'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.”
Wrist Slap for CEO Who Defrauded USAID out of Hundreds of Millions
Former CEO Derish Wolff of Louis Berger Group, one of the country’s largest engineer contracting firms will be confined to his home for a year and have to pay a $4.5 million fine for helping to defraud the federal government out of hundreds of millions of dollars over 20 years. The fine represents a tiny fraction of the amount the company collected from the government.
Wolff, 70, was sentenced by U.S. District Court Judge Anne Thompson for leading a “conspiracy to defraud USAID by billing the agency on so-called ‘cost-reimbursable’ contracts—including hundreds of millions of dollars of contracts for reconstructive work in Iraq and Afghanistan” and for inflating overhead costs.
Related: U.S. Blew $500k on Melting Afghan Buildings
Federal prosecutors said the company, tasked with building roads and bridges in Afghanistan and Iraq, charged the government 140 percent of the actual cost for every project it did. That means that for every one dollar of work the contractor did, it received $1.40 extra. Louis Berger was paid more than $2 billon by the U.S. government for its infrastructure work in war zones.
Prosecutors said that between 1990 and 2009, Wolff and his colleagues inflated the costs of their work for USAID by telling accountants to “pad time sheets with hours ostensibly devoted to federal government projects when it had not actually worked on such projects.”
Related: Pentagon Won’t Verify $300 Million a Year in Afghanistan is Spent Properly
Beyond logging false work hours, the prosecutor said Wolff routinely instructed his subordinates to bill USAID for all of their overhead expenses—like rent at Louis Berger’s Washington office even though the D.C. office worked on other projects that had nothing to do with the federal government.
After two other company executives pleaded guilty to conspiring to defraud the federal government in 2010, Louis Berger Group agreed to make full restitution to USAID. It settled civil and criminal charges and had to pay $18.7 million in criminal fines and an additional $50.6 million to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act by significantly overbilling USAID.
After the Amtrak Crash: Finding the Money to Fix Our Infrastructure
The Amtrak derailment in Philadelphia that left six people dead and dozens more injured has already prompted calls for increased infrastructure spending. "This one is a wake-up call," New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said Wednesday on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. "We have got to get serious about investing in infrastructure."
There have been other wake-up calls before, and the dire need for infrastructure renewal isn’t news. Yet, as Politico’s Kathryn A. Wolfe reported, the deadly crash occurred just as a House panel was set to mark up a bill that would cut Amtrak’s funding for 2016 to $1.13 billion, or about $250 million less than the railroad service typically gets. (To be fair, it’s also not clear at this point what caused the horrific Amtrak derailment and whether infrastructure problems played a part or not — and the number of rail accidents each year has actually fallen significantly since 2006, according to Federal Railroad Administration data.)
Related: At Least 6 Die in Philadelphia Train Derailment, Scores Hurt
Even before the Amtrak tragedy, though, de Blasio and Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett, a Republican, along with some two dozen other mayors were scheduled to travel to Washington, D.C. today to press Congress for a long-term renewal of the federal transportation authorization bill. The current funding law is set to expire May 31.
Pretty much everyone agrees that it’s well past time for the country to repair and rebuild its dangerously dated bridges, roads, railways, water mains and other critical infrastructure. The hold-up has always been over how to fund it.
Here’s one suggestion: The U.S. has spent some $110 billion on rebuilding Afghanistan, including billions that can’t be accounted for or that the inspector general has found have been wasted. That’s a drop in the bucket compared to the trillions in domestic infrastructure spending that some have called for. Still, clamping down on that waste in Afghanistan, and on other money being frittered away, might allow for some spending to be redirected to other necessary and more productive needs, like domestic infrastructure.
That’s not to suggest we must entirely abandon nation building abroad in order to rebuild this country. It’s just to point out that Congress should be able to find the money to address our national priorities, something it has miserably failed to do of late.
A $180 Million Picasso: What’s Making the Art Market Sizzle
The art market is hotter than a hoisted Rembrandt.
Last night at Christie’s in New York, Picasso’s “Les Femmes d’Alger (Version O)” sold for almost $180 million – the highest price ever paid at auction for a piece of art. There were said to be five bidders, and the winner remains anonymous.
At the same sale, a Giacometti sculpture, “L’homme au doigt,” went for a total of more than $141 million.
On May 5, at the first major auction of the spring selling season, Sotheby’s pulled in $368 million. It was the second-highest sale of Impressionist and modern art in the history of the auction house, according to The New York Times. The top seller was van Gogh’s “L’allée Des Alyscamps,” which fetched $66.3 million.
Related: 6 Traits of an Emerging Millionaire. Are you one?
The haul represented a 67 percent increase over Sotheby’s spring sale a year earlier, according to Bloomberg, which noted that many of the buyers were Asian.
The May 5 auction was only the second-highest because Sotheby’s held a sale last November that took in $422 million.
And tonight at a Sotheby’s auction of contemporary art, a painting entitled “The Ring (Engagement)” by the Pop artist Roy Lichtenstein could sell for as much as $50 million, the Times said.
What’s behind all those staggering numbers?
About a year and a half ago, the columnist Felix Salmon (then at Reuters, now at Fusion) ruminated about whether there was a bubble, which he defined as often driven by FOMO (fear of missing out), or a speculative bubble, one fueled by flippers, in the art market. His conclusion: the art market bubble was definitely not speculative.
“The people spending millions of dollars on trophy art aren’t buying to flip…,” he wrote.
Related: Get Ready for Another Real Estate Bubble
Still, Salmon said he was seeing signs that the market could be turning speculative. But they may have been false signals.
Recently, The Wall Street Journal wrote: “Spurred by the momentum of several successful sale seasons and an influx of newly wealthy global bidders, the major auction houses…say demand for status art is at historic levels and shows no signs of tapering off.”
But why?
In an April 17 article, the global news website Worldcrunch asked Financial Times journalist Georgina Adam, who wrote the 2014 book Big Bucks—The Explosion of the Art Market in the 21st Century, why so much money is rolling around the art market and driving up prices.
“Rich people used to be rich in terms of estate or assets, but not so much in terms of cash, like they are today,” she said.
“This growing billionaire population from developed or developing economies has money to spend and invest,” said the Worldcrunch article by Catherine Cochard. “For many of them, art — in the same way as luxury cars or prêt-à-porter — is an entry pass to a globalized way of life accessible through their wealth.”
That is a development that the keen eyes at the auction houses haven’t missed.
Why Google Needs to Build a Better Bumper
Google unleased its self-driving fleet in real traffic and let the cars cruise a total of a million miles with back-up drivers ready to hit the brakes or take the wheel. The humans didn’t take control.
As it turned out, there were 11 minor accidents and no injuries, according to Google’s Chris Umson, who claimed that none of the fender benders was Google’s fault. He told the Associated Press that all the self-driving cars behaved well (not bad, considering the cars just got their learners’ permits). He also said most were hit from behind.
Not so fast, Google. Delphi, which automated the Audi SQ5, claims its car was broadsided by a Google car. Hmmm. Lexus vs. Audi, Google vs. Delphi—sounds like bumper cars!
Related: Driverless Self-driving Truck of the Future Will Crash Into Labor Laws of the Past
Other companies have permits to test their driverless cars including Daimler/Mercedes, Honda, and Nissan with Volkswagen and a host of others on tap.
This is not going away—and in the case of Daimler, they’ve extended the technology to trucks.
For older people and the disabled, who need a little help driving and parking, an autonomous car could be the difference between independence and a shut-in life.
If, on the other hand, these cars decide to “think,” we could all be in trouble.
Attention Autobots! Start Your Engines!
This Computer Only Costs $9
It's smaller than a credit card yet powerful enough to act like a super cheap PC. How cheap? It costs less than $10.
C.H.I.P. is a micro-computer that allows you to surf the Web, check email over Wi-Fi and play games with a Bluetooth controller. The minicomputer—basically a chip that hooks up to an external monitor—has a 1 GHz processor, 4GBs of storage and 512MB of RAM, according to its Kickstarter page.
The Next Thing Co., a company based in Oakland, Calif., began a Kickstarter campaign for the C.H.I.P. computer in May with a funding goal of $50,000.
Related: 10 Biggest Tech Flops of the Century
It has since blown past that goal, and by a large factor. The campaign has brought in just under $690,000 and counting as of Monday morning. The fundraising campaign ends June 6.
The small computer is designed for a mass audience, including students, teachers, grandparents, children, artists, makers, hackers and inventors, according to its Kickstarter page.
Raspberry Pi is another full-functioning, no-frills computer. Like C.H.I.P., the Raspberry Pi is basically a computer chip that plugs into a computer monitor or TV. It costs $35 and uses a standard keyboard and mouse.
Raspberry Pi teaches users how to program in languages like Scratch and Python.
This article originally appeared on CNBC.
Read more from CNBC:
Reward checking accounts offer savers up to 5% APY
Has Krugman been proved wrong on austerity?
How the 2014 CNBC Disruptors cashed in