White House Cites Tariff Reports That Undermine Its Own Claims
Attempting to defend Trump’s tariffs, the White House points to studies that show they raise prices, cut manufacturing output, and lead to costly retaliation.
Our commentary is featured in top news outlets throughout the US and Europe, including The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, CNN, and Le Monde.
Attempting to defend Trump’s tariffs, the White House points to studies that show they raise prices, cut manufacturing output, and lead to costly retaliation.
The U.S. Constitution grants authority to Congress to “lay and collect” duties and to “regulate commerce with foreign nations.” But Congress has delegated its powers to set tariffs and negotiate trade to the president. For decades, the executive branch has used those powers to reduce barriers to trade and, sometimes, to impose tariffs in limited fashion.
Whether we look at it as consumers of these goods, or as middle-class workers who transform them, low-cost goods have been the underpinning of American prosperity.
Compromising on the timing and availability of expensing—or offsetting the revenue losses by worsening other parts of the tax code—would squander an opportunity to craft a fiscally responsible, pro-growth tax reform.
According to a new poll from the Tax Foundation and Public Policy Polling, more than half of taxpayers lack basic tax literacy, regardless of educational attainment, income level, or political affiliation.
If voters are being asked to charge state legislators with raising the equivalent of a doubling of the current income and sales tax, shouldn’t they get to know what the plan is first?
The Trump administration recently announced a new round of so-called “reciprocal” tariffs, ranging from 10 percent to 50 percent, assigned to nearly every US trading partner. There’s a problem with its notion of “reciprocity,” though. The White House’s tariffs are intended to be real, while the so-called tariffs it is responding to are fake.
Attempting to defend Trump’s tariffs, the White House points to studies that show they raise prices, cut manufacturing output, and lead to costly retaliation.
Congressional Republicans are looking for ways to pay for extending the tax cuts scheduled to expire at the end of the year. Repealing the green energy tax subsidies expanded or introduced in the Inflation Reduction Act is an appealing option.
The individual income tax has plenty of problems, but in some respects the tax has improved in recent decades. Unfortunately, several Trump administration proposals would move us in the wrong direction, including the president’s call to drop taxes on tips.
With the imposition of American tariffs on steel and aluminum imports on March 12th, the European Union was officially pulled into the global trade war.
Whether we look at it as consumers of these goods, or as middle-class workers who transform them, low-cost goods have been the underpinning of American prosperity.
President Donald Trump surprised many in the tax community by making the global tax deal a day one issue. His Jan. 20 memorandum gave his Treasury secretary 60 days to recommend interactions with tax treaties and possible protective measures to ensure the minimum tax rules have no force or effect in the US.
Policymakers are right that Kansas has an opportunity to reform property taxes while providing long-term relief. But one idea gaining traction in the statehouse — which would introduce assessment limits that artificially cap valuation increases — would be a step backward.
The U.S. Constitution grants authority to Congress to “lay and collect” duties and to “regulate commerce with foreign nations.” But Congress has delegated its powers to set tariffs and negotiate trade to the president. For decades, the executive branch has used those powers to reduce barriers to trade and, sometimes, to impose tariffs in limited fashion.
Compromising on the timing and availability of expensing—or offsetting the revenue losses by worsening other parts of the tax code—would squander an opportunity to craft a fiscally responsible, pro-growth tax reform.
If Republicans want a successful year for tax reform, they must put aside the extensive demands for niche provisions and, instead, approach this debate with a principles-first mindset.
A recent poll from the Tax Foundation found that most American taxpayers—regardless of age, education, or income level—do not understand basic income tax filing concepts.
If Republicans want to pursue this policy, they’ll need to answer some questions about what Trump’s promise means. And they’ll need to be careful that the idea doesn’t turn into a budget-buster.
With so much emphasis on politics and procedure, the actual policy debate suffers.
With war continuing in Ukraine, political instability in France and Germany, and the return of Donald Trump to the White House, this could be a year of major realignment for Europe. The tax policy mindset in Brussels should shift accordingly.
According to a new poll from the Tax Foundation and Public Policy Polling, more than half of taxpayers lack basic tax literacy, regardless of educational attainment, income level, or political affiliation.
As we prepare for the tax code’s “move,” it’s time to start cleaning out the proverbial attic of our messy system. For the sake of our economy, moves toward growth must win the day.
Tariffs are almost always the main issue connecting the tax reform debate with strategic competition with China. However, some provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) should get some of that attention, especially the 100 percent bonus depreciation and the research and development (R&D) amortization.
“Full expensing” may not sound like the most exciting policy, but it’s the strongest tool in our tax code to help our small businesses.
The US government’s $6.8 trillion budget is larger than the GDPs of Germany and Japan. Its roughly $2 trillion annual deficit is larger than the GDP of Mexico. And it has 441 agencies that employ more than 2.8 million civilian employees.