Biden’s vow to not elevate taxes for many Individuals limits infrastructure choices

WASHINGTON – President Biden’s pledge not to levy taxes on households earning less than $ 400,000 helped him get elected and develop an administrative tax plan aimed at businesses and high-income households. Now that promise narrows the path to a bipartisan agreement on infrastructure.

Citing the promise and preference to tax businesses and high-income people, the White House cited demands for higher gasoline taxes and user fees to fund an infrastructure proposal of around $ 1 trillion. This opposition, combined with the blanket anti-tax stance of Republicans, has resulted in the Internal Revenue Service’s enforcement being considered as the primary tax option.

Mr Biden reiterated the $ 400,000 pledge during the election campaign to refute Republican claims that he would, by and large, raise taxes. Focusing on the top 2% of households who could pay more under his plans, he tried to emphasize an economic philosophy aimed at tackling inequality.

John Anzalone, Mr Biden’s lead pollster, cited recent polls from his firm ALG Research and Hart Research Associates, which show that a majority of respondents support a tax hike for those who earn more than $ 400,000 a year to pay for Mr Biden’s agenda would increase federal spending on roads, broadband, preschool and community college.

“Middle-class voters are pissed off that they always bear the burden,” he said. “The President pushed this forward as an item on the agenda and as an economic policy.”

President Biden’s infrastructure plan calls for non-traditional projects such as the removal of some highways. What the Democrats want for cities like Baltimore says a lot about the president’s goals in the next wave of development. Photo: Carlos Waters / WSJ

This policy has drawn objections from corporate groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which opposes corporate tax hikes but supports a gasoline tax hike, possibly coupled with a way to offset lower-income households.

“This is not the time to throw options off the table,” said Ed Mortimer, group vice president of transportation and infrastructure. “We think everyone has to pay.”

Now that Mr Biden is in office, turning that promise into politics sometimes requires hard-to-see distinctions.

“It’s not the most ideal way to do tax law, but politically it was a brilliant blow,” said Frank Clemente, executive director of Americans for Tax Fairness, a progressive advocacy group that supports Biden’s tax hike plans.

Administration officials insist that the pledge leaves plenty of room for tax increases that target exactly where Mr Biden wants them.

“This principle is not limiting,” said David Kamin, associate director of the National Economic Council. “It made it clear to the teams and to the people in Congress what the president believed, and also got us working on ideas that are consistent with what the American people support and that can potentially be implemented.”

The government has built the $ 400,000 threshold directly into some policies. The Stricter Tax Enforcement Plan states that the auditing frequency would not increase for households with actual – as opposed to taxable – incomes below the limit, a definition set to affect someone earning $ 700,000 but $ 100,000 USD reports.

The government’s plan to curtail the tax breaks on the carried interest income of private equity managers would ensure that those mutual fund profits are taxed as ordinary income rather than capital gains. However, this only applies to those with taxable income greater than $ 400,000.

Capital Journal

Scoops, analysis, and insight driving Washington from the DC office of the WSJ.

The $ 400,000 pledge threshold is usually based on Adjusted Gross Income, but not always. Some of Biden’s proposals – like taxing unrealized capital gains on death – would effectively broaden the definition of income, increasing taxes for some people who typically earned less than $ 400,000.

The government used the pledge to exclude gasoline taxes, which some Republicans may describe as an acceptable user charge rather than a tax hike. Biden advisors have also turned down electric vehicle charges as a proxy for the gasoline taxes that their owners don’t pay. Government policy is not driven solely by trying to stay within the parameters of the promise. Officials simply prefer to tax companies over gasoline, a senior Treasury official said.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki called for a mileage tax on electric vehicles, said Monday the president wanted the industry to grow.

“It’s a bit of a challenge, a bit like having both hands tied a bit behind your back, when one team says no taxes and the other team says no usage fees,” said Senator Mark Warner (D., Va.) Said last week .

After banning gasoline taxes, the White House has not given the same thought to who pays corporate income tax, which hits high-income shareholders hardest, but also middle-income households.

“I haven’t figured out exactly how to apply the promise,” said Kyle Pomerleau, a resident fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. “From my point of view, it feels very arbitrary.”

Economists estimate that corporate taxes are mainly paid by shareholders. Even if shareholders are the only ones paying through lower dividends or lower stock prices, anyone with a 401 (k) plan is affected. The corporate tax is less direct than the gasoline tax, the tax official said, and the administration needs to draw a line.

“Americans basically understand that there is a really big difference between raising taxes for the middle-class American and raising taxes for a large corporation,” said Mr. Kamin.

Mr Biden’s proposals include higher taxes on businesses and high-income households that Republicans say they cannot accept. Republicans, who argue that tax hikes would do economic harm, are ready to accept criticism that they side with the richest Americans. Democrats could later legislate tax increases without Republican support.

Including corporate taxes, Biden’s household would raise taxes slightly for the majority of middle-income households, though the group as a whole would receive a net tax cut thanks to provisions like the expanded child tax credit, according to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a project by the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution. Looking only at Mr Biden’s individual tax proposals, no middle-income households would pay higher taxes.

A similar promise was made by Barack Obama during his 2008 presidential campaign when the thresholds were $ 200,000 for individuals and $ 250,000 for couples. He then signed several tax increases that affected broader groups, including higher tobacco taxes and restrictions on tax-privileged accounts for flexible healthcare spending. He won a second term.

“Biden ran a campaign that was about honesty and reliability, and I would guess maintaining a consistent character is a key consideration,” said Vanessa Williamson, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and author of Read My Lips: Why Americans are Proud to “Pay Taxes.”

But, she added, a broken promise might not make much difference in a polarized electorate.

“It would likely appear on Republic attack ads, but that doesn’t mean it would have any impact,” she said. “What is definitely important to the elections is the economic situation, so adopting stimulating policies is far more important than any rhetorical commitment.”

Write to Richard Rubin at [email protected] and Catherine Lucey at [email protected]

Copyright © 2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All rights reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8