Recently, the Biden administration and a submissive media tried to change the meaning of “recession” in order to help their political cause.
Now, Dems want to reinterpret “tax” to explain how their tax-and-spend plan would hurt middle-class households as well as “the affluent.” Americans shouldn’t buy it, nor any other Dystopian or Clintonian attempt to distort simple terms and concepts.
The Joint Committee on Taxation published a study on the tax-and-spend bill the Senate enacted on Sunday, opening the way for House Democrats and Biden to turn it into law. Once the bill’s provisions take effect, Americans in all income categories will pay more in federal taxes in 2023.
Middle-class families with earnings below $200,000 will see their taxes rise by $16.7 billion next year. Families making less than $400,000 per year would pay approximately half of the $54.3 billion in additional taxes under the plan. Biden committed to not raising their taxes during his campaign.
It's gonna be hysterical when voters who thought Biden was canceling their student debt realize he gave them a tax increase instead.
— thebradfordfile (@thebradfordfile) August 6, 2022
Bloomberg received an explanation from Marc Goldwein of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget on the thought process that went into the JCT report. Despite the fact that the tax-and-spend measure proposed by Democrats would result in higher corporate tax rates, “ultimately, ‘people pay taxes,’“
"*" indicates required fields
JCT believes that corporate taxes will be passed on to individuals through reduced salaries or higher pricing. Inflation continues to chip away at family budgets, and real (inflation-adjusted) incomes drop. In other words, when families struggle to pay their bills each month, the Democratic measure would give them an effective wage reduction.
Goldwein proceeded with an assertion Democrats have made to deflect blame for these increased taxes: “Once you account for spending and other taxes left out—including household consumer tax credits for various energy items, lower drug prices, and health care subsidies—the middle class will be ahead.“
This argument has multiple flaws. First, 73.1% of Obamacare subsidy outlays are outlays, not decreased revenues. These subsidy payments aren’t tax cuts for persons who pay income taxes; they’re welfare expenditures on top of income tax responsibilities.
This reasoning is also dishonest. Biden didn’t say in 2020 that “middle-class people will pay higher taxes but get greater benefits.” He promised “no additional taxes” for families under $400,000.
Biden and the left aren’t only breaking a campaign commitment by redefining their vow. It’s an attempt to legitimize another government’s attempt to select winners and losers—lawmakers and officials favoring politically connected persons or those who engage in Democratic-approved activities, namely, household consumption tax credits for different energy products.
This isn’t new. Obamacare’s individual mandate, which penalized Americans who couldn’t afford health insurance, was not a tax hike in 2009. George Stephanopoulos called him out, using the dictionary definition of “tax” as compatible with the mandate: “A charge, generally of money, imposed by authorities on persons or property for public use.” Obama snickered and said, “The fact that you looked up Merriam-Webster’s definition of tax hike indicates you’re stretching a bit right now.“
Democrats misrepresenting their legislative initiatives says volumes about their programs’ popularity (or lack thereof). Tax increases during a recession will hurt Americans’ wallets, and they’ll remember it at the polls in November and for years to come.