'Tax Reform Is Hard. Keeping Tax Reform Is Harder': Highlights from the House Tax Cuts Hearing
The House Ways and Means Committee held a three-hour hearing Wednesday on the effects of the Republican tax overhaul. We tuned in so you wouldn’t have to.
As you might have expected, the hearing was mostly an opportunity for Republicans and Democrats to exercise their messaging on the benefits or dangers of the new law, and for the experts testifying to disagree whether the gains from the law would outweigh the costs. But there was also some consensus that it’s still very early to try to gauge the effects of the law that was signed into effect by President Trump less than five months ago.
“I would emphasize that, despite all the high-quality economic research that’s been done, never before has the best economy on the planet moved from a worldwide system of taxation to a territorial system of taxation. There is no precedent,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum and former director of the Congressional Budget Office. “And in that way we do not really know the magnitude and the pace at which a lot of these [effects] will occur.”
Some key quotes from the hearing:
Rep. Richard Neal (D-MA), ranking Democrat on the committee: “This was not tax reform. This was a tax cut for people at the top. The problem that Republicans hope Americans overlook is the law’s devastating impact on your health care. In search of revenue to pay for corporate cuts, the GOP upended the health care system, causing 13 million Americans to lose their coverage. For others, health insurance premiums will spike by at least 10 percent, which translates to about $2,000 a year of extra costs per year for a family of four. … These new health expenses will dwarf any tax cuts promised to American families. … The fiscal irresponsibility of their law is stunning. Over the next 10 years they add $2.3 trillion to the nation’s debt to finance tax cuts for people at the top – all borrowed money. … When the bill comes due, Republicans intend to cut funding for programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.”
David Farr, chairman and CEO of Emerson, and chairman of the National Association of Manufacturers: “We recently polled the NAM members, and the responses heard back from them on the tax reform are very significant and extremely positive: 86 percent report that they’ve already planned to increase investments, 77 percent report that they’ve already planned to increase hiring, 72 percent report that they’ve already planned to increase wages or benefits.”
Holtz-Eakin: “No, tax cuts don’t pay for themselves. If they did there would be no additional debt from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and there is. The question is, is it worth it? Will the growth and the incentives that come from it be worth the additional federal debt. My judgment on that was yes. Reasonable people can disagree. … When we went into this exercise, there was $10 trillion in debt in the federal baseline, before the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. There was a dangerous rise in the debt-to-GDP ratio. It was my belief, and continues to be my belief, that those problems would not be addressed in a stagnant, slow-growth economy. Those are enormously important problems, and we needed to get growth going so we can also take them on.”
“Quite frankly, it’s not going to be possible to hold onto this beneficial tax reform if you don’t get the spending side under control. Tax reform is hard. Keeping tax reform is harder, and the growth consequences of not fixing the debt outlook are entirely negative and will overwhelm what you’ve done so far.”
Steven Rattner: "We would probably all agree that increases in our national debt of these kinds of orders of magnitude have a number of deleterious effects. First, they push interest rates up. … That not only increases the cost of borrowing for the federal government, it increases the cost of borrowing for private corporations whose debt is priced off of government paper. Secondly, it creates additional pressure on spending inside the budget to the extent anyone is actually trying to control the deficit. … And thirdly, and in my view perhaps most importantly, it’s a terrible intergenerational transfer. We are simply leaving for our children additional trillions of dollars of debt that at some point are going to have to be dealt with, or there are going to have to be very, very substantial cuts in benefits, including programs like Social Security and Medicare, in order to reckon with that.”
Fast Cars and Rampaging Dinosaurs Help Universal Shatter Box Office Record
High-speed car chases, dinosaurs run amok and yellow, pill-like creatures helped Universal Pictures bring in more money this year than any other studio in movie history.
Universal announced Wednesday that the studio has grossed $5.53 billion in worldwide box office so far this year, setting an industry record. The Comcast-owned studio has pulled in $3.59 billion internationally and $1.94 billion domestically.
Related: ‘Jurassic World’ set to become fastest film to gross $1 billion
Three global box office hits -- “Furious 7,” “Jurassic World” and “Minions” -- were the most successful films for the studio. “Furious 7” and “Jurassic World” have each brought in over $1 billion already, with “Minions” expected to top $1 billion after its Sept. 13 debut in China. Universal is expected to become the first studio to release three films in one year that each took in over $1 billion.
And there are still some big films slated to be released by Universal before the year is out, including the N.W.A. biopic “Straight Outta Compton,” “Steve Jobs,” and the Tina Fey and Amy Poehler comedy “Sisters.”
20th Century Fox held the previous record for annual box office, grossing $5.52 billion in 2014.
These Women Are Now Earning Almost as Much as Men
That women earn 77 cents for every dollar a man makes has been chronicled and discussed at length, but a new analysis by economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York finds a far smaller gap among recent grads.
The country’s youngest (ages 22 to 27) female workers earn roughly 97 cents on the dollar compared to their male peers, when controlling for major and field of employment. For many majors, they actually earn more.
Any early advantage disappears, however, once workers hit mid-career, with men earning 15 percent more than women across the board. Even in majors where women earned more during the early years of their careers, men earn more by age 35.
Related: 10 Worst States for Working Mothers
Researchers point to several potential reasons for the reversal, including possible gender discrimination and women’s tendency to scale back their careers to bear and raise children.
“Because raising a family often requires more flexible schedules, those with family responsibilities who have difficulty satisfying time-sensitive work demands may face lower wages in these types of jobs,” the authors write. “In fact, in jobs where such time demands are largely absent, and more flexibility is possible, the pay gap has been found to be much smaller.”
For some women, that means leaving the workforce entirely. The percentage of women age 25 to 54 who are working has fallen to 69 percent since peaking in 1999 at 74 percent, following a 60-year climb.
Top Reads From The Fiscal Times:
Facebook Patents a Technology That Could Use Your Social Network Against You
All that data Facebook has been gathering on you and your friends could someday be used to approve -- or deny -- your application for a loan.
Facebook was just granted an updated technology patent for “authorization and authentication based on an individual's social network.” This innocent-sounding technology can no doubt be applied in a multitude of ways, many of them benign. But one troubling use of the technology consists of assisting lenders in discriminating against a borrower based on his or her social network connections.
The patent application explains that a lender can use the technology to examine the credit ratings of members of the social network of the individual who is applying for a loan. If the average credit rating of the social network reaches a minimum, pre-defined level, the lender moves forward with the loan process. If the average credit score is too low, the loan application is rejected.
Related: Now Facebook Wants to Know Where You Buy Your Toothpaste
The new technology raises concerns about potential unjust bias, but banks would most likely use it as an additional factor in the loan approval process, not as an end-all metric. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act imposes strict guidelines as to what factors creditors can use when determining whether to approve a loan. It’s unclear if Facebook’s new technology falls under the criteria the federal law defines – things like income, expenses, debt and credit history.
Another fear involves predatory lenders. People rejected for loans through this process would make a nice customer list for unscrupulous financial operators.
Some of the less worrisome uses of the technology include preventing spam email and inappropriate content and improving the accuracy of searches. At this point, it’s not clear how Facebook plans to implement the new technology. Let’s hope the social networking giant stays on the sunny side of the street on this one.
Top Reads from the Fiscal Times:
- The 10 Fastest-Growing Jobs Right Now
- Teens Are Having Much Less Sex Than Their Parents Did at That Age
- 9 Social Security Tips You Need to Know Right Now
Facebook Patents a Technology That Could Use Your Social Network Against You
All that data Facebook has been gathering on you and your friends could someday be used to approve -- or deny -- your application for a loan.
Facebook was just granted an updated technology patent for “authorization and authentication based on an individual's social network.” This innocent-sounding technology can no doubt be applied in a multitude of ways, many of them benign. But one troubling use of the technology consists of assisting lenders in discriminating against a borrower based on his or her social network connections.
The patent application explains that a lender can use the technology to examine the credit ratings of members of the social network of the individual who is applying for a loan. If the average credit rating of the social network reaches a minimum, pre-defined level, the lender moves forward with the loan process. If the average credit score is too low, the loan application is rejected.
Related: Now Facebook Wants to Know Where You Buy Your Toothpaste
The new technology raises concerns about potential unjust bias, but banks would most likely use it as an additional factor in the loan approval process, not as an end-all metric. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act imposes strict guidelines as to what factors creditors can use when determining whether to approve a loan. It’s unclear if Facebook’s new technology falls under the criteria the federal law defines – things like income, expenses, debt and credit history.
Another fear involves predatory lenders. People rejected for loans through this process would make a nice customer list for unscrupulous financial operators.
Some of the less worrisome uses of the technology include preventing spam email and inappropriate content and improving the accuracy of searches. At this point, it’s not clear how Facebook plans to implement the new technology. Let’s hope the social networking giant stays on the sunny side of the street on this one.
Top Reads from the Fiscal Times:
- The 10 Fastest-Growing Jobs Right Now
- Teens Are Having Much Less Sex Than Their Parents Did at That Age
- 9 Social Security Tips You Need to Know Right Now
This Is What America’s 'Dream Home' Looks Like
The dream home for today’s American consumer is just over 2,000 square feet and located outside of a major city, according to a report out today by Trulia.
Consumers polled by the real estate Web site said the top features in their dream home were a backyard deck, a gourmet kitchen, and an open floorplan.
Owning a home is still part of the American dream for 70 percent of those polled, down from 77 percent five years ago. The portion of Americans who want to buy a home one day was highest—hitting almost 90 percent—among millennials.
Related: 10 Luxury Home Amenities that Are Trending Up
Those findings echo the results of a Wells Fargo poll in June, which found that nearly two-thirds of consumers say that home ownership is a “dream come true” and an accomplishment to be proud of.
Despite the desire for home ownership, only 14 percent of those surveyed by Trulia said they would buy a home this year. Nearly 70 percent said they planned on waiting at least two years to make a purchase.
The country’s home ownership rate fell to 63.7 percent in the first quarter, the lowest level since 1989. The rate peaked at 69.2 percent in the fourth quarter of 2004, right before the housing bubble burst.
Just 36 percent of millennials who want to buy a home are currently saving to purchase one. As rents in many cities continue to skyrocket, however, homeownership may become more appealing.
- The 10 Fastest-Growing Jobs Right Now
- Teens Are Having Much Less Sex Than Their Parents Did at That Age
- 9 Social Security Tips You Need to Know Right Now