they're going to get a special tax by virtue of what
you have done. i would think we are serious about diving back, changing, making permanent, making adjustments, one of the things we should attack is looking at the consequence on your constituents and mind. of that provision alone. mr. chairman, i'm sorry.i understand why redoing it because of an election. but i hope that we will not make this a routine. that is not a precedent, that sours the reputation of the committee. i yield back. >> a gentleman yields back. i would like to say -- colleagues voted to make the bush cuts permit the cost of $3.9 trillion. you and mr. lewis who was not here for the vote for the day, are the ones who did not vote that. so you actually have an argument. on the deficit issue.
so, mr. kelly, you are recognized to strike the last word. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would also like to ask a question. it comes down to a project long-term debt and why project deficits. what do we project growth act to come up with some of the figures we are hearing today about how much that growth widens? >> the projections i think are being quoted based on the congressional budget office. macro economic baseline. so the baseline that was used for the analysis last fall was the january 2017 economic baseline. i believe the congressional budget office and macro economic growth projection for the next several years was approximately 1.9 percent real growth for that period. they've increased, i do not
recall in the 2018 baseline, projected slightly higher growth rate. >> okay. when we go with the slightly higher growth rate i think is important to understand if you're looking at a meager growth rate and as we were told by the left ministration that look, if you think this will get better than 1.6 or 1.7 percent, annual increase in gdp you need to readjust your thinking because it just can't happen. and that was true under the tax laws and regulations were underpaid people thought they were stymied and will not have time to actually grow. so as i listen this is almost like a tale of two cities. the worst of times and best of times depending who you listen to. i will say this, you're absolutely right. politics is always go to trump policy so when isn't it an election year? i think it's less take a good look about not just what's good for democrats or republicans
but what's good for americans. and be a lot more of our taxpayers to keep more of their own money i think that is really a bright spot. if real gdp grew one percent faster than the projected every year for the next decade, it would produce roughly 2 and half trillion dollars in additional revenues. so when an economy is doing better, and i just know this from experience, there been several years of my life averting my private business they didn't pay any tax. and it was because i was brilliant and i know how to maneuver and get through the tax code is because we didn't make money. people pay on profit not on wishes that they hope would be there. the other thing is of course, working people. they are the ones responsible but also the people that employ them, wage taxes and income taxes if they pay. it's interesting and important to know where it comes from and how it is spent. i want to really talk about the one percent growth adding to and a half trillion dollars in additional revenue. you would have to be a fool to
sit back and look at an economic program that is losing. look at an economic program that is keeping you behind the rest of the world that is an economic program that means people have less take-home pay and their wages have been stagnant. you know what? that is a kind of america we needed to come to washington and keep fulfilling that promise that we keep people in the backside of success.i have to tell you, i am so much in favor of the 2.0 tax reform and honestly, look, i know that none of you voted for it. and it is hard to go back and say you know what? please tell me about how good we are doing. i did not vote for it and still would not vote for today. in fact if it puts us back a majority we will raise your taxes. so let's get ready for that rough ride. gentlemen, thank you for holding the hearing. thank you for bringing this up now. there is no time like the present and doubling down. it has nothing to do with democrats and republicans. it really doesn't.
it has with hard working taxpayers. we've never had blue skies and stronger wind at our back then we do today and it is all because of legislation that took place. these people didn't just wake up one morning and say, hallelujah! i watched eight years, watch stagnation and depression and people thinking there is no tomorrow because we were told why would you think you are exceptional? you're not exceptional, you're just americans for crying out loud. don't put yourself in that book that you think you are exceptional people. we are exceptional people and we have done exceptional things. i think would be hard to deny the last 20 months.look at the progress the nation has made. and i'm talking about our nation because i talk about our people. it is benefited every person. i will yield my time. thank you for doing this, tax reform 2.0, i am all in favor of making it much easier for our fellow citizens to enjoy life. >> a question.
mr. kelly made reference to thanking you for the hearing today. i want to ask the question, is this a hearing or a markup? >> it is a markup. >> thank you for the correction. >> were you not aware of that? >> no, he had made reference of thanking you for the hearing and there has been no hearing on this bill. with the prior bill. and that this is a markup and not a hearing. >> gentlemen -- >> it is a markup. >> they you go. >> thank you. >> for the record i just wanted to clarify. >> we will continue with the nitpicking. >> nitpicking not having a single committee hearing. >> in 2026 the year in which most of the new republican legislation, tax legislation would start having an effect, that is the first year in which all members of the baby boom generation, including the younger, the youngest, it will
be eligible to draw social security, retirement benefits. it is also the year in which the oldest baby boomer will turn 80. so now, what we are looking for is, and i agree with those who brought this up, what are you going to cut in order to make up for what you have done? it is pretty bad to listen to both sides. well, we start by cutting social security. that has already been proposed. medicare. medicaid, that has a ready been done. so, we have caddy shack two, weekend at bernie's two, jaws, the revenge. the sequel is never as good as the original. [laughter] >> the original socks. >> in this case, in this case i
sure hope that this tax scam two is just as popular as the first one. 34 percent popularity. i cannot imagine anyone in the movie business backing a sequel for such a flop! consider the headline, fox news poll, voters like obamacare more than gop tax cuts. even the guys and gals on our side find that funny to say. that's right. a majority of all americans now approve of the affordable care act.let that sink in a minute. maybe that is why new jersey republican leonard lance, last week, call this new attempt and exercise fertility. he is not the only one. another headline from the week, republicans consider dropping second phase of tax cuts after
backlash. why all my friends on the other side bringing up this bill? what problem is the tax bill trying to solve? consider the original tax scam. way back in january, the gop, they saw that corporate profits were at a high. they said not enough. we need to shower them with lavish tax breaks. they came in and so that the middle class families are struggling with healthcare. housing cost and said, let's make health insurance costlier! let's make homeowners pay more taxes. by eviscerating the original mandate and going back to the civil war, you are wrong! and now, they see how unpopular the first go at the tax cuts were. so let's do more of the same. but why would this time be any different? paul ryan and the president
said when they passed the tax scam, that the average families wages salary would go up by $4000. he said it. i didn't. wages are down for most workers. only about one percent of workers are getting a wage increase. the republicans only come up with 4000 based on the assumption that workers were successfully going to bargain for a bigger share of profits corporate productivity. but that hasn't happened for 40 years. republicans have waged an all-out war on labor unions, collective bargaining rights. what power do workers have to bargain for higher pay? it shows that workers wages are flat. even slightly down in real terms over the last year. i have backup information since you asked me that a couple of times. you want it. corporations reap the profits,
gains have not trickled down to regular workers but in fact the tax bills only made it harder for them to get ahead. companies are not investing in employees or innovation. another headline, trump tax cuts have no effect on most businesses hiring plans. corporations are spending. 101 times as much on shareholder bonuses as they are workers bonuses in wages. telling us to wait, telling workers to wait. they did not raise wages. they simply passed the tax cuts. by the u.s. treasury to the wealthy shareholder pockets. i am afraid the sequel is just more of the same failed trickle-down economics that has never worked before. but i would rather go see weekend at bernie's again then to watch this and read this sequel. we are real urgent problems facing working people. >> your time has expired.
>> i think you for your indulgence. >> i would respectfully make the case for mission impossible fall out. as a stronger of the other three. >> i think that is a great idea. >> out also note the average family of four in the ninth district of new jersey will see a tax cut of $5508. mr. bishop, you are recognized. >> mr. chairman, since you directed your comments to me, can i say something to you? >> not at this time. >> you have not even gone there and how much they will lose in deductions.and how much -- [multiple speakers] >> that is part of the calculation. mr. bishop you are recognized to strike the last word. thank you,. -- >> thank you for the opportunity to talk about this. in michigan my home state, we are seeing a positive impact of tax reform.
i guess this is a matter of perspective but i been around my state and district talking to families, big companies, small companies. from large major corporations to startups. all of them have share their positive feelings about tax reform and what is doing for our state. the heart of our economy is the manufacturing sector. and of course that is the auto industry. as we see in our state, when the auto industry sneezes, michigan catches a cold. on the other side when they do also to the state. i'm excited to talk about tax reform and what it has done. there are some examples from the people i speak with. specifically i will mention one, fiat chrysler has decided to bring back the ram heavy duty truck from mexico investing $1 billion hiring thousands of new employees in by itself doing an enormous
substantial new economic investment to our state. which will make a real difference. that is just one example. it is not just our auto industry and manufacturing that benefits from tax reform. our main street businesses are being benefited as well. they are growing, hiring workers, here all the time about new expanded benefits. in my hometown the main street downtown is called rochester road. rochester road leave everything on that street. locally owned car dealerships, jewelry stores, restaurants, clothing stores, law firms, accounting firms.you name it, we have it. i have talked to each of these folks in every sector of this part of the economy. they told me about their positive feelings about tax reform and how it has allowed them to reinvest in their companies and business and workers. and continue to make my city, my hometown of rochester a great place to work, live and raise a family.
just last week for example, main street optimism index hit a record all-time 45 year high. i think that is a great positive step in the right direction. a giant step in the right direction for our country. mr. chairman, as you know the nonpartisan tax foundation looked at the effect of making these tax cuts permanent and in tax reform 2.0 peer productions are very optimistic. the legislation before us according to the tax foundation would add 1.5 million new jobs to the economy. an increase gdp by 2.2 percent. i don't know about all of you but that sounds like pretty good news for me or to me. it will be great for constituents in michigan and our citizens and the nation were looking for something positive in this economy. we've seen the tax reform spread the kind of growth anticipated from tax cuts.
i believe it is time and i agree with the chairman and the committee that we lock in the race and give businesses the certainty that they need to continue to grow and thrive. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back the rest of my time. >> agenda yields back. you are recognized. >> thank you. what we are doing today is certainly falls under the category of exercise in futility. the senate has made it perfectly clear they have no intention of taking up the action today. nor is there a need to. the major provision involving the individual rates doesn't take effect for another seven years. but instead of taking this opportunity to take a look back, see what mistakes and what directions need to be made with tax 1.0, we are moving forward with this and what a strictly political exercise. there is no here today that can deny the only reason we are wasting our time marking the stop and moving forward is because of the political calendar. with the midterms just around the corner. the reason why we have tax 2.0
before stays because tax 1.0 went over like a wet blanket. they knew that the federal reserve came out with a recent revenue report that showed corporate tax receipts this year are down 35 percent. overall tax revenue down five percent. the congressional budget office estimated the era of trillion dollar budget deficits is upon us. this fiscal year. we don't even have to wait until next year. and since when is a philosophy of family value agenda mean passing huge debt onto our children and grandchildren? this bill alone when it is fully implemented for the next 10 years, will increase the national debt by over $3 trillion. no offsets, no pay for, let's just borrow more from china and stick our kids with the bill. what is significant about this
time period. it also coincides with the exact time that all 74 million baby boomers who are beginning their massive retirement, 10,000 each day. will be fully retired and fully vested in social security and medicare. and now you will throw another $3 trillion worth of debt that will only jeopardize the long-term solvency of social security and medicare for that generation and for future generations to come. let's stop kidding the american people. we know that this is what the game plan is. shortly after tax 1.0 past last year the republican budget that came before the house this year, called for over $2 trillion worth of cuts. to medicare and medicaid. which happened to coincide exactly with the $2.3 trillion worth of debt that your tax bill called for. it is not rocket science, it is basic math. and this is adding a very clearly what the play is here.
expected to have social security and medicare cuts and reformed in order to pay for the massive tax cuts. the corporate rate, we all knew this would happen. and what do they do with the additional money? they did not increase employee wages. some gave bonuses. some only applied to retail workers there for 20 years which means very few saw them. but they did what they said they would do. massive share buybacks, massive dividend distribution, huge plus up in executive salaries and compensation packages. that is exactly where the corporate money is going. when corporate america was already sitting on a pile of cash on the sidelines. they told us before tax 1.0 past what they would do with it. and that is exactly what they have been doing. mr. chairman i would ask at this time the federal reserve report be inserted in the
record that i just cited. and it should also surprise no one that the republican party today now has become the party of death because they're being led by the king of death. the thought of my word for it take his word. president trump on the campaign trail and 2016 said and i quote - i am the king of death. i love debt. these people are crazy. this is the united states government. ... we are better than most of the committee mr. chairman. go back to regular order, clean up any mistakes made in the past
, be be thoughtful and have your be thoughtful in appearance and be thoughtful and have your instant feedback where we go with the tax code is next. this is in the way to do it. encourage my colleagues to vote no. there's still time to do this the right way. i yield back. three mike thank you, mr. kind. just another democrat colleagues voted to extend the bush tax cut at a cost of $3.9 trillion in all those present at the time voted to have another trillion dollars. >> i would add that i am not a party to that huge debt increase with the vote. >> the bush tax cuts a 3.9 trillion. mr. karbala coming to recognize. thank you, mr. chairman. and a bit confused because some of our colleagues are saying that these tax policies are highly unpopular and ineffective, yet they accuse us of bringing them forward at this
time for political gain. it is somewhat of a dissonant argument. what i would say is we should all acknowledge the truth that we have some real challenges in our country. i think about the debt all the time. i'm worried about social security and medicare. i'm 38 years old. people younger than us will face the brunt of the consequences of inaction and we should all work together to make these programs solvent. we should work together not just today's seniors, but tomorrow's seniors as well and that means young americans all over the country contributing billions and billions every year to social security and medicare. if we're honest, we should recognize that i really haven't heard this from the other side that our economy is doing really well. passover so many individuals is not reaching them. the people are moving in the
work and switching jobs because they're getting paid more. more jobs available in our country than people looking for jobs at this point according to the most recent and the most recent report highlights i saw a major job and wage growth. these are all things to celebrate and i'm not going to be disingenuous and say that our tax reform is the only reason for the success were seen in the economy today, but it's certainly a part of the story and anyone who fails to record highs that is just not sharing a complete picture of what's happening in our country. i can tell you a lot of people in my district who are grateful for the new opportunities that they see in the economy. a lot of young people, a lot of immigrant receiving opportunities they have not seen in many years and are better off today. that is something to celebrate. there's some people displeased
with the new tax policies and i'll tell you in my district we do have some wealthy pocket and people who owned mansions and live in really expensive homes have complained about the deductibility of property taxes and that's understandable. but if they think mr. barthold went there earlier, the wealthy under the new tax cut are paying a greater share of our nation's taxes than under the old tax code a greater proportion. i understand any time we pass a broad comprehensive policy there must be some people unhappy, but we did the best we could. more and more americans are sharing in the recovery finally and that is something everyone on this committee should celebrate and of course we have to work together to face the challenges that pose the threat
and people younger than me, we cannot hand over this kind of diet and that is something i'm committed to working on with every member of this committee on the republican side on the democratic side. thank you, mr. chairman. and i look forward to supporting our legislation today. >> thank you, mr. curbelo. mr. crowley can you recognize. thank you, mr. chairman. for the purposes of introducing, yield to mr. pascarella. >> thank you >> mr. chairman, for the department of bureau of labour statistics i want to introduce into the record under president trump in the chart will show that it has slowed. >> minus two, mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman, i regret that i
will not be returning to the house of representatives nor to this committee in the next congress. i've dedicated a portion of my life in congress trying to get on this committee and i had the great honor to serve on this committee for the past 12 years. but over the last decade i have witnessed such under both parties control the diminishment of this committee. but i must say with the passage of what is termed now is tax cut one point no, i believe we've hit rock bottom. no hearings, no witnesses, no amendment, accepted by a majority -- minority offering. no regular order, no
bipartisanship. one of the most personal issues that the american people is their taxes and yet, the bill that yet, to build those passes passed as we enter this committee in the house of representatives. this wasn't just a missed opportunity. it was willful, premeditated and intentional. this intentional and its execution and unlike what we saw in the teen 86 with republican president ronald reagan and democratic speaker tip o'neill, what was true bipartisanship in the last overhaul of the tax code. the bill that we passed late last year and the one before us today was in partisan and
divisive in the wholesale creation of one party. i regret i regret i will not be here in the congress to help restore the faith of the american people and our congress and this committee to do what is right on behalf of all americans . but i will not be here to help restore to hard-working men and women, struggling men and women in this country trying to make ends meet a code that is fair to them as opposed to a code that an effective special interest of our nation. i look forward to seeing in the
future from another perch, the restoration of the prestige of this committee that i'd love. without mr. chairman i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields that. >> dr. davis to recognize. thank you, mr. chairman. i strongly oppose this deal at hard-working illinoisans of middle-class americans to pay for luxurious tax cuts for the wealthy and most secure people in our nation. chicagoans lose under this deal. illinoisans lose under this deal, real families lose under this deal. under this deal, over 40 million middle-class families will be double taxed permanently due to
the cap on the state and local income tax deduction. while corporations that donate to political coffers get the full benefit, indeed 31% of an annoyance recently claimed the deduction for a total of $24.12 billion. the of the republican bill would increase the taxes on almost over 2 million illinoisans by hundreds of millions of dollars with 85% of whom are in the middle class. the august economic report showed the fastest growing occupations for older workers require 14% to claim food stamps this republican bill champions
permanently [inaudible] and vacation homes. when baby boomers are retired and need and security, the republican bill excludes the deficit and threatens an automatic 4% reduction to medicare and critical safety net programs. the first republican tax cut damaged the health of the medicare trust fund and this bill is more of the same. after decades of wage stagnation , one over 41 million laborers earn less than $12 an hour and almost none of the employers offer health insurance, when the cost does childcare disorient in more than one quarter of americans struggle to cover housing costs,
the republican bill practices millionaires, given an average tax cut of over $39,000 to the top 1%. illinois has one of the highest childcare rates in the country, yet this bill keeps the child and dependent care tax credit for working parents capped at a shameful $15,000 bestows amazing tax benefit on the states under 20 million. people in chicago expect government to help real people. they do not want trillions of dollars in unpaid for permanent windfalls were the elite. the median income in my deck draped is about $54 billion. under this bill these constituents may save between 15
and 550. those earning over a million dollars get an average of over 39,000 almost half of the individual tax cut to households earning more than $350,000. 6.5 times the median income in my district and as community organizers would say, that ain't right. no it is not right. we need the help doesn't pay rent, buy good health insurance, child care so they can work and send their kids to college. we should not raise the taxes on hard-working americans and undermine local government to subsidize special interests. i oppose this dangerous steel
that threatens the economic security of our country and its people and i yield back. >> thank you, dr. davis yells back. mr. schweiker recognized to strike the last word. thank you, mr. chairman. and look, this is for all of us here in the committee and those watching and those that have to report this. many of us feel like we are in parallel universes because we are saying such different things and lucky not we should be seeing some of those same numbers. mr. chairman, i'll be asked to put this "wall street journal" article into the record because i don't know how any of us sort of match what is being said by the analysis of the current tax law. a couple points of reference. under the old tax law, so
pre-january 1st according to "the wall street journal" analysis, the top 20% of income earners paid 84% while the federal income tax. top 20% from 84% of the income tax. today under the new tax code where we have heard so many of our brothers and sisters on the other side say it is windfall for the wealthy, the top 20% is no longer paid 84%. they are now paying 87% of the federal income tax. the tax according to the analysis by "the wall street journal", the new tax code that got rid of some of the gains to the wealthy became more progressive. so i know that doesn't fit sort of what we want to say rhetorically, but that is the analysis on the data. the tax code more progressive january 1st and the talk% of
income earners are paying a higher percentage of the total federal tax revenues. but there's also another thing in here that's also interest being. it just makes the point that the first 60% quartile of income earners according to "the wall street journal" analysis functionally now will pay almost no federal income tax. and the nice thing with this, it is not our spider your site doing the analysis. it's an outside group. i'm hoping that at some point when we get out of what is the nature of this time of year and the political season, if we have feelings in the tax code that are not listing everyone, i'm one of those who desperately wants to know about it.
but what i see happening in arizona has some of the lowest unemployment in my lifetime. jobs that seem to be across the board in some populations that have had a really rough time. about three weeks ago i visited her homeless campus in downtown phoenix and they were telling me they have people recruiting workers from the homeless camp is because they are so desperate. even outside the political angst i am hoping some of us can find some joy that those folks who just came out of a pretty rough decade, who's been the most disaffected of our population are now finding work and somewhere in there should be some joy. but joy. that battle your back, but i do request to put this wall street article journal into the record. >> without objection. the gentleman yields back. they recognize strike the last word. thank you, mr. chairman.
i want to begin by putting an end to this nonsense average tax cut talk that keeps getting thrown out here in the chamber today. according to mr. reid, a million and his district would get a $30,000 tax-cut in a middle-class worker would get a thousand dollars tax-cut. according to the chairman of this committee -- >> with a gentlelady yield? >> or? >> elect and the right time. are to make my point without being interrupted if i might. according to the chairman they're both walking off with $15,500 in tax cuts. that is the kind of fuzzy math you hear when we talk about averages. you can throw at averages all you want, but averages doesn't mean everybody gets the benefit and that's for sure not happening to make his achievements. the problem is working american families didn't get the great tax relief and that's why they don't believe in this law.
helping working class americans would think that it would be supported by more than just three out of 10 people. but it's not. it's usually unpopular. in my district no doubt the chairman had some statistic that is going to throw out about the average tax cut for an average family in my district. but that is just speaking in generalities. by throwing out these averages, you're clearly not taking into account that the average family in my district would get $8000 more in tax liability simply because of the cap on the state and local tax reduction. $8000 more in tax liability. they may have gotten some relief, but on top of that they are getting this huge tax bill. and while the average worker might see a benefit of $30 a month on their paychecks, that is more than the rising interest rates which affects things
extend on that, credit card debt, the kinds of things the working families take on to improve their situation. average families in my district don't need to worry because i'm sure the rest better at night knowing that the first $11 million of their estates are going to be over the past month tax-free to their heirs. and when i tell them that, they're flabbergasted and they know who got the benefit of these tax-cut and it wasn't done. if you have any doubt about that, the fact that the rich are doing so well under this plan, i have an article that i would ask unanimous consent to enter into the record if you have any doubt about who's getting the benefit, would point to the article that says tax change helps executive provide pricier planes. giving business executives a new perk. opportunity to did that the
entirety of your purchase and noticed the chairman if i could enter that into the record. >> without objection. >> my constituents might have been born but they were born last night. they know who's getting the benefit of this tax cut and it's not them. don't sell this to middle-class families or working-class families because it not. they know it's not. let's stop pretending and end the charade. but that may affect the bouts of my time. >> the gentlelady yields back. mr. higgins, you're recognized to strike the last word. thank you, mr. chairman. the corporate tax cut last year resulted in a one-point $1 trillion budget deficit for next year 2019 meaning that she will spend more than a trillion dollars more than the collective revenue. by 2028 come your annual deficit
will reach $1.7 trillion. the national debt will hit 29-point for trillion dollars by 2028, more than 100% of the american economy. with the reckless actions of this committee today, the federal deficit will be to point for trillion dollars in 2028 and the national debt in the same year 2020 will reach $33 trillion. a new debt record exceeding the debt to gdp ratio of 1946. that is an inflection point. but it's a distinction that the members of this committee who vote for this today will own. mr. barthold, the white house council of economic advisers, you should report in october of
last year seen a reduction in the corporate tax rate would increase average u.s. household income in the united states by $4000 a year and that would recur throughout the decade. is there any credible empirical evidence to suggest that this is happening or that it will happen >> mr. higgins, there's a lot of current study going on in terms of increases in wages and household income. i don't know of anything that addresses the point specifically of your direction. >> chairman about an hour ago that indicated under this bill before us today that mr. levin's district, a family of four will
save $17,000 of the next 10 years. according to the white house council of economic advisers, $4000 annual savings per household. mr. levin's family of four is out about $23,000. the larger point here is this is a cheap trick. this is fraud being perpetrated against the american people. this is a moral horror of death imposed in a generation without representation. ms. sanchez said that we were born recently but not last night. the people that were born last night will be forced to deal with the debt being imposed on them today. this is reckless. it's a responsible. i yield back the balance of my time. >> is shaken to recognize the surplus for a new mac thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to yield to
mr. reid. >> i think the gentlelady for yielding. since my name is used by my good friend from california, i would just like to ask possibly the gentlelady from california to questions. first question is when she indicates that her constituents are going to see a tax liability increase of $8000 because of the interaction of the state and local tax deduction, how she concludes that number of $8000? >> but the gentlelady like to respond? the question to the gentlelady as you indicated clearly that the tax liability for your average can situate between an increase of $8000 as a result of the interaction loss of the state and local tax reduction and i just want to for my edification how exactly you about that that number.
>> sure. the average constituent in my district, which is a working-class district gets about $18,200 in local tax deductions. so with the cap at 10,000, that is $8000 of tax liability the average constituent in my district that takes on as a result of this bill that was sold as a boost to middle-class families. >> reclaiming my time i appreciate the gentlelady's analysis because that is clearly one of the erroneous impressions going across the country because when the gentlelady indicates an increased tax liability of $8000 by constituents of the 23rd congressional district are under the impression their tax bill, tax liability will go up and that is not the case. what we're talking about here, ladies and gentlemen come as a tax deduction. not a reduction in your tax
liability. and so, for the information to be relayed for this committee by capping the state and local tax reduction, any above the $10,000 will ultimately result in a tax liability increase to a taxpayer is just false. it's just not accurate. it's a basic misunderstanding of the tax law i hear so many people across america under the erroneous conclusion that a tax policy works. >> with the gentleman yield? >> i will just for one moment. i just want to clarify and i think it's important, mr. chairman, that we make sure the information coming out of this committee hearing is accurate on this deduction because i have seen family after family, then scared that they are facing things like in my
district the average itemized deductions based on charitable state and local tax and mortgage interest direction of $16,200. other families come up to me at my town hall and stopped me on the street in the indicated by capping and $10,000 or exposing your tax bill of $6200. should i start saving for the bill that i think is coming due next year? i try to assure them and i say no, that is absolutely erroneous. that is absolutely false. that is not how tax policy works. when you walk or, when i walk as individuals through a basic tax return, they then eat, i get it now. also what we are doing in regards to this is if my advisors in if my itemized there's interdistrict advice of $16,230 we've expanded the
standard deduction to $24,000, they get the benefit of an additional approximately $8000 worth of deductions under the standard deduction that they would not be able to access because it was at 12,004 and 16,000 now. the point i'm trying to stress the value up to the gentlelady at this point in time that we've got to be careful that tax liability, tax reduction and tax credits or different terms and we should not be scaring people. all yield the last 20 seconds to my friend. >> thank you. like to respond to that. i would respond by saying the following that when you cap the average reduction of $10,000, that's $8000 in deductions that is now considered taxable income. >> reclaiming my time -- >> their tax rate goes up by the marginal rate. >> the time is expired.
>> i would like the gentleman to explain that to the average family my district when their taxes go up. tell them it's a misunderstanding and how they calculate it. >> all time is expired. you're recognize to strike the last word, ms. sewell. thank you, mr. chairman. 10 months ago is that you're hoping to mark up a tax reform bill that would be bipartisan and promote sustainable growth in our economy. i have to tell you as excited about the prospects for $9 a member of the house ways and means committee. i didn't think we had opportunity to do something truly bipartisan and it would help all american people. the democrats on this committee were reduced to being spectators as republicans push through a reckless tax bill that was poorly designed, provided huge windfall games to wealthy investors, failed to raise wages and promote benefits for workers in a significant way of plunging us further into debt to invest
our future and provide for her children and create jobs. mr. chairman, gill recalled not a single democratic effort to improve the tax bill was except good. republican taxon became a missed opportunity for those we were true tax reform for 40 years in a huge betrayal for middle-class and working-class families left with a tab that they and their children will be paying off for generations to come. now we are hearing the same place less than a year later been asked to consider a bill that will double down the trail and put hard-working families that are working every day to make ends meet further into debt. i believe that this first tax bill process to $.3 trillion. we were told today we don't know how much this to point no tax
bill or tax sham of a bill that actually cost. i can tell you, though, the first tax bill was supported by exaggeration and i believe outright lies. this tax cut would pay for itself but somehow we don't have to actually have it paid for his ludicrous. the folks they represent have been waiting for trickle-down economics to trickle down to them for such a long time that they don't believe it. i can tell you what to several of my town hall meetings. >> at the gentlelady will suspend. the room is getting louder. we want to be respectful to the numbers in their comments. ms. sewell can you recognize. thank you, mr. chairman. it is important that we remember we are representing all americans and when you do a tax bill that helps the top 1%, how is that truly helping all americans? several of my town hall meeting i was approached by constituents who said they were waiting for
their bonuses. all the extra money we were able to give to corporations that were supposedly going to come out in worker bonuses for increased wages. that never materialized. it was like them waiting again for this trickle-down economics to work for them. i have to tell you that want to make sure that whatever i do on this committee will not only affect the top 1%, but will really affect all americans. working-class americans, middle-class americans and those who aspire to be in the middle-class need an opportunity. but i think about the fact we're spending today, talking about a bill going nowhere in the senate, may not even pass the house. it's unimaginable to me we are not talking about infrastructure improvement and we're not talking about shoring up our health care system, that were not talking about making sure tush the social security trust fund insured up to make sure it's there for hard-working americans that need it most.
instead, we are doing tax reform to point out and i don't know how that's going to help the people back home i represent. i think this is a missed opportunity, mr. chairman. a missed opportunity that we could spend our time doing so much more to help the american people than tax to point no that's still going to be waiting -- the top 1% and not the vast majority of americans. i just think this is a colossal waste of time and the real missed opportunity for us to be able to show the american people that they're reasonable folks on both sides of the aisle they do want to do comprehensive tax reform, but actually would like to have an opportunity to have bipartisan opportunity to affect the tax code and incentivize that with which we want to see, which is higher wages, people having livable wages and the people able to have a tax code
help them with their liability and not hurt them. i know that alabama is a state that does not have high state and local taxes, but so many of my colleagues do. i know that the run of opportunity for people to homeownership and the like. so many things we could be doing i just don't see how the sham bill -- >> you're recognize to start the last word. thank you, mr. chairman. over the summer and the other commissioner and the doctors who lead the network of clinics in our region. among the sun is autism and i am professional struggling to pay for health insurance than a woman with big testing conditions who's worried about whether she'll have access to affordable quality care if president trump in my colleagues on the other side of the aisle continued to get their way driving up health care premiums in my state alone the nearly
20%. the mother, young woman in dr. heard from a our statistics ameritech sabbaticals. they are friends, families and neighbors. they're a constituent sent here to serve and across the country millions just like them. hard-working americans doing everything right in wondering if the folks in this body would have for so long been the most distinguished committee in congress have their backs. there is nothing distinguished about what contributed to those rate hikes they continue the assault on america's health care by president trump in this american congress including through version one of this tax bill. there is nothing distinguished about what is being done here today. we are talking about a conscious decision by my republican colleagues to put corporations over people. a conscious decision to let companies get tax breaks for moving jobs overseas while not allowing americans who must move
for work that same benefit. a conscious decision to flash medical expense deductions for seniors and families caring for loved ones with long-term illnesses just so corporations can enjoy unprecedented tax cut and shareholders can reap those rewards. in the months since the gop rushed through their deeply flawed to $.3 billion tax giveaway without any transparency or in part from the american people, we've identified at least 100 unintended consequences that must be repaired. einstein said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results and that is what this is. pure insanity. today's exercises a cynical one. it's one that encapsulates everything people at home town is wrong with washington d.c. politics is the preservation or put before the people who sent us here to serve them. then, their families in this
nation. let's not forget a few of the questions we are considering today are whether to permanently take away homeownership benefits for corporations keep their property ownership benefits wholly intact. whether to permanently take away benefits for individuals who move for work while corporations get a write up for shipping jobs overseas. whether to erode the medical expense deductions for families and seniors while the most wealthy can lower their tax bill to zero by buying private jet. you can't make this stuff up. so what is happening here. 54 days out from an important election. the clock is winding down and the players are getting desperate. they throw a hail mary and helps the magic. but the players here in this game are not russell wilson or aaron rodgers. the set of policies being enshrined in this legislation before us was a failure for the american people the first time
around and it's a failure today. so let's take the time to do things right this time around. let's put people first or let's make sure every american can live, work on a see a raise a family and retire with dignity. perhaps my colleagues on the other side of the aisle can own up to the misplaced values they've made clear by their choices the last time around, putting corporations first, people second. we can't afford to make a $2.3 trillion this take a $3,000,000,000,000.1. thank you and i yelled at. >> gentlelady nails back. mr. smith, you're recognize. thank you, mr. chairman. i have some letters of support from the documents to support for h.r. 6760 protecting small business and family tax cuts after 2018. i'd like to ask unanimous consent these letters are from the nfib, national federation of
independent business. the homebuilders come associated general contract or is, national electrical contractors association, the parity for main street employers, a lot of folks who are about helping the middle class a note or economy helps everyone. >> without objection. >> we are here to help raise wages and hope americans succeed in our economy. but instead, republicans are trying to funnel resources to those who already have the most. instead of assessing the damage caused by a tax the, fixing problems and thinking ways to address the income inequality gap growing everyday, republicans are doubling down on their failed trickle-down policies. this time they're passing another massive tax cut but the wealthy do not need by making the flawed individual rates per minute while once again
completely ignoring the needs of hard work and low middle class families. it has been around nine since the passage of the first republican tax gambit -- the corporate rate to 21%. that is more than enough time to start seeing the impact especially when we are promised immediate growth. so let's take a look at where we are today then. certainly corporations and shareholders have had a windfall profit. corporations got richer by billions of dollars and shareholders about to get a lot richer as companies are on track to spend a remarkable $800 billion on stock buybacks by the end of 2018. but our workers are still struggling to keep up with the rising cost of necessary items like ask items like gas, prescription drugs and health insurance and the corporations they work for haven't even give them the reasons they've promised. in fact, 4% of workers at
fortune 500 companies have gotten as much as a one-time bonus or a wage hike from the trump tax cuts. that is, let me say, 4% have gotten any kind of bonus and few if any have received the $4000 at the trump administration promised them. what is worse, some of the same companies are actually cutting jobs over 160,000 job cuts have been announced at 304 companies since the first tax and became law. there is an easy explanation for this and that is that trickle-down doesn't work. it never has been republicans know that. what's more we borrowed $2.3 billion as future generations of americans will now be burdened with in order to finance handouts to the rich. now we will vote again on a deficit exploding tax bill that
is ultimately another thinly veiled giveaway to the wealthy. this proposal would cut taxes by 32,000 or the richest 1% of the country of reducing taxes of $340 for the bottom 60% according to the center for budget and policy priorities. with tax one point no and to point out, the deficit and increase says to $3 trillion more. but the robbery doesn't end there. in order to pay for the pay for the scots and addressed the ballooning deficit, we already know republicans are planning to turn. they will immediately move to cut medicare, medicaid and social security. vital programs that provide support to seniors in their countries most vulnerable. just like last year's tax cuts, to point no will do nothing to
raise workers wages, create good paying jobs or reduce economic inequality. make no mistake today we are coding to make a deeply flawed and deeply unpopular law per minute. this bill is a feeble attempt to appease voters who are left out in the first tax and which cemented him off the true number one priority tax cut for their corporate donors. i urge my colleagues to oppose this bill and i yield back. >> the gentlelady yells back. thank you, mr. chairman. i just want to speak in support of the legislation we have before us primarily from the above making these rates per minute to give his certainty and predictability not only for families that is benefits across the district or minnesota or the country with more money in their pocket, but also for all businesses. i just talked to another
business owner and i got pulled up beside saying thanks for the tax reform. we need to keep making positive direction. the joint economic committee report multiple folks testify, but the whole team of economists that invalidated everything predicted to come through at the hearings we had come years of preparation for tax reform. what did the bsf. small business optimism is now at record highs. the fastest pace of wage growth that we've seen in this country in a decade and for the first time in history we have more job openings and job seekers. that's a good problem to have, but the problem we have to fill the labor force. i think what is most important is the latest forward. we make sure we've got this momentum going into the future. we want to do this on a regular basis. the provisions be brought
forward to make sure we are going to keep our tax code modernized with the most innovative, as is family-friendly on a regular basis is owing to continue to build confidence in our economy or continue expansion and excitement for middle and some families. i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. does anyone else wish to strike the last word? are there any amendments to the amendment? mr. pascarella, for what purpose? you seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. >> the gentleman is recognized. >> -- local and state tax deduction. >> thank you give mr. riker. >> reserve point of order. i guess the gentleman to suspend or the court distributes.
[inaudible conversations] >> i withdraw. >> the gentleman's point has been withdrawn or gentleman from new jersey is recognized for five minutes on its amendment. >> mr. chairman, my amendment would restore the full state tax reduction and stop the double tax put in place some homeowners, families, communities across our country with the egregious captain the gop tax scam. after deliberately targeting the northeast for the first tax bill like jaws, republicans are back to take another bite out of my constituents wallets. the sql tax scam we consider
today's further pulls the northeast by making permanent the limits to the state and local tax deductions. while republicans are looking out for their friends, while corporations and businesses get their false start, large families will see a significant tax break with this joke. a new jersey the average claim in 2016 was more than the 10,000 limit. 20 out of 21 counties. in my district, the average was over 18,000 in some counties more than 24,000. that means that the average taxpaying household and my district now has to pay income tax on an additional $14,000 worth of income without any increase in wages to speak of. is there a middle-class tax
certainly been taxed, that's an extra $3400 to have to come up with that tax time. that is a tax on the tax. they already pay on their property and state sales tax. that's a big hit for regular families. i don't think anybody could disagree with me on that. this egregious double tax is not just a problem in the northeast. in fact, towns in minnesota will be hit harder than towns in my own district of new jersey. cities like minnetonka, without the, the average salt -- [laughter] >> canaille of order, mr. chairman? >> we've always been hoping for that. >> the ever salt reduction in 2016 was under $60,000 with half of the households in this area cleaned the salt deduction.
50,000 additional income on this household, that amounts to a 12,000 tax bill for those families if they are taxed at the 24% bracket. after a 32% of jobs to $16,000 tax bill. attacks on a tax. oakbrook and west point from illinois. 60% of the families used to deduction and 2016. the average bear was over $30,500 to given how hard taxpayers, it's surprising to see numbers from illinois and minnesota vote for a bill that directly harms their constituents. this bill manages to give away $657 billion still takes homeowners in those communities. it is mind-boggling. a member would want to hammer his constituents like that.
some members like to talk about how great tax cuts are like some miracle drug that cures all ills. they usually leave out the details like telling their constituents that the new cap on it and local tax deduction and to be capped at a higher income level than they were before. forget about tax cuts. constituents in these districts will be lucky to break even or more likely face a tax increase. many property tax bills are issued and are due october the first. i ask my colleagues, how we are constituents feel when they find out they can no longer do.property taxes or state taxes on federal returns. this bill doubles down on the double tax. this is literally rubbing salt in the wounds, salt of our middle-class neighbors. and with that, i yield back.
>> the gentleman yields back. mr. neil come to recognize this become the amendment. thank you, mr. chairman. not only on behalf of the beleaguered taxpayers that are going to suffer because of what happened with the deduction, but also this is what happens when you don't hold hearings. this is what happens when you don't summon witnesses. this is why many of us are having individuals knock on our doors to say we didn't anticipate this, we didn't foresee that. we hope that there could be some moments of clarification. this is an issue that really would have been vetted fully if the opportunity had been taken to do tax reform in a true basis. instead, we chose but the objection of the minority to do a massive tax cut in 51 days without any witnesses without any hearings on this matter. but that. but that in the back my time.
>> you recognize this become the amendment. thank you, mr. chairman. let's be clear what is happening here right now with a republican majority engaged in today's political theater. it's political theater because this bill, the overall bill will never become law. we are here for theater. it gives us an opportunity to talk about the original lot that you did pass and one that has been very damaging element to it to struggling working men and women in our country. we are debating the gop tax and to point out, but in reality still debating when plano because the original tax scam was a flop with a middle-class families of america. why was that a flop? the gop tax scam is leading us to $1 trillion in annual deficits. the gop tax scam is giving up the bankruptcy mr. larson is that social security and
medicare. the gop tax scam hasn't delivered 4000 annual pay increases republicans promised us that would do the average american worker. in the gop tax scam is in fact raising taxes on the middle class to lavish tax breaks on the privileged few. the effects of a tax stamp become crystal clear when you see the republicans push a bill to decimate the tax break given to all americans are the local and state property and income taxes paid. so if you live in california or new york come you can't deduct all of your state income tax is anymore. if you live in texas or florida where the resume statement can tax come you can no longer write off all of your property taxes anymore. this is a tax grab affect in all 50 states, not red states, not blue states, but all red white and blue states of america.
to make matters worse, corp. can still deduct all of their state and local taxes. it's simply the middle-class families, hard-working middle-class americans, republicans and democrats who get shafted by this gop tax scam bill because they can no longer deduct all of their state and local taxes. this is why i'm a strong supporter and cosponsor of the commonsense amendment offered by my good friend and colleague, mr. price growth to roll back the sun working families and specifically restore the tax break given to working people so they can deduct the money they pay in state and local taxes. everyone who pays income tax to the state or city where the pay state sales tax will pay property taxes assembly with the tax deduction. this created to ensure working families are not taxed twice. the gop tax scam crashed the middle-class tax cut until 2026.
the tax scam to point out would make their aggressive middle-class tax hikes per minute in the middle-class families who are losing this deduction, the gop assault victims live in every corner of america. for example, tens of thousands of gop assault victims who will see their income taxes skyrocket in upstate new york in places like this vehicle in cayucos county and in the city of syracuse, new york. almost 100,000 families in this district claim the salt deduction in 2016 to reduce the federal income tax burden and as with an average of $12,140. some members like to talk about how great tax cuts are coming but they never seem to get around to telling can take joints in reality though we pay more in taxes. constituents in areas like this will be lucky if they manage to
break even, let alone be a tax cut. in reality especially with the loss of the personal exemption, many will see tax hikes and while the amendment may not win today in all likelihood it won't because we don't have the majority. and america's middle class will have the last say in just a few weeks. i asked my republican colleagues to stop putting america's working people, working men and women trying to make is the head of corporate special interest and pass this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. >> mr. thompson. >> are recognized to speak on the amendment. thank you, mr. chairman. i'll be brief. i want to associate myself with my colleagues on this side of the aisle who spoke about the need to pass this bill and praise mr. pascarella for having the initiative to introduce the
amendment. there's a few things you should consider. if the salt revisions and the republican bill continue, there is something that will happen in our districts across the country. the value of their house often times are middle-class folks, people working to get in the middle-class, the biggest investment they have is their investment in their home. the value of their home is going to shrink. it's going to be reduced. public services and every one of our districts to send and that is extremely important to the security of our constituents to the quality of life apart to chewing to the livelihood of our constituents to the future of our constituents. and if this double taxation provision that has been placed on our constituents by the republicans continues to exist,
public services are going to go down and most certainly by anyone's estimation, all of the data indicates such people as taxes are going to go up. our constituents taxes are going to go up. the services they get from government will go down. the value of their homes will go down. this is a bad deal anyway you cut it. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back. mr. larson, you're recognized on the amendment. thank you, mr. chairman. and just to underscore a point that was made about mr. neil with regard to the subsidy for a hearing in the process, one can tell just by the people in the room as mr. crowley alluded to
that this is kind of a sham of a proposal to begin with, knowing inasmuch it probably won't even be taken up any other body. but as mr. crowley pointed out, that still leaves in place the original bill that mr. neil noted that was passed in 51 days without any kind of hearing. and that is why so many resident and i'd like to submit for the record a letter from the governor of the state of connecticut come a letter from the department of revenue services, a letter from the attorney general, a letter from the connecticut cpas of connecticut, all of which appointed the fact that this is double taxation on the residents of the state of connecticut. and why so, mr. chairman?
almost 730,000 taxpayers deduct, take state and local taxes as a deduction. that's an average of 19,500 in the state of connecticut, which means even with your deduction that they are paying on average 9500 more. two of my talents in my district, kind of like glastonbury, the deduction can be as high as $30,000 a west hartford connecticut $27,000. the average each connecticut county is about the 10,000 cap. it is double taxation. it is policy at its worst. there will be a tax revolt when people learn more about this as the cpas are now just getting around to do it in the hope that there still might get as mr. blumenauer has suggested the opportunity for hearing for an
opportunity correctness, two of expert witnesses come before us and point out what will be happened. no member on the other side of the aisle who i believe would actually say they believe that some members that we should provide 5500 households in america with a $7 billion tax cut made through the estate tax code so that citizens in our districts can pay for them. it is a massive regional transfer of wealth that's taking place and done so without any hearings and done so in the most unfair and i know her attorneys generals were arguing comes to should only. this is what is so disconcerting in that setting about this to the citizens of the state of connecticut and i dare say on the east and west coast as well. and so, mr. chairman, i'm not
going to continue to be labor but we believe is a very obvious point, but want to make sure that for the record that those statements and ask unanimous kids than with the chair of the letters from the governor of the attorney general the cpas of connecticut all be included as part of the record. >> without objection, the gentleman yields. dr. davis are recognized to speak on the amendment. thank you, mr. chairman. i strongly support this amendment and i emphatically opposed the republican effort to permanently double tax illinoisans and tens of millions of other americans they permanently capping the state and local income tax reduction. according to recent irs data, 31% of illinoisans create a
solid deduction. salt adduction gave an average benefit of about $12,524 for illinois households for a total of 24 billion across the state. both the republican bill would increase the taxes on over almost 2 million illinoisans pay hundreds of millions of dollars. in my district, in my congressional district, over 102,000 households benefited from the salt, the vast majority of whom earn less than $75,000. it is surprising to see members vote for a deal that would harm so many of their constituents. indeed, the counties in illinois with the average salt adduction
values lake, cook, king county and mchenry county are all represented on this committee. so it's not just the chicago area. it is illinois families that are bob enough against the republicans sold on it. plenty of downstate families will lose out, too. david dunlap in other areas represented members of the committee. half the citizens and households in those areas claimed the salt adduction on average of $15,642. that's a lot of money. the republicans fault limit will encourage businesses to leave
illinois and discover businesses from locating in our wonderful state. why should businesses choose to subject their employees to double taxation if given the choice. the salt adduction is a bedrock part of the tax code since its inception because it recognizes that all levels of government need revenue to carry out critical services. the republican bill increases taxes for hard-working americans and threatens in a serious way public service. that is why the national governors association, the national association of counties, the national league of cities, the u.s. conference of mayors as well as all public
employee organizations strongly support the salt adduction ended my community especially the salt deduction helps keep housing affordable and that is why the national association of realtors support this deduction. i support the amendment strongly in your back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back here to send a message to speak on the amendment? ms. sanchez. thank you, mr. chairman. i can't believe we are here today for this bogus marker. the giveaway to the ultra- wealthy was not enough last time, so this time has come back for round two from a fake tax reform to point out. they cannot stoop any lower. here we are marking up a bill for wealthy in the country.
they will trickle down to working people. i hate to keep harping on the salt adduction, but it is a great amendment. the salt adduction is a middle-class provision, but in order to give insane tax cut rates to millionaires, victor conte and salt cap is enshrined again in this bill. over one third of taxpayers in my district use a salt adduction and these are wealthy people, but average families trying to save and plan for the future. i have heard over and over again that this is a red state blue state issue, but that couldn't be further from the truth. high cost of living knows no political boundaries. whether it's in los angeles county with $19,000. st. louis county missouri over $14,000 average for the roughly $13,000 deduction taken by tax payers in hamilton county, ohio. this is a profound impact on
working families. the combined effects of extending the salt cap, extending the mortgage interest cap, extending the limits on home equity debt and eliminating the casualty loss direction together raised $318 billion in the bill before us today and that is in addition to the $669 billion raised in h.r. one for a combined $1 trillion. the driver of the cost estimate is by far the component of these combined deductions. guess what, somebody is paying for the $1 trillion being raised from this bill. my constituents are. and here we are once again passing up an opportunity to work together to do something for america's working families. in this nation, we agree everyone should earn his or her wealth, status and privilege.
that is something each individual should earn on their own. we don't believe aristocracy, which hoards wealth and leads the rest to fight over crimes. the only thing these policies today guarantee is that adding at least $3 trillion more to the deficit over only 10 years and who picks up the tab? middle-class americans who are being priced out of homeownership. i strongly support the amendment to restore some balance to the tax code by providing average people with a better deal. the federal tax code is a country some of the misguided plan could be swayed us further from where we need to be. i want to thank mr. pascal for his thoughtful than that. i my colleagues to support it and maggie deal but also my time. >> dr. chu command you wish to be recognized to speak? you recognize. go for it.
>> i offer my full support for representative pascrell amendment to eliminate the cap on the state and local tax deduction. the cap on the salt adduction is one of the most outrageous aspects of the gop tax scam. it's not just money out of households all across america, but especially for my state of california. and for what purpose? mainly to give a windfall profit to the alter wealthy. over 100 years the salt adduction has prevented american citizens from double taxation, once at the state and local level and again at the federal level. the deduction has made it possible for states like california to raise local and state revenue to fund important services that ultimately improve the quality of life of our constituents. and in fact, the 20 cents says shows almost 80% of state and
local revenue goes to public services including education, and public safety. that is why state and local government organization, the groups that represent the people on the ground that make day-to-day decisions that impact the well-being of our communities overwhelmingly opposed eliminating the deduction. these groups include the national governors association, the national association of counties, the national league of cities, the u.s. conference of mayors come of the government finance officers, the council of state governments, the national conference of state legislatures and the national association of towns and townships. despite this public outcry, republicans ultimately cannot $10,000 in tax scam one to partially pay for corporate tax cuts.
to be clear, constituents in counties like my are footing the bill so that banks and corporations can increase profits and buyback stocks. and now, republicans want to make that permanent. in my home state of california, 37% claim the salt adduction in 2016 and the average deduction was 18,507 team. that is nearly double the cap republicans have put in place and while some claim the deduction allows the rest of the country to subsidize high tax state, the reality could not be further from the truth. california is one of only 13 donor states in this country, meaning they give more in taxes than they get back in federal investments in benefit. but i want to state that this cap is not just a blue state issue. it affects all of dates. for example, in 2016 the average
salt adduction was over $10,000 in 23 states including kentucky, nebraska, iowa, pennsylvania, ohio and wisconsin. so i urge my colleagues to support the pascrell mma to reinstate the salt adduction and ensure americans are not tax twice and that state and local will drive. >> wish to speak on the amendment? speak on behalf of the ways and means members. this is a great amendment. if you are wealthy or if you are a governor or state legislature who loves to brutally tax families and businesses, according to the very liberal tax policy center, this amendment of the kids a $10 tax cut for the middle class.
but they repeat that. it's a $10 tax cut for the middle class. the top 1% have a tax cut of $31,000 plus. 31,000 for the top 1% and that is because half of all this tax break goes to millionaires. i don't know if george soros needs another tax break. i don't know if robert de niro is really having tough times. my guess is they are doing just fine. this amendment favors the wealthy. it is unfortunately a huge tax increase as well. so this amendment proposes to tax their local businesses $800. driving our business tax rate, so again america will fall behind or can editors in the
world and again will continue to see american jobs go overseas. so it raises taxes on the companies hiring workers. it shifts money to the very wealthy and here is that the real solution is. i do have sympathy for members in california, new york and illinois, new jersey, massachusetts. your elected officials brutally tax small businesses and families in my view. but they have an option. these various states are seeing windfall sinners and local revenues because the economy is booming, changes in the tax code that provide them new revenue. so today, those same governors and mayors and legislators have an option. they can pass on new tax revenues to these very same families or they can pocket it. unfortunately what we've seen is these high tax states pocketing
the new tax revenue and not passing it on. not the million dollars families come up with the other families you hope to help. i strongly recommend to our members that we not support this major tax break for the wealthy and we continue to urge the legislators to lower their taxes. don't pocket these new revenues. pass it onto the families families and small businesses that deserve it. the question is on agreement to the amendment offered by mr. pascrell. all those in favor signify by saying aye. all those opposed say no. the roll call is requested. the clerk will call the roll. roll
[roll call] >> mr. chairman, before voting. mr. chairman, sir? mr. chairman, that is the most bizarre defense of what you're doing today. >> mr. pascrell, where the voting. right now. we'll plenty of time today to debate these important issues. how does the gentleman wish to be recorded session marked >> mr. chairman, may i finish the statement, please? >> after the vote, after we recess for these votes on the floor, when we begin to offer amendments strike the last word in question i will certainly recognize you. how does the gentleman wish to be recorded on his amendment? >> i'm voting for my amendment of course. [roll call]
[roll call] >> the clerk will call the roll. we'll report the vote. >> 15 yeas and 21 nays. >> the amendment is not agreed to. are there any amendment to the amendment? given amendment question mark >> and now you're going to give me a chance. >> yes, sir.. >> mr. thompson, do you wish be recognized? thank you, mr. chairman. the gentleman has amendment at the desk. >> reserve a point of order. >> the clerk will distribute the amendment. as the gentleman from california to suspend while the clerk a distribute.
recognized to speak on the amendment. thank you, mr. chairman. in october by district suffered the most destructive fire in californiaia history. another fire ravaged through northern california and it was the largest fire in california has reappeared the folks in my district aren't the only ones to see these sweeping and devastating fires. the car fire, which we did a moment of silence or on the floor yesterday was then representatives district and destroyed over a thousand homes in three firefighters died. the canyon fire and representative walter's district forced 15,000 residents to evacuate from their homes in the ferguson fired and representative mcclintock's district for nearly a thousand acres in two firefighters were killed there as well. we don't even have a full today because of
the disaster of a disaster of historic proportions. mr. rice and mr. holden are both at home in their districts bracing for hurricane florence. the survivors of disasters like these shouldn't have to come begging congress for tax relief in the darkest hours of their lives. they shouldn't be spared only if they're lucky enough to live in the district was represented by her committee chairman. that is why i'm offering this amendment to make targeted changes that will provide relief to communities hit by disaster. these are the same targeted changes that the chairman secured for his community in the aftermath of last year's hurricanes. my amendment would expand the deduction for personal casualty losses in the disaster area, provide for penalty free accessn to retirement fund, suspend
limitations on charitable giving related to disaster relief, provide a tax incentive for disaster related wage relief and ensure impacted families qualify for the earned income in child tax credits. again, you shouldn't have to be against scituate of the chairman ways and means committee to have access to disaster tax relief. the star shouldn't have to line up perfectly in order for you to get help. this help should be automatic. a key part of this amendment reinstates the deduction for casualty losses outside of a declared disaster. i've seen my share of disasters that don't meet the threshold for federal disaster declaration there has been nearly 5000 fighters in california this year since the beginning of september or through the beginning of september. if you lose a home in one of
analysis stating that most states should have a close look at their attacks ttructure that you are taxing your citizens too much and what they should do to not accumulate a windfall, that was your word in the treasury. new jersey has no windfall i don't think too many other states have windfalls. the reason why they have the taxes that it does because of the densely populated state that it is. think of new jersey without a transit system. it isn't south dakota but new jersey. if you don't have that transit system people cannot get to wor work. there's not enough word --dash room to build all the roads.
more people and more schools. if you use that wide brush to do away with the ability to deduct that is a very, very dangerous way to go. this deduction goes back 153 years. but this only was in the 20s we know why with the economy of the civil war. so giving states and counties the ability to respond to their constituencies so the federal government could not take all the money then you understand what this deduction is all about. it is almost sacred ground. in fact this is very different from the tax code itself since the mid- 20s.
i ask you to review your comments make is on the topic we are talking about now and with those tragedies that occurred for the entire nation i flew to your state. only one of two congressmen after the worst hurricane 100 years. and with all the volcanic canopies that replace the roof that had blown off. and the very people that we tragedies when it comes to sandy. i know who voted for and against it. every disaster in our country is a tragedy and now we are
witnessing another catastrophic hurricane to the south. with the consequences of a government that abandons them losing nearly 3000 lives importer rico to ravage that island last year that yet president trump refers to this as quote mac and incredible unsolved success. with all those lives lost and that is anqu incredible success i do not accept a federal response that lets so many lives be lost. to do the bare minimum today is a congress to limit our response to disasters or will we expect one -- extend to tornado victims when disaster strikes? is it expensive? you're darn right.
is it our responsibility? you bet. politics should never be the determining factor of who gets relief w and who doesn't. that is why i've worked with committee colleague on a bipartisan natural disaster. this bipartisan bill with not included in the tax bill also not in the bill before us today. the chairman of this committee will move forward without any debate or committee process to is expired.me >> i want to speak in favor of the gentleman from california's amendment. it makes sense and with thoseam beautiful congressional districts in the nation along the mississippi river inland from there many valleys in
those various communities nestled within it. unfortunately as pedophile as it is mother nature reminds us there is a price to be paid. we had devastating flooding through these communities throughout wisconsin. 15 inches of rain and a little over an hour and it only had one place to go. that was up and swift suffering over $200 million worth of damage 583 homes were completely destroyed or severely damaged and now people are trying to get back on their feet to a sense of normalcy. we will qualify for federal disaster but this was a gut check. they are not unfamiliar with flooding but the extent this time. to make sure they have a tax
code working for them rather than against them. the federal government tries to partner with them so those provisions with the business tax credits and those other provisions in the amendment is something we should embrace in a bipartisan a fashion. i know flooding wisconsin didn't receive a lot of attention like the wildfires out west or florence getting ready to slam into the east coast of our country but the small businesses know are less great we also know that fema does virtually nothing to help small businesses with natural disasters. if you don't get flood insurance or no federal assistance that is why these provisions that are specifically targeting small business makes a lot of sense.
it doesn't cost a lot it is reasonable it ist not unprecedented and other areas of the country we need a code that is uniform regardless of where you live or what type of natural disaster showed up on your doorstep. you don't know when it will happen with our own congressionalas district. i healed back one -- >> can i yield to my friend from new jersey? >> for the record with youre permission when the tweets of the president i of the united states on puerto rico the report that has just come outn the ascertainment of the excess of hurricane maria in puerto rico. with that graduate school of public health. and also to remind
and i yield to mr. chairman, texas newspaper. >> anybody else? >> and i appreciate the nature of the work we have worked on. to bring permanency to this section ofof the tax code and even though i just received this amendment that is a little difficult to support that in this format but to mr. pascarella and others there is some work we can do here to improve the code and i would encourage the chairman to consider the base feature what we are trying to do with permanency of tax relief and i yield back. >> you can now speak on the
amendment. >> i listen to my friend who says he agrees with this inr. principle but he has just seen it so he doesn't feel comfortable supporting it. well you voted for this before. and you just dropped a major piece of legislation that nobody on this committee has had an opportunity to go through in a granular form with much greater complexity them a friend from california offered. and as i mentioned at the time the bill to be passed with your original tax reform that was much greater with unintended consequences and to see that nobody on the committee fully understood. and now to refuse to take
something that is exactly what our chairman put in the faa reauthorization to deal with problems in his district and others and was appropriate to do something that you voted for for the chairman's constituents and others and others that strikes me as being ironic and unfortunate and in the west may not believe in climate change but also in the aftermath of the storm having some permanency in the tax code to deal with
these exceptional circumstances and with this administration fema is not always on top of it. so for people to have some tax relief is good policy. as good policy when the chairman did it. it's good policy now. and with further disasters looming it won't be any change or any different from the past to give the circuit --dash the certainty so i wish we were in a different state where this might be enacted but moving the principled house we can go forward when it is timely to do so.
i think that is somewhat hollow i want to see if my colleague otherwise i am happy to yield. >> you are spot on. we have done this before it has been enacted and should be applied equally to all constituents if there is a natural disaster in new york or oregon or anywhere else aal big fire or flood or mudslide or earthquake that does not rise to the level of natural disaster, those constituents should not be shut out. at my house burned down or flooded away and the ways and means committee happens to be working on a tax bill. maybe we can't get that stuff again. it should be the law for
everybody. equal protection under the law for everybody and you did an excellent job to point that out. >> i appreciate the gentleman ii understand that criticism that is levied againsto me but to illustrate the higher point in regard to the trust we need to work upon and to understand when we have an issue like this when we can. >> i am reclaiming my time. i only have 19 seconds left. >> trust begins and when you build that but if you fail to support something you voted for in thehe past and when you have forwarded for massive changes, you have no idea to use that as our rationale?
>> your time is expired. >> i offer my strong supportg to provide permanent tax relief we need this now more than ever. hurricane florence is coming to the coast of the carolinas. with little to no warning in the prospects that is one -- unsurmountable. to be ravished by wildfires in anab increase of intensity. four have occurred since 2012. already this year california has tracked fires that have
burned more than 1.3 million acres. last year southern california has the biggest fire with 280,000 acres but that was shattered by the fire in northern california 460,000 acres in each wildfire their belongings, their their homes and even their lives. october last year to wake up in the middle of the night to shouting and car horns just seconds after to seee what happened flaming debris ignited the shed in flames spread to the house within minutes there home and everything inside was gone. but tragically that story is
not unique and it took the lives of 22 people to destroy over 5600 structures. a few months later to experience similar destruction and evacuating his home in the night after seeing flames on a nearby hill returning the next day only his fireplace and what was left of the refrigerator and washing machine remain standing. the rest of his home at all belongings were destroyed. but they would only become more common to see 15% of all housing units have extreme risk of wildfire damage over 2 milliontr homes causing more and to veer hurricanes.
millions of americans in the path ofs c the storm that similarly americans from california and the united states face risk from natural disaster. whether a hurricane in the southwest or a wildfire it is a responsibility our government to help americans country recover and rebuild following natural disasters. to allow victims to pay more with access to retirement funds that casualty lost deduction makes all the difference to families and rebuildes trying to their livelihood. this amendment is so important all americans deserve a helping hand when they needed the most i urge my colleagues to provide permanent natural
fast relief for victims of upfederally declared disasters. i yield back. >> does anyone wish to speak on the amendment? i am to the point where i said i would agree. we can always do more and better. but last year within weeks and to address that devastation cost as well as california wildfire. it is the most largest aggressive response and in response my worry about this amendmentl the same as wildfire
as drought or wind damage from the hurricane but we have learned that they are very different that requires a tailored approach but i worry if they band and jurisdiction that they will be less responsive and will require the help each required tailored to those who need it the most. so i recommend the no vote. point of order. >> thank you for the courtesy to allow me a few extra words.f >> we are not talking about different things the victor
one -- victims in my district and those and in mr. holdings district with this latest hurricane their lives were turned upside down and lost everything. but there is nothingng safe. you heard us on the four yesterday saying that the fire was so severe it created its own weather pattern and there were hurricanes i'm sorry tornadoes, fire tornadoes that jumped across massive experiences of the area to light other houses on fire.
we are talking about the fire in october and talk about the fire retardant gun safe and when the fire came through it burned the house completely down that when they finally opened the safe, nothing inside was there. they just disintegrated because it got up to 2000 degrees all their important papers, valuables, guns, disintegrated. people's lives are turned upside down and as the responsibility of our government to be there when americans need us the most this is not r unprecedented.it you do the same thing in your district.
and with those disasters but i want to put in a plug for those first responders because it has been raised that fema has done and incredibly good hijob. and for the tax policy as it pertains to victims of disasters we will be standing in pretty good company i ask for your i vote and all of your constituents and i yield hack. >> the gentleman yield back the clerk will call the role.
[inaudible conversations] >> the gentlelady from california is recognized. >> my amendment is straightforward and logical the medical expense deduction gives a lifeline to families and seniors one bit of bad luck should not ruin entire your financial future my amendment simple makes permanent the republican institute of the adjusted growth or to claim that
deduction.an those that face high medical costs including those with life-saving treatment outside their health plan or with health needs by medicare. this is important for those struggling to manage illnesses like alzheimer's disease something that hits home for far to many families that i represent more than 1 million california claim to deduction and more than 600 of those earning 75000 or less per year. a nationwide three out of every four individuals claim the seduction are age 50 or over.re so to create a pass-through deduction would have 50% of the billionaire benefits but we cannot make permanent tax relief to health and the last
pay for prescription drugs or kata catastrophic healthcare cost?pt shame on us the republicans call hearted when it comes to quality affordable healthcare for all whether taking aim at coverage for pre-existing conditions it appears republicanss will start on -- stop at nothing with those that are saving lives and some hard-working americans are already facing high medical bills but that is just un-american. it is only further enriches the most wealthy from speakinghe up and trying to change that i urge my colleaguesit to support my amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. >> know i will recognize myself.
i agree there are a number of affordable care act taxes that had brutal consequences we have worked together to make sure they have good healthcare workers that with every person of health insurance insurance in america delay now we hope repealed medical device taxes so damaging as well so we do have a record of working together to minimize the most damaging taxes of obamacare. this is another one limiting 6% the trigger is the obamacare tax hike that failed so the affordable care act but what it delivered the premiums
for most americans and then huge out-of-pocket cost they don't allow you to see local ouctors and then you pay more out of pocket. so i do think it is important to provide relief with the tax increases we do exactly that by extending and delaying the obamacare tax hike for two more years. itit is consistent with what we have done in a bipartisan way to offer temporary relief from those that have been enacted into law. i think it is important to continue to delay the higher
obamacare taxes it increase of the affordable care act have been too high for too many families. >> we can sit and bemoan the affordable healthcare act but it provides real healthcare coverage for many americans it helps to strengthen the plan through their employers as well as what is easy to sit here and criticize and critique but we have an opportunity today right now with my amendment to make permanent the medical expense of deduction for those that have less than $75000 per year with chronic illnesses that require special care outside of what their medical plans cover.
we can give a 14% permanent tax cuts to corporations but we cannot help elderly and middle-class families struggling with focal cost? medical costs that eat up the vast majority of their income? it is an opportunity to do something proactive not just stand back to complain about other things. we have the power today in this committee to stand up to say we help to make life a little bit easier for those who are struggling. but yet it is easier for the majority of this committee to blame the aca to say it isn't working. that is us. but to do something beneficial and proactive with seniors and retirees those with extraordinary medical cost those that struggle to put food on the
table and their medication that goes up year instead then to blame all the ills of the healthcare system and to provide relief i provide it on -- find it ironic for those who want to purchase new corporate jets but they don't want to help middle income families that make $75000 per year? really? so in this committee in light of the fact we have not seen any real relief from people that struggle with healthcare cost so continue to see these attempts we have an opportunity to provide some real relief and it would be refreshing of the majority on the other side would join me to help me do that. i urge my colleagues to vote
yes on this amendment which is critically needed do not turn ndur back on them. stand up have a sense of pride for those who need to help the most did i yield back. >> as a point of order medical expense deduction is permanent today. and this bill shows the obamacare tax hike going at 10% so just to be clear the medical expense to duction did is permanent in the tax code extended under two-point oh. >> he withdraws his reservation. >> also the green amendment
>> you are directed to speak on the amendment. >> this is designed to end the cover-up of the trump tax returns policies to achieve the same result that i have attempted on five prior occasions it includes new findings from those notable developments of recent months and to make veryn clear not only dealing with a
self-described king of death but what continues to be someone who acts like wanting just to be king within estimated average lies per day seven 1/2 we know when he says something the opposite is likely true and that is true with reference to the tax bill so with the original regarding republican tax bill i don't benefit i don't benefit there's very little benefit for people of wealth he ignored the reality that 83% of this republican tax bill went to the top 1% of the wealthiest americans and trump and his family were greatly enriched.. it was estimated they would pocket more than $1 billion from that tax sham. today's bill seeks to put in place a special tax break hidden until late in the legislative process not approved initially but only coming out in the conference
committee tailored to make realni estate moguls like trump a little bit richer never before in american history has a president stood to gain so much for himself from that legislation he promoted we don't know if that benefit will be bigly or just huge until we uncover the tax returns. one revelation after another there is a greater need to see what he is hiding in those returns and those with a 500 business entities that stretch to manhattan to iser by shawn. leading directly before us today nothing we could consider more important to the integrity of our tax code that the faith they have in our democracy he has surrounded himself with tax evasion which
friends who decide they are law and those that afford to pick up the slack because it will have fancy tax lawyers in response to his campaign manager trump called him a brave man deserving of respect and even complained about the justice department pursuing this criminal tax evasion. the chief financial officer reportedly has been granted to investigate potential crimes by the trump foundation even richard nixon invited the joint committee to review his tax returns explainingen that people have got to know whether or not there president is a crook. i believe corruption pervades and permeates this administration and we need to
know oversight has become overlooked as an overlooking the administration's misconduct the tax returns have been reviewed and told us he got the good housekeeping seal of approval that he has no business dealing with the russians and who provided the review? his personal lawap firm that just received a prestigious honor to be named russia law firm of the year. ii am only asking this committee do for the american people what the russian law firm of the year did for mr. trump. before we accept one dime of additional tax breaks we must to obtain and return these by line by line. i believe as tax returns he really putting america first or trump first in his family second and russia third.
i yield back. >> under the house rules remarks may not include a personal attack on a member or on the president sumac i make a point of order to the amendment it is not germane to the amendment as a substitute it violates high house rule 16 because the conditions and effectiveness of the underlying bill with the unrelated condition. >> would you like to speak on the point of order? >> you have drawn this bill only relating to individuals those that happen to be the commander -- in chief of our country, the president has a return to make available and has failed to do so and they
have the ability to request that return and i would yield to mr. pascarella who has diligently pursued this crmatter. >> it is now unindicted co-conspirator to leave no stone unturned. and compliance with the tax law 2017. asking the both of us to do on a nine partisans --dash it is all to come out in the end
when the personal lawyer pleaded guilty in the u.s. district court with five counts of tax evasion. one account making false statements and two cause the unlawful corporation contributionf at the request of a candidate michael coleman paid off the presidents paramore in the national enquirer for a story about another affair with another woman and former playboy model. and then to be written off on mr. trump's taxes.
to have a right and duty with there's any conflicts of interest of any member of the's executive branch of government of 61031923 in 1925. the senate finance committee and the joint committee for taxation there is credible evidence those that engage in money laundering. those unlawful institutions we know they have a history of money laundering because they were fineded by the irs. there was a history of tax
avoidance to be complicit in money laundering schemes, you cannot make this up my colleagues thinking out checking out those tax returns is overreach just like those 50 tax returns from six years ago. that's not why i'm here to talk today. we need to know how the president personallyar benefited the tax policies that he himself has signed into law that is a reasonable look in oversight. this is what checks and balances mean for the democrat republican that's a our responsibility. it should be agree just abuse of power that they are even unwilling to consider it the attorney general also filed
against the donald j trump y foundation and the board of directors with state and federal laws by governing charities use the foundation as a slush fund for political favors. >> sense we are down just to few seconds i will reclaim part of it you can reach out for technicalities to try to block a vote the rule that you cited has no merit point of order has no merit the only condition posed here is did the committee do his job which it is authorized to d do. >> your time isho expired i prepared to move i will note that this amendment while not germane we have never been in the business of targeting tax returns of single individuals we are not about to start now if congress can use its powers for political purposes and
prevents congress for doing the same for average americans privacy and civil liberties the house wanes and committing committee this is a new and dangerous precedent it is not germane with the effectiveness of the underlying bill and the sustained amendment is not an order. >> the ruling of the chair. [inaudible conversations] 's been with the gentleman has requested a will call vote. the clerk rule.
they will be paid for by cursing in the city cuts to programs like social security and medicare. consider in 2026 at the tax provisions we are talking about will kick in. according to mr. robert greenstein from the center of budget and policy priorities, we estimate legislation would cost roughly to .9 trillion over the 26 -- 2026 to 2035. the first full decade with the unified. the revenue loss and cited by mr. pascrell earlier at commit time and baby boom generation would he retired him on number causing medicare and social csecurity costs to rise considerably. indeed, 2026 is the first year in which all members of the baby boom generation including the youngest will be eligible to draw social security retirement benefits. most of the year in which the oldest baby boomers will turn 80. the nation will need more
revenues to help meet these and other challenges, not fewer. and yet this bill the gop tax law insists on putting huge amounts of fiscal strain on both medicare and social security that makes that time the baby boom generation will need those benefits most. the 2018 w report the trustees r medicare and social security confirm the medicare hospital trust fund has spent three years closer to insolvency thanks to the gop tax lot in their agenda now becoming insolvent in 2026 instead of 2029. who are these trustees? who confirmed us? who are these people that came up withh this? labor secretary acosta, health and human services secretary a's are. the trillions they're adding or building towards their next goal, which is cutting medicare and that's where the rubber meets the road.
hear me, americans. the other side insists on calling social security and entitlements. it is not an entitlement. it is the insurance to pay for. how do you know this? check your pay stub. it's called fica, the federal insurancech contribution who's? yours. you've made this throughout a lifetime. it is congress assault but it hasn't been made actually found in in fact, the last time we did it was when ronald reagan was president and tip o'neill a speaker. i commend president reagan. in fact, i will commend president trump because at least he has spoken about not only protecting but enhancing social security while we can even have a hearing in this committee. nhso what we need to do is make sure we extend these benefits to seniors who have paid into a
system t that requires it, but they receive these benefits. it is appalling that so many women, women in this country who relies social security only will retire into poverty while congress won't even hold a hearing. your fellow americans, mothers, sisters, aunts, retire into poverty and we can't hold a hearing and now you're going to pass a tax cut that further is going to take away from them at a time that every baby boomer from the oldest to youngest is susceptible to this. this is a straightforward amendment. let no harm be done to these at least minimally without a report from the social security trust, the very people who work for and charged before we go forward with this incredible bill thatn
makes little sense to me. >> the gentleman yields back. does anyone else wish to speak on the amendment? dr. davis can you recognize. thank you, mr. chairman. i simply want to associate myself with the'r comment made y mr. larson and to point out as he's already indicated that there are millions of individuals who accept for social security they would be living in absolute poverty and millions of them are barely surviving even with a. and so, it is a protective amendment. not that i think we are about to go under or anything close to it, but i do think the assurance that social security will be there, and that we don't tamper
with medicare is worth the effort and i supportbe it in yid back. >> the gentleman yields back. you recognize to speak on the amendment. >> i want to thank my friend and colleague from connecticut, mr. larson for offering the simple amendment and to reiterate i want to associate myself with his remarks as well. very simply put, mr. larson then that would prevent any of these corporate giveaways that are enrolled in this tax scam from happening if they simply threaten the solvency of social security and medicare. i don't think that is a big ask in consideration of the testimony given by her good friend and colleague, mr. larson. after all, mr. larson said it is their money. they have entrusted within the
social security and medicare trust funds to accrue to their benefit in the golden years. itus is not your money. it's not my money. it is their money. unfortunately all my colleagues on the other side have forgotten that in the tax scam last year. and while i think we can have a debate on the lowering of corporate taxes, i think there was mutual agreement that should be looked at and debated at the question is whether or not it should be lowered as low as it has become is the issue of skepticism certainly on our side if not outright disagreement. we know that the passage of the tax bill has 30 shortened the life span of social security and medicare. recent report across
medicare found that the medicare trust fund had three years of it life eliminated in the last year simply because of the passage of the gop tax scam. so mr. speaker or mr. chairman, i have more comments than i would ask in reference to the time constraints we are under that i would ask to have included in the record and with that, mr. chairman i yield back the balance of my time. >> mr. pascrell come you recognize. >> mr. chairman, i want to make it clear in the form of a question unless there is a rebuttal to this, you vote no on this amendment, on mr. larson's amendment, what you're saying is i'm not standing to protect social security, medicare, et cetera appeared already reposed
a budget of 2018 out of the $64 billion cut to medicaid on page 47 of the budget. but the point of the matter is, i mean, this is just simple trigger point is for protecting the money people put into their own insurance plan for you. that seems to be pretty simple. unless you think of oversimplifying it then you have every right to correcto me. i don't think i'm oversimplifying it at all. cothat was good money, hard-eard money, putting into social security, putting in the other programs and all we're saying is don't touch it. don't produce the benefits of these people. that is not how we are going to balance the budget. and with that, all yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. they recognized to speak on the amendment. t >> mr. chairman, i want to join mr. larson and supporting this amendment. it's a good time and, it's
necessary. where are we going? we cannot vote to support protection of social security and medicare just fine. it's the least we can do. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. recognizing myself, in my view. dr. tran further, your recognize pure >> i strongly support mr. larson's amendment which would get security and stability by the social security and medicare trust funds before this bill could be enacted. reckless republican policies have endangered the welfare of our seniors by completing the medicare trust fund inn order to pay for tax cuts for billionaires and corporations. while the rich get richer, republicans have decided that it
seniors who must foot the bill. the republican budget released this summer would cut $500 billion for the medicare program purchase one of the many programs that would suffer in order to pay for the $2.3 trillion tax cut. while president trump is saying it is making medicare and social security stronger, the reality is public and policies in the first tax scam has drained three years in the life of the medicare trust fund and one year of life from the social security trust fund. and yet, this republican congress seems to be completely ignoring that issue. instead, we are now doubling down on the impacts of the first tax and to mark a bill that will cost the government $3 trillion further jeopardizing these critical programs. in addition to destabilize and medicare trust fund for seniors, the firsto gop tax eliminated te individual mandate which raises
premiums by double digits. right now in the court, the trump administration has refused to dip in the aca even though it is the law of the land. so i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. we need to get back to working for her constituents, our seniors are not multimillion dollars donors and corporations. i yield back. >> does anyone else wish to speak on the amendment? it's an election year. this is a scare tactic to your friends on the other side of the aisle who/$700 billion from medicare andho obamacare. this week i met with one of the operators of a nursing home in my world community. he said their biggest challenge is trying that with all the cuts ethat obamacare put on them. it's hard to serve our seniors in rural areas because of these cuts by your democrat friends. let's fact check a couple things that you referred to on medicare
uses outdid obamacare slow growth numbers. does anyone recognize the economy is growing so much faster today than it did last year in the year before. let's be clear here. social security actuaries made clear this year and 2018 social security trustees report did not say tax reform or social security. in fact this your individual tax receipts and payroll taxes are higher, under $5 billion higher this year and cbo projects that our economy will raise wages by over a trillion dollars over the next decade payroll taxes that help stabilize and fund social security and medicare. i urge a no vote on the scare tactic and i urge republicans and democrats to work together to actually address and save medicare and social security for the long term.
>> mr. neil. >> first of all i want to dispute the. argument be made after 17 or 18 months of a a suddeny that all of all has been righted. today barack obama took the oath of office and there closes in 800,000 jobs a month. when he left office there were 14.3 million jobs created on his watch. stimulus package at one time would have been accepted on both sides because of the conventional notion of economics that any downturn you do two things. you cut taxes and increase spending, both of which we did to repair the bush economy. the recklessness of those years for tax cut, the idea that you could try to $.3 trillion in tax is mr. lewis for tomorrow we acknowledge the 18th anniversary of afghanistan, a veteran.nd half theax then he turned the pages back a couple more years. so bill clinton, record economic
growth and i defy anyone to say the trump numbers so far have come close to the four years of the administration. 23 million jobs in for balanced budgets and yes we took the top rate and kept it there. record growth across the board, minority growth in terms of income went up. poverty rates substantially went down. so we can argue this in some cases based upon how we wish to make the argument to the american people. the idea of growth of four per 1% and one quarter proclaimed that is going to be a growth rate for the entire presidency of donald trump when you consider that obama had growth that was 4%. that is the reality of this. the notion that all of a sudden this happen on january 20th 18 months ago i to be contrasted with the idea that bill clinton
left i put $6 trillion of surplus is only put behind us by $2.3 billion in the repatriate tax act. all based at five and a quarter and he idea of job creation. there is anyone in this audience are watching who would acknowledge that there is any job creation because of repatriation or that what i'm about to say is inaccurate. the slowest growth since hoover herber was president. i yield back my time. >> gentleman yields back whatever time he may have. >> i just want to be very brief. >> if i may come a close on amendment and yielded that. we'll continue with the process. the question now, does the gentleman continue to reserve an order? the amendment offered to mr. larson. all those in favor signify byy saying nine. the post, no.
substitute? >> i've been amended at the desk. >> you are recognized. >> point of order has been reserved. the gentleman from texas to spend while the clerk distributes. >> it is not unique -- [inaudible] to lobby for time purposes to start? [inaudible conversations] >> the gentleman is recognized on this amendment and if he
wishes, there is feature mainly in fish e-mail address as well. >> thank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman. to solve his or her tax bill the trump administration told a number of whoppers, but certainly one of the biggest whoppers as this one of the executive office of the president on november 14, 2017. when they told us that this tax bill would increase average household income at least $4000 annually, $4000 every year as a result of this sorry tax bill. well, that wasn't enough for treasury secretary terry -- well, this amendment is only about holdingn. up to their wor. put the money where their mouth is. do not multinational corporations get any further tax breaks until republicans keep their commitment to deliver the
$4000 per family. the latest overpromised underdelivered to make the americans were expected to fall for is that these tax breaks for giant corporations would trickle down to families. their core argument was trust slashing taxes will inevitably lead to higher wages. no matter that large multinationals were already reaping his door profit and have plenty of cash to share with workers at their chosen to do so. like mexico paid for the wall, our trade wars can be easily one. about $4000 promised to working families is never shown up. with these republicans, broken promises really seem to be a broken record. so far corporations spend to reward shareholders to buybacks with wage hikes and bonuses. a little over 4% of all the
workers in america have been fortunate enough to receive even a one-time boost in pay. as it turns out, a rising tide doesn't lift all boats, not a stagnant wages keep working families anchored to thee botto. the tax bill exploded the debt to shower the top 1% for tax breaks. this amendment turns off the spigot until american workers can get just a little step. the spigot to this amendment were shot off, has been asked visibly a pipeline in the treasuries of the largest multinational corporations. for years, armies and tax lawyers and clever accountants made projects earned here in america with the help of our american infrastructure and educated workforce disappear into the books offshore of violent tax havens. this went that if these multinationals were given a huge discount that have to pay for profits shifted to america through the tax loophole islands
that they'd invest in america. there were a few problems with that. much of tou that cash is still e in america just moved to a different account to avoid the taxil lien in the second problem was history. this committee did the same thing in 2004, had the same results. wealthy shareholders as well. ceos did well. jobs were cut. this time around, even the economist at goldman sachs were fooled nor was the federal reserve. they've made it clear that we will see littleis investment in that the money is being put in to stock buybacks, nodded to increasing the average household in come of american households. among the multinationals that repatriated the most cash, the federal reserve found no noticeable surge in investment. failing to deliver the $4000
promised for public transit is built today now proposing to do some day and seven years from now for the middle class here seven years from now this bill would lock into the tax code that republicans have read already in favor of the wealthy few at the expense of working families thesew provisions about delivery. the $4000 or much of anything else. instead of continuing to reward a few, the multinational corporations the most aggressively shiftst profits offshore to dodge taxes, what turn up the spigot until we see the $4000 increased the trump administration promised and i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. >> mr. chairman, i make an point of order to the amendment because it's not germane in the order a substitute. the amendment violates house bill 16: seven because the amendment makes causes of the underlying amendment conditional
on unrelated analysis. >> the amendment is not germane because it violates house rules 16 caused seven with the underlying bill unrelated analysis by joint committee and the point of order is sustained. >> the amendment is not in order. >> on that i would press a record vote in only asked the committee to do its job. >> you indicated that was the only recorded vote. >> no, it wasn't. i come by remarks. >> no, we are good. the question is on the motion. -questions on the motion that e church really. all those in favor signify by saying i code. oppose, no. [laughter] the table is agreed to. recorded roll call is requested. the clerk will call the roll.
[roll call] >> the clerk will report the vote. >> 21 yeas, 16 subs tix. >> devotion to the table is agreed to. if there are no further amendments, questions on the adoption of the amendment of the substitute. all is in favor signify by saying aye. those opposed, no. the nature of the substitute is agreed to. i'll recognize mr. johnson. for the purpose of offering a motion.
>> mr. chairman, i have moved favorable reporting 6760 as to the house of representatives. >> h.r. 6760 ased amended. all those in favor signify by saying aye. s.those opposed no. the motion is agreed to h.r. 6760 as amended. the rollcall is requested that the clerk will call the roll. [roll call] [roll call]
>> the clerk will report the vote. >> 21 yeas and 15 cents six. >> the motion is agreed to h.r. 6760 as amended. report to the house of representatives of that objection be authorized to make technical and conforming changes to the bill. members have two additional days of supplemental for minority views. next order of business is h.r. 6757 from the field the same effect in 2017. the bill sponsor with an opening statement. >> i thank the chairman for this markup. nearly nine months ago was the legislative miles and historic victory for the american peopl. this new law has turbocharger nations economy to historic highs bolstered businesses of every shape and size and most importantly giving hard-working american taxpayers at everyis
income level more take-home pay. the evidence cleared and the facts don't lie, taxi firm has been an undeniable success story. the i package we discussed today is the logical next step for a committee to build on the enormous success that our country has been being paired among the commonsense packages or three players i'm especially proud to be a sponsor of h.r. the families of every background to prepare for the future. so many households receiving a bonuses and bigger paychecks thanks to the tax cuts and job site is a perfect time to make the tax cuts permanent and make sure americans have the financial security they need of anything like me have their way. this is about helping every american citizen enjoy happy retirement and peace of mind. for the record i'd like to submit a piece of market watch convoy has to do with don and
google had done it. this is something back home watching this are people listening distance will hear this. approximately 62% of americans have less than $1000 in their savings account and 21% of americans don't even have a savings account. now in a time when it seems we are making more money than was made before they enjoy incredible economic growth. we have to ask yourselves, why is that americans are saving? why is that pensions are as strong as they should be? the old average that my parents for years as we were growing up with not how much you make. it's how much you save. so if the question becomes if we don't have 62% of us don't have $1000 in savings, talk about cash you can access, not the ability to bar a thousand dollars for something that may show up and you were expecting
it. it's incredible we're that far away from what is important to all of us to have stability. i would say this to most people that are reaching their senior years, it would be much better if a little more bold to enjoy those golden years. if we look over trying to do, every thing about this the do withhas incentivizing hard-working american taxpayers an hard-working americans to start to do something to poke more away. and not to penalize them. as we go through this piece, today is disappointing to a certain extent. it is to be people say listen, every dark cloud has a silver lining. every silver cloud of the darkpl lining. something in here that people just aren't able to understand what is actually happened in the last six months or seven months or eight months or when we passed the tax cut.
i haven't had a gun, to be a guy you know, you are so be come a bit harder for me to get through life. the reason i won't make an investment in my business, the reason i won't buy new equipment or hire more people, the reason i won't educateny more people is in my wallet again. i would say look, what happensop here is fine. i think after watching the senate circus when it comes to judge, not, look at what we're doing today but said they may not agree in everything. which is what we all came here to do. i don't think there's any doubt in my mind we have the same goals. i love the fact we can meet like this and have that discussion walk out of here at the end of the day as they are people better off for the years we spent you m are not and i just hope that the message were getting across. i'm really looking forward to h
the debate. >> i now recognize rank now recognize ranking member nil for purposes of an opening statement. >> u. should i say that all the time about republicans. people talk to me about it. they're in your wallet again. thank you, mr. chairman. unfortunately today our country as mr. kelly correctly noted is in the midst of their retirement crisis. half of the american private sector employees, roughly 55 million mark for an employer that does not offer a retirement plan. most workers are employed by small businesses in the fastest-growing segment of our economy. too many workers reachch retirement age without saying what they need. retirement crisis in america's real and only worsen unless he makes a miniseries due more to encourage workers to begin saving for retirement earlier. as such i certainly applaud chairman brady because of his interest in this area. h.r. 6757 includes a number of bridges that will help americans save for retirement.
however, largely simple provisions i propose were not included in this legislation. they were well met by critics everywhere and the idea that they could not have been included shapes me. legislation generally would ldrequire all but the smallest employers for a 401(k) plan for employees or this bill would provide an opportunity to say work forhe millions of american workers. consider ideas like this one to address our coverage gap is mr. kelly noted at also be remiss if i didn't mention we also need to address the multi-player pension crisis as well. i'm disappointed a number of key provisions which are supported by business and aarp are missing from today's bill. i have three bipartisan proposals that are not included in h.r. 6757 or the first which i work with mr. bishop would encourage small business employers to implement enrollment in their retirement plans. automatic moment has a huge
impact. anincluding bipartisan proposals the automatic enrollment and expansion of small employer pension fund startup credit. also missing some key lifetime income proposals that would help america manage retirement and include an import retirement provision that's critical to the girl scouts and thee boy scouts and the number of religious organizations. the bipartisan proposals would do a lot to improve our retirement system and it's a missed opportunity and i still don't know why these are not in this legislation. to address the retirement crisis is critical on a bipartisan basis to develop solutions to help americans prepare for financially secure retirement. democrats and republicans join up their sleeves, which by the way during the previous discussions in hearings we agreed to.
it also means the retirement industry coming together to participate with retiree groups. a long history of a bipartisan issue i thought that i was embracing. now more than everer it's time o put it beside to address the requirement crisis. >> mr. kelly's point is an important one. this was the first legislative step in this process. we are committed to working with you, to recognize members of the committee and our conference and with the senate as well to find common ground we think america is frankly just not saving enough. there's good things we can do to help our businesses offer plans ofic my workers a part of god wl continue to keep the door open going forward. proceed consideration of h.r. 6757 pair 575 without objection the measure will be considereda read. the substitute distributed in advance along with explaining
appear without objection the subsidy shall be considered as red and considered base type for purpose of amendment. i now turn to john barthold to provide the technical amendment to the substitute and the changes made since introduction. as a member so the question until after his presentation. thank you, mr. chairman.tr members of the committee have before them three joint committee documents 73, 74 and 75, which describe the underlying legislation in h.r. 6757 the family saving factor than the chairman's amendment of the major substitute also provides the staff estimates the budgetary effects of's the proposed legislation. the chairman'ss amendment and nature of the substitute provides b clerical correctionso the underlying legislation. let me highlight just a few significant provisions, a number of which have been before the
committee before. amonge the provisions as relief from the so-called one.apple role applicable to multiemployer plan. it establishes the rules so there's no plan by one or more participating employers failing to meet requirements. a newer provision that members may not have seen before as there is relief for individuals who would otherwise be required to take a required minimum distribution after age 70.5 from plan for their ira. it provides the total account balance of the taxpayer or $50,000 or less that the taxpayer need not take the other why required minimum distribution for that year. the legislation also provides for the creation of universal savings accounts. this is an account to which any individual could contribute $2500 annually limited by the amount of compensation that they
earned. the earnings on that account would be tax-free in there would be no requirements related to the distribution or use of the funds from that account. it would just be a tax-free savings account. the legislation also makes modifications to existing law 529 college savings plan by modifying uses of funds in those plans. they would permit to his apprenticeship programs to be counted as qualifying expenses. it would permit expenses incurred for homeschoolingam of materials and supplies to count as qualified expenses. it would morerr generally permit the books, equipment and other needs of out-of-pocket expenses related to primary or secondary education regardless of whether the student was in public or private education could be qualifying expenses. and lastly, would provide up to
$10,000 of repayment of nsincipal and interest on higher education student loan could be a qualifying expense from the 529 plan. lastly, the legislation would create a new penalty free distribution from qualified plans in the case of a tax payer with a newborn child or an adopted child. it would permit up to $7500 penalty free c distribution andt would provide that amount of funds could be be contributed on an open-ended basis to the plan at a latter day. mr. chairman, that provides a brief description and i'd be happy to provide any detail that the members might have. >> thank you, mr. barthold. any questions for the amendment? >> you have the total cost of this bill before us today? >> yes i do, mr. kind.
7518, my colleagues have estimated the budgetary effect of this legislation would be a loss of $20,970,000,000 over a 10 year budget. fiscal 2019 through fiscal 2028. >> starts in fiscal 2019. >> fiscal 2019, yes. >> is there anyny to offset? >> among the provisions there are no provisions. they are all revenue losing provisions in our estimation. >> said no upset. >> correct, sir. >> h.r. 3596 had an original offset in it to replace a life expect the payout will in irate that allow significant tax avoidance among wealthy families commonly called a stretch ira. is that a part of the legislation at all? >> that provision is not an legislation. >> part of the original bill we offered premium for a variety of
charities and co-ops. >> that is the legislation before the committee. >> thank you. >> i go back. >> does anyone else have any questions about the amendment? does anyone wish to strike the last word? mr. doggett, you're recognized. >> how much time do we have? >> you're recognized for five minutes. thank you, mr. chairman. there clearly is a need to increase savings all across america. 40% of americans in a recent survey said they did not have the resources to meet a medical or other emergency of a mere $400. about 50% of americans, almost half of our country men and women do not have any retirement savings according to the gao. the only problem with this bill is that it's not targeted on addressing any problems those
individuals have. it is designed to help those that are already in much better shape. the retirement incentives that we have today by one study, 66%, about two thirds of the total tax retirement incentives go to the top 20% of americans. i don't reproachhi them. all of us i expect every member of this committee uses those incentives and we want everyone to have retirement savings. but you know, a lot of people out there have practically nothing. that is why reference to the last bill is so important to preserve social security and medicare. the goal here is to spend $21 billion, which is exactlyca what this bill does for a few hundred million one way or the other cops if it is to spend
$21 billion, why don't we target ever leave towards those individuals who need the greatest amount of assistance. i think like everything else be considered here today, republicans are intent on designing a savings account proposal to help those thatsi ae to have the most. the universal savings account would be a universal tax shelter for those at h the top. the average income we don't have a full distributional allen is, but the average income of those who make use of this bill is more than twice the median household in america. if you want to know what republicans thinkce about retirees, they don't have large investmenthi accounts. i think we just look at the budget and proposals to slash medicare to the tune of about half a trillion dollars. the full cost of all three tax bills we are considering today
and those that have been adopted win round one is over $3 trilln in tax breaks for the few republicans on future occasions that they are given the opportunity to move the making cuts to medicare and social security at that portion of americans, half of americans who lack resource for retirement rely on. that is why we are so concerned about all these bills. we would like to be able to work together to encourage more retirement savings. we need to focus that relief on those who needed them most and they have been totally left outt of this piece of legislation. i yield back. >> mr. paulson, recognize to strike the last. >> i'd like to highlightio sectn 302 of this bill identical to separate legislation that r i've authoreded h.r. 3767 as discussd 529 savings plans are very
popular tool to help their children attend college and for college expenses, 529 can be used to pay for tuition, books cover room and board, technology products like computers and laptops, but the list of qualified expenses is relatively short and withdrawing funds for any other reason results of those funds resulting being taxed at ordinary income plus a 10% penalty. many families may contribute to 529 accounts for several children over the course of many years and many families might use a combination of $529 in student loans to put one child through college while another child might receive scholarships or other financially that allow them to forgo the use of a their 529 funds in graduate without taking a student loans. in a case like this parents might face a situation where one of their children graduate college with a student loan to repay and their love for a thaddeus 529 funds and under current law they could withdraw
the savings, but they have tax and and penalty under earning families much ofy the value of the money.y. the legislation with this problemlt by x andy and a list f 529 qualified expenses to include student loan payments. it would allow family to use $10,000 in 529 savings to pay down your child's student loan. by doing this, families will take full advantage of hard-earned dollars and then help children mitigate the anxiety that sometimes comes with having student loans. but that mr. chairman, yield back the >> devotes her imminent. the committee will be in recess thel immediately after vote. we will remain until wel comple our work. [inaudible conversations] >> committee will come to order. we are in the process of striking the last word and i
recognize mr. johnson to start the last word. thank you, mr. chairman. first i would like to thank my good friend, chairman brady for including my servicemember retirement improvement act in this bill. this is my common sense measure to correct a problem in the 2016 nba that limits the ability of our guard and reserve forces to save for retirement. colleagues, america's guard and reserve forces typically have a rdvilian job in addition to their military career. and because of this, they often have a civilian 401(k) in addition to their military savings plan. the 2016 nba included military retirement reforms that reduce the military pension and made up
for this by allowing service members to receive matching funds for the first time. but guard and reserve forces who have already had the irs cecontribution cap in their civilian 401(k) are unable to receive their military matching funds at all. simply put, this will hurt our military's ability to recruit and retain the best and brightest and that is just wrong. my bill addresses this by allowing guard and reserve forces to contribute the maximum, to vote for civilian 401(k) plan into their military tsp. i would note that the irs already allows state and local workers as well as teachers tos do this. so with that the case, why
shouldn't our men and women in uniform he allowed to do the same? my bill is supported by over 30 major military and veterans groups as well as transamerica and the society for human resources management. i would like to submit for the record the letters of support from these groups. as a member of this committee who fought in two wars, i can't tell you -- i can tell you that the servicemen, our countries deserve the best and should not be penalized when it comes to saving for retirement. thank you again, mr. chairman dand i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back here does anyone wish to start the last word? mr. kelly, your recognize. thank you, mr. chairman. it just came to me as i was talking to you, one of the things i i wanted to point out,
for those of us that grew up in a situation where grandma and grandpa were there all the time and mom and dad were there all the time. one of the things i remember so clearly, one of the things they say all the timehe as we never want to be a burden to you kids. as a young person to say mom, dad, he'll never be a burden. certainly myself and my other siblings would be willing to chip in a matter what we needed to do. think about that for a minute. that generation which is called the greatest generation in so many ways for many good reasons, just think what they said. they never wanted to be a burden for the next generation. over talking about today is relieving the burden on the next generation by making it easy for people to go when retirement years in feeling that they have enough income to carry themselves through. everything in the piece of legislation enhances that. parts of this were in their and it comes to the fact that so
many people, so many people during their lifetime has made a commitment that they would never be a burden for the next generation. as we go forward, look at what we are doing to shore up those peoples worries and make sure we honor the sacrifices they made over the years. this is so solid. it just make so much sense. i appreciate the fact we are marking it up today and has some serious conversation. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. kelly. dr. davis. >> thank you, mr. cameron. only 39% of americans have enough savings to cover the emergency cost of a thousand dollars. the median savings of workers earning the median income of 54,000 in my congressional district is over 2000. median savings of women is 2000.
the median savings of african-americans is 1000 of latinas, 1500. get this bill bestows tremendous tax benefits on the wealthy who can stockpile tens of thousands of dollars in multiple savings account, leaving the middle class out in the cold. when hard work is one of two jobs it isn't enough for most americans to escape poverty because wages have stagnated for decades and the cost recovery from the great recession is concentrated in a small percentage of americans who invest in the stock market. when we know that low and moderate income families have a harder time leaving for college because they have less cash available. put away in a savings account, the republican solution embraces
the privilege and fails the middle class. what is absent from this bill is talent. the 529 plan does not cover child care for apprentices. one of the number one costs they face is training. this bill throws crumbs to apprentices by allowing 529 plans to cover minor training expenses like books and supplies. given that employers pay for coursework for apprentices, the remaining education costs are relatively small. this is why apprentice advocate asked for and why the original bill included coverage for child care.. yet, childcare is not covered in this bill. also absent is the jenkins kind permission to help middle-class
>> that help students learn, the republican solution is to allow the privilege of thousands of dollars of savings while working middle-class t families forgo these services. with 67% of americans say they will outlive their retirement savings the republican solution is family plate pays for association of a new child or adoption the republican bill are just corporations and millionaires tens of thousands ofre dollars but the middle class must take money from their retirement. government should strengthen the economic security of the
from wisconsin is recognized to speak for five minutes. >> we have been operating the retirement saving space with many provisions and ideas we have been working on our embedded in the legislation before us today. many of those provisions are not that is what my amendment is meant to address. some of those provisions i was happy to introduce my colleague from washington state called the save act and introduce the underlying bill that is the patient basis of the one fourth today we have received tremendous bipartisan support in both the house and the senate over 99 republican cosponsors and 50 democratic cosponsors in the house with a
comparable bill in the senate introduced by senators hatch and wyden. e address the cost of the underlying bill. it was fiscally responsible. and that many of us have been aware of for some time but doing this in a fiscally responsible manner. 62% of american families have less than $1000 in retirement savings accounts the number one cause of that is the lack of disposable income they are spending everything they have with the basic expenses so one way to address that savings
that was touted last year for passage of the tax break late last year hundreds of billions of dollars given to corporate america hoping some of that would trickle down in the form of wages unfortunately today that did not happen most of that is share buyback or compensation salaries very little goes to a wage increase or to save for their retirement one provision in particular with the underlying bill to provide some premium really for charities of co-ops around the country with an unnecessary expenditure and included in the underlying bill to the inexplicable reason it was stripped out at the lastha minute as were many other important provisions
that is lacking in this legislation. many groups have expressed o opposition for the bill with us today with the exclusion of that provision like girl scouts and boy scouts of america electric co-op the broadband association religious organization mr. chairman one of the major purposes in life is to make your life easier and that is what this amendment is to make your life easier scene i have to take so much heat or criticism by the outside groups by reasserting the provision that was stripped off for some inexplicable reason that is embraced on the senate side senator hatch and senator wyden want to be forwarded a bipartisan fashion if there is a classic definition of a layup the bill that we introduced is that
layup. i don't know why we make it so difficult to remove certain provisions without reasonable offset to pay for in a bipartisan way vetted by the outside groups do to be embraced by them to do that in a fiscally responsible manner. it is now almost to the point i am under the impression not only is the modern-day republican party not interested in fiscal responsibility but your hostile when you start to reject ideas to do it the wrong way rather than settling with a tremendous amount of debt regionally in over ten years is toof much -- too much to ask our children and grandchildren to pay this has been vetted and has wide port of the offset and it is ready to go and will make your life a little bit easier i ask for the adoption and i yield
back. >> anyone else wish to speak. >> i recognize myself i think a lot of good work has been done on this bill i know the house is working on retirement provisions the senate has as well but as you know tax measures begin in the house with the constitution we don't rubberstamp bills for thought and consideration to what that would be. this bill is a thoughtful approach in the first step to retirement b savings but it includes a number of provisions frankly thatt were not considered that i think for the committee things should as well. i've uses longest view this in the first step in the legislative process we are eager to work with you and others on the committee to find common ground and as we
move to the senate we will do exactly the same thing without collaborative effort is exactly what is c needed we are trying to encourage more savings as a young woman works for her father to inherit that savings for law would force her to get rid of them even if she needed those to make her family secure over their lifetime. we want more discussion of the impact on retirement savings from that provision. we don't rule it out we just want to deeper discussion on the issue that you i raised relating to the premiums like malter -- multiple employer plans. we agree it is important to have that proper level of
premiums that -- those that are too high impose the unappropriate burden of premiums that are too low hurt those workers and threatened that ability to provide protection and their beneficiaries we believe the retirement plans we are discussing in your management do have special characteristics and should be recognized setting the premiums for them. they should not pay more than the rich profile specific to this plan having said that we are not going to guess at the rate they are two important workers in my role electric a lot of these organizations will not guess it is simply too important and i want to
make sure that this lower rate i am certain will be set for the plans that i can work on just look at my work or straight in the eye to say we found a right way to protect your plan. so the approach that we took is premium levels for the charitable organization and those co-ops we are eager to receive more information perhaps there is a recommendation on this i don't know if there is like to know why because there is a lower rate that is appropriate when we want to set it for the safety and security of the workers at exactly the right level and frankly we are eager to work with you and others to develop these pension plans that are complex and we are open to finding that rate.
>> if i could have unanimous consent a letter from september 11 to those that are opposed because of this underlying issue. i like to insert that into the record at thisedte time.t >> without objection. i'm committed to working with mr. kelly mr. reed and the number of members on the committee with economic modeling to know the volatility and the whole picture so we can pick the right reduced rate with these programs. i will urge a no vote to gather appropriate information to settle on the right rate to protect those workers does anyone else wish to speak on the amendment?
to.e the? the adoption tenant all those in favor say hi? the amendment is agreed to. >> mr. chairman i move the committee favorably hr 6757 as amended to the house of representatives in a call those in favor? t those opposed? it will be favorably reported a role call is requested. call the role before. [roll call] [roll call]
>> the motion is a degree to those as amended it is favorably reported and make those changes to the billak there are two additional days to file supplemental positions or the minority view the last business, if i could ask the committee and the audience refrain. hr 6756 the american innovation act the bill sponsor and chair to give an opening statement. >> we last year we passed the tax cut jobs act and the bill for economic growth lowering tax rates across the board for individuals and small businesses and corporations to
introduce paul and immediate use equipment reforms benefit all businesses big and small for the economicr climate that what we see the result tax reform driving growth in the country we have an opportunity to encourage more new startups and businesses. the united states recently dropped of the top ten most innovative countries and the world new business formations have taken a dramatic downturn since 2008 recession between 1977 in 2007 the economy added 120,000 new businesses each year since 2008 it has added only 2000 each year. we should be committed to make the united states the innovation leader of the world
as a down payment to reach that goal with american innovation act two encourages entrepreneurs to take next step forward first it allows new businesses to deduct more of the startup of expenses with the american innovation act they may deduct up to ss000 of startup and organizational expenses when the new business begins and second the american innovation act preserves the use of new business valuable tax benefits like from the businesses early years it can be very expensive many operate at a loss they aregn used in later years when they become more profitable.n to find innovation and growth equity investors this may trigger limits on the use of valuable losses in the credits early years of operation with the american innovation act
from the shareholders without limiting the use of the loss of credits. now is the time to support the creation of new businesses and startup businesses on the american economy they are a significant contributor to innovation and job creation i encourage my colleagues to support the american a newer spy supporting the american innovation act. just yesterday thinking about startup companies watching the launch of apple there are many great stories like that and other companies across america and or 15 employees or less. but to mention the reality 30% of startups in their first year fail. 50% startup startup 66% in ten years many people put
everything on the line with personal guarantees or second mortgages we need to do everything we can to help them be more successful and this bill is a good start and with that i yield back. >> we now recognize the ranking member for an opening statement. >> question republicans had a once in a generation opportunity to work with democrats to simplify the taxai code to benefit small businesses instead they acted on reckless tax cuts for the well-connected.ea we have watch republicans double down to make permanent the limits of the state and local tax seduction the mortgage interest reduction and casualty losses we consider retirement savings bill and issue of utmost ioimportance to me but the majority squandered the opportunity to work together to address the issue and now here we are with a third with
a highly political exercise legislation that never receives the scrutiny it deserves in a public hearing. last year we saw what happened when that process resulted in a disastrous tax law almost every stakeholder meeting every problem with the law is raised in rather than learn from their mistakes they are once again movingg forward withh legislation with no oversight. they believe american innovation as much as anybody and we support small businesses are the backbone of our economy we would have enthusiastically participated in legislation to help smallti businesses deduct more startup costs we are helping incubators attract capital. that is not the process as adopted this pierced to be
dead on arrival and show you how serious the majority is about making law. the last few days in session republicans have to address rising healthcare costs and threaten pre-existing conditionsbe of the healthcare system they have done nothing to stop that haphazard trade policy andur today they go down these bills to nowhere so they would not treat these provisions like an afterthought of the tax bill we can and should work together with innovative startups to thrive in this economy they can and should must he better this will be considered red and open at this time along with the sheet
to explain that we are now open for amendment and the chief staff and f joint committee onas taxation with an emphasis on the changes made since the introduction.ha >> thank you mr. chairman with joint committee documents thatou despite the underlying legislation hr 6756 the american innovation act of 20 team on the nature of the substitute to provide the staff estimates of the budgetary effects of the proposed legislation that does make clerical error corrections to the underlying legislation it will take a couple of brief minutes to explain those to may expense $5000 of startup cost under a
separate provision expense up to $5000 of organizational costs that legislation combines those two concepts too increase the amount up to $20000. that second provision relates to section 32 revenue code with the ability of a change of ownership to claim certain amounts of net operating losses it was enacted several decades ago the legislation before you mr. buchanan described would have a tartup. for a business that would commence years from the date
that activity is initiated and would not count net operating losses and that startup. to the limitations under section 382. the two be happy to provide more detailed explanation. >> are there any questions? does anyone wish to strike the last word? >> i strike the last word i am excited work this committee has accomplished and put together with the american innovation act they should be the bok backbone of economic growth and a study by the making the global institute finds advanced economies lie on productivity to drive
economic growth america is no exception lies critically on innovation technological progressss to boost productivity which results higher growth higher wages and better living standards so we all stand to benefit we have seen troubling indicators bloomberg recently dropped out of the top ten of the innovation index for the first time in six years i believe this is not a result of lack of ingenuity would have a government framework often plays catch-up with industry to title leash on the best and brightest one important way to foster a friendlier atmosphere is to modernize our tax code to allow startups to base decision-making on the success of their ideas in the market force rather than tax considerations section three makes a down payment to accomplish that goal a startup company creating the next
life-savingis drug or technological breakthrough will operate for years without bringing the product to market without turning a profit over rating losses in hopes to carry forward when it turns a profit many do not make it through this initial stage those statistics were outlined the current section 3d2 rules discourages startups from raising capital because that could trigger an ownership ownership change to reduce thedi value of net operating lessons on -- losses this allows the exempt of startup losses from the time of incorporation until the and of the three-year period of section 282 p limitations it would allow
the startup to take on capital without worrying about the ownership change with the tax code to allow the new businesses and rather than the time about our tax lot to finish success. i have letters of support from the innovation organization entered toation i a the record. the families they being asked.
the neck and there are the adoption all those by i now recognize mr. johnson. so that question is as amended all those in favor the motion is agreed to visit favorably reported to the house? members have two additional days to file the supplemental or the minority views. with no further business the standard. [inaudible conversations]]