hoka shoes

Posts Tagged ‘ Americans

Biden: Americans will be “seeing for the first time” details of Jan. 6 riot during tonight’s hearing

President Joe Biden speaks during a meeting at the Summit of the Americas on Thursday.
President Joe Biden speaks during a meeting at the Summit of the Americas on Thursday. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press/AP)

Ahead of the House select committee’s Jan. 6 hearing, President Biden said many Americans will be “seeing for the first time” details that occurred during the insurrection at the Capitol.

The President said the actions taken on that day were a “flagrant violation of the Constitution” and that the committee’s hearing is going to “occupy” the country.

“I think it was a clear, flagrant violation of the Constitution. I think these guys and women broke the law — tried to turn around a result of an election and there’s a lot of questions, who’s responsible, who’s involved,” Biden said in Los Angeles at the beginning of a bilateral with Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Democrats’ billionaire tax would heavily target 10 wealthiest Americans, but alternative plan is emerging

Democrats’ billionaire tax would heavily target 10 wealthiest Americans, but alternative plan is emerging

WASHINGTON – Senate Democrats this week are preparing to propose a new tax increase that would raise billions of dollars from a handful of of the richest Americans, a policy so narrow in scope that the number of people it would affect is likely unprecedented in American history.

But criticisms of the proposal have emerged – including from at least one leading Democrat – and party leadership is still considering more traditional approaches to taxing the rich.

Senate Finance Chair Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said Monday he will “in nike outlet a matter of days” release a tax on billionaires that economists and tax experts project could raise more than half of its revenue from just 10 people, including Tesla founder Elon Musk and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. (Bezos is the owner of The Washington Post.) Estimates vary widely on exactly much money the plan would bring into federal coffers, in part because no such idea has ever been put into effect.

While Democrats have increasingly eyed the plan as a way to win the support of Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., who has expressed opposition to increasing the corporate tax rate, some legal scholars have warned it could get struck down by the Supreme Court. And while negotiations are rapidly evolving, Democrats are considering swapping the billionaire tax for a separate 3% “surtax” on millionaires earning more than $5 million per year, according to two people familiar with the negotiations who spoke on the condition of anonymity to reflect internal negotiations. Details remain very much in flux.

The competing tax plans show the difficult trade-offs Democrats must weigh as they try to come to agreement on new sources of revenue to pay for Biden’s climate and social spending plan – which could cost as much as $1.75 trillion over 10 years – by the end of this week.

The surtax on multimillionaires – originally pitched in House Democrats’ tax plan from September to pay for President Biden’s economic package – may prove easier to administer and less vulnerable to legal challenge. But the billionaire tax would fall on far fewer people and, if successfully implemented, could do substantially more to reverse the massive concentration of wealth that Democrats have for years called reflective of a dangerous increase in U.S. inequality.

“If there’s a sliver of good news, it’s that there may be at least enough political cohesion to target a class that clearly has a great deal of resources way in excess of what it needs,” said Darrick Hamilton, an economist at the New School. “When you see billionaires being able to go space and back for hobby and fun – in a society worried about floods on a periodic basis – that’s a problem.”

Billionaires have been able to pay very low effective tax rates in part because the value of their company stock holdings is not subject to capital gains taxes until skechers outlet they are sold. Wyden’s plan would amount to a major shift in the U.S. tax code by leveling a 23.8% tax on the increase in stock value – or “unrealized capital gain” – even before those assets are sold.

As a result, the plan would fall primarily on billionaires who have held onto their publicly-traded stock holdings – an easily measured and publicly identifiable criteria. Their private business holdings, such as Musk’s SpaceX or Bezos’ Blue Origin, would likely not fall under the tax.

Figures for how much the tax would raise over 10 years range from between $250 billion and upward of $500 billion. But roughly half of its potential new revenue would likely be paid by just the 10 wealthiest Americans, including Musk, Bezos, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and Warren Buffett, according to an estimate by Gabriel Zucman, an economist at the University of California. Several other tax experts supported his broad conclusions.

According to Zucman’s analysis, Musk would pay as much as $50 billion under the tax over its first five years, while Bezos could pay as much as $44 billion, according to economists’ estimates.

Musk weighed in on the proposal Monday evening, suggesting on Twitter that it could mark the beginning of a much more aggressive taxation campaign by Democrats. “Eventually they run out of other people’s money and then they come for you,” he wrote.

He also wrote: “Who is best at capital allocation – government or entrepreneurs – is indeed what it comes down to. The tricksters will conflate capital allocation with consumption.”

Collectively, the wealthiest 10 Americans own roughly $1.3 trillion, and the Wyden plan would require them to pay a combined $276 billion in taxes. These taxes would essentially fall on billionaires’ lifetime earnings. But, once paid, bluetooth headphones the billionaires would only pay further taxes on additional increases in unrealized stock gains. That distinguishes the Wyden plan from Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s, D-Mass., wealth tax, which would indefinitely reduce billionaire wealth every year.

Democrats have increasingly viewed the billionaire tax as a way to pay for the economic package in part because of the tremendous increase in wealth at the very top of the income distribution since the beginning of the pandemic. The top five billionaires saw their wealth increase 82% since the pandemic began, adding $370 billion since the S&P 500′s pre-pandemic peak in February 2020, according to calculations based on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.

These calculations are based on wealth as of Sunday, Oct. 24, but revenue estimates will evolve along with billionaire’s wealth. On Monday alone, the total wealth held by Musk skyrocketed by as much as $36 billion due to a new order of Teslas from the rental company Hertz.

The new law would see Musk and his peers paying orders of magnitude more than they had before. A June report from the nonprofit news organization ProPublica found Buffett paid $23.7 million in taxes from 2014 to 2018. He would pay about a thousand times that number under the new proposal. Musk paid $455 million over that time, the report found, or about a hundred times less than he’d pay under the new proposal. Bezos’ new tax bill would be about 10 times what he paid in the earlier five-year period.

“It is being written so that when nurses and firefighters pay taxes with every paycheck, billionaires, who have figured out how to not pay taxes because they don’t take a wage, they’re going to have to pay their fair share,” Wyden told reporters on Monday night.

But questions abound about implementing the billionaire tax. Steve Rosenthal, senior fellow at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center think tank, said it would be far simpler to enact Biden’s initial plan to tax capital gains when they are inherited – a proposal abandoned due to opposition from centrist Democrats – than create a new part of the tax code for billionaires.

Rosenthal also raised the question of how to ensure billionaires do not simply evade the tax by moving their publicly-held stock into more opaque forms of assets, such as private companies. Wyden’s plan proposes an interest penalty on privately-held assets, but such an idea is untested.

“While only a few taxpayers would pay the new tax, many more would need to value all their assets annually, including their privately-held businesses,” Rosenthal wrote in a blog critiquing the idea. “Taxpayers close to the line might move in and out of the new tax regime frequently. How would the IRS determine whether all billionaires filed properly?”

House Ways and Means Committee Chair Richard Neal, D-Mass., has also expressed reservations about the billionaire tax idea. Neal said House Democrats previously had looked at the idea and concluded then – as now – that “it will be a challenge.” Neal raised a number of areas to address, including what the government would do when billionaires had bad years and had taxes owed to them.

“I like the politics of it, yeah, I think it’s sensible,” he said. “I think the implementation of the plan may be a bit more challenging.”

Other tax experts say a conservative-dominated Supreme Court would be unlikely to uphold the new tax. The Constitutionality of a tax on wealth remains unclear, and it is unclear if the administration could successfully convince the court that the measure is instead an income tax – which would be permissible under the Sixteenth Amendment.

“If I were a justice, I would uphold it . . . But I’m not. Six Republican-appointed judges on the Supreme Court are,” said Daniel Hemel, a tax law professor at the University of Chicago. “There are lots of constitutional ways to do this, and we’ve picked the one Constitutionally problematic option.”

Zucman rejected the argument that the tax could prove complicated to implement. He said it “would be the most progressive tax in history,” noting the next closest – the estate tax – raises roughly $20 billion a year, possibly as little as 5% of the Wyden plan.

“For these guys, the truth is it’s so easy to enforce the tax because it’s so obvious what they own,” Zucman said.

Why Many Black Americans Changed Their Minds About COVID Shots

TUSKEGEE, Ala. — By the time vaccines for the coronavirus were introduced late last year, the pandemic had taken two of Lucenia Williams Dunn’s close friends. Still, Dunn, a former mayor of Tuskegee, contemplated for months whether to be inoculated.

It was a complicated consideration, framed by the government’s botched response to the pandemic,brooks shoes its disproportionate toll on Black communities and an infamous 40-year government experiment for which her hometown is often associated.

“I thought about the vaccine most every day,” said Dunn, 78, who finally walked into a pharmacy this summer and rolled up her sleeve for a shot, convinced after weighing with her family and doctor the possible consequences of remaining unvaccinated.

“What people need to understand is some of the hesitancy is rooted in a horrible history, and for some, it’s truly a process of asking the right questions to get to a place of getting the vaccine.”

In the first months after the vaccine rollout, Black Americans were far less likely than white Americans to be vaccinated. In addition to the difficulty of obtaining shots in their communities, their hesitancy was fueled by a powerful combination of general mistrust of the government and medical institutions, and misinformation over the safety and efficacy of the vaccines.

But a wave of pro-vaccine campaigns and a surge of virus hospitalizations and deaths this summer, mostly among the unvaccinated and caused by the highly contagious delta variant, have narrowed the gap, experts say. So, too, have the Food and Drug Administration’s full approval of a vaccine and new employer mandates. A steadfast resistance to vaccines in some white communities may also have contributed to the lessening disparity.

While gaps persist in some regions, by late September, according to the most recent survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation, a roughly equal share of Black, white and Hispanic adult populations — 70% of Black adults, 71% of white adults and 73% of Hispanic adults — had received at least one vaccine dose. A Pew study in late August revealed similar patterns. Federal data shows a larger racial gap, but that data is missing demographic information for many vaccine recipients.

Since May, when vaccines were widely available to a majority of adults across the country, monthly surveys by Kaiser have shown steady improvement in vaccination rates among Black Americans.

How the racial gap was narrowed — after months of disappointing turnout and limited access — is a testament to decisions made in many states to send familiar faces to knock on doors and dispel myths about the vaccines’ effectiveness, provide internet access to make appointments and offer transportation to vaccine sites.

In North Carolina, which requires vaccine providers to collect race and ethnicity data, hospital systems and community groups conducted door-to-door canvassing and hosted pop-up clinics at a theme park, a bus station clarks shoes uk and churches. Over the summer, the African American share of the vaccinated population began to more closely mirror the African American share of the general population.

In Mississippi, which has one of the country’s worst vaccination rates and began similar endeavors, 38% of people who have started the vaccine process are Black, a share that is roughly equal to the Black share of Mississippi’s population.

And in Alabama, public awareness campaigns and rides to vaccination sites helped transform dismal inoculation rates. A store owner and county commissioner in Panola, a tiny rural town near the Mississippi border, led the effort to vaccinate nearly all of her majority Black community.

Today, about 40% of Black Alabama residents — up from about 28% in late April — have had at least one dose, a feat in a state that has ranked among the lowest in overall vaccination rates and highest in per capita deaths from COVID-19. About 39% of white people in the state have had one dose, up from 31% in late April.

Health officials and community leaders say that those who remain unvaccinated have pointed to concerns about how quickly the vaccines were developed and what their long-term health effects might be, plus disinformation such as whether they contain tracking devices or change people’s DNA. The damage wrought by the government-backed trials in Tuskegee, in which Black families were misled by health care professionals, also continues to play a role in some communities, helping to explain why some African Americans have still held out.

“It’s less about saying, ‘This racial ethnic group is more hesitant, more unwilling to get vaccinated,’ and more about saying, ‘You know, this group of people in this given area or this community doesn’t have the information or access they need to overcome their hesitancy,’ ” said Nelson Dunlap, chief of staff for the Satcher Health Leadership Institute at the Morehouse School of Medicine in Atlanta.

When the U.S. Public Health Service began what it called the “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male,” 600 Black men — 399 with syphilis and 201 without the disease — were told they would be treated for so-called bad blood in exchange for free medical exams, meals and burial insurance. In reality, treatment was withheld. Even after penicillin was discovered as an effective treatment, most did not receive the antibiotic.

The experiment began in 1932 and did not stop until 1972, and only after it was exposed in a news article. The surviving men and the heirs of those who had died were later awarded a settlement totaling about $10 million, and the exposure of the study itself eventually led to reforms in medical research. Still, the damage endured.

“Few families escaped the study. Everyone here knows someone who was in the study,” said Omar Neal, 64, a radio show host and former Tuskegee mayor who counts three relatives in the study and who wavered on a vaccine before finally getting one, his mind changed by the rising number of deaths. “And the betrayal — because that is what the study was — is often conjured whenever people are questioning something related to mistrusting medicine or science.”

Rueben C. Warren, director of the National Center for Bioethics in Research and Health Care at Tuskegee University, said the study was a real example in the long line of medical exploitation and neglect experienced by Black Americans, eroding trust in the government and health care systems.

“The questions being asked about the vaccine should be understood in the larger context of historic inequities in health care,” Warren said. “The hope, of course, is they finally decide to get the vaccine.”

A national campaign led by the Ad Council and COVID Collaborative, a coalition of experts, tackled the hesitation. This summer, a short-form documentary including descendants of the men in the Tuskegee study was added to the campaign.

When Deborah Riley Draper, who created the short-form documentary, interviewed descendants of the Tuskegee study, she was struck by how shrouded it was in myths and misconceptions, such as the false claim that the government had injected the men with syphilis.

“The descendants’ message was clear that African Americans are as much a part of public health as any other group and we need to fight for access and information,” she said.

In Macon County, Alabama, which has a population of about 18,000 and is home to many descendants of the Tuskegee trials, about 45% of Black residents have hey dude shoes received at least one vaccine dose. Community leaders, including those who are part of a task force that meets weekly, attribute the statistic, in part, to local outreach and education campaigns and numerous conversations about the difference between the Tuskegee study and the coronavirus vaccines.

For months, Martin Daniel, 53, and his wife, Trina Daniel, 49, resisted the vaccines, their uncertainty blamed in part on the study. Their nephew Cornelius Daniel, a dentist in Hampton, Georgia, said he grew up hearing about the research from his uncle and saw in his own family how the long-running deception had sown generational distrust of medical institutions.

Cornelius Daniel, 31, said he overcame his own hesitation in the spring because the risks of working in patients’ mouths outweighed his concerns.

His uncle and aunt reconsidered their doubts more slowly, but over the summer, as the delta variant led to a surge in hospitalizations across the South, the Daniels made vaccination appointments for mid-July. Before the date arrived, though, they and their two teenage children tested positive for the coronavirus.

On July 6, the couple, inseparable since meeting as students on the campus of Savannah State University, died about six hours apart. Their children are now being raised by Cornelius Daniel and his wife, Melanie Daniel, 32.

“We truly believe the vaccine would have saved their lives,” Melanie Daniel said.

Biden’s Proposal to Empower IRS Rattles Banks and Their Customers

Jill Castilla, chief executive of the one-branch Citizens Bank of Edmond, outside the bank in Edmond, Okla., on Wednesday, Oct. 6, 2021. (Nick Oxford/The New York Times)
Jill Castilla, chief executive of the one-branch Citizens Bank of Edmond, outside the bank in Edmond, Okla., on Wednesday, Oct. 6, 2021.

When the Biden administration looked for ways to pay for the president’s expansive social policy bill, it proposed raising revenue by cracking down on $7 trillion in unpaid taxes, mostly from wealthy Americans and businesses.

To help find those funds, the administration wants banks to give the Internal Revenue Service new details keen shoes keen shoes on their customers and provide data for accounts with total annual deposits or withdrawals worth more than $600. That has sparked an uproar among banks and Republican lawmakers, who say giving the IRS such power would be an enormous breach of privacy and government overreach.

Banks and their trade groups are running advertising and letter-writing campaigns to raise awareness — and concern — about the proposal. As a result, banks from Denver to Philadelphia say they are being deluged with calls, emails and in-person complaints from both savers and small-business owners worried about the proposal. JPMorgan Chase & Co. has issued talking points to bank tellers on what to tell angry customers who call or come into a branch to complain.

“We have heard a lot from our customers about their concerns about their privacy,” said Jill Castilla, the chief executive of the one-branch Citizens Bank of Edmond, just outside Oklahoma City. “I’ve gotten calls, emails, and then we’ve had many customers come in.”

Banks already submit tax forms to the IRS about the interest that customer accounts accrue. But the new proposal would require they share information about account balances so that the IRS can see if there are large discrepancies between the income people and businesses report and what they have in the bank. The IRS could audit or investigate the gaps to see if those taxpayers are evading their obligations.

Biden administration officials say the United States needs more information from taxpayers to crack down on those who do not pay what they owe. The measure, which would affect more than 100 million households and millions of businesses, is estimated to capture $460 billion in additional revenue over a decade, primarily from the wealthiest Americans.

“This is a very serious policy brooks shoes proposal,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said at a congressional hearing last month. “We have a $7 trillion estimated tax gap that we have a great deal of tax avoidance by individuals and businesses — typically very high-net worth, high-income individuals and businesses that have opaque sources of income that are not paying the taxes that are due.”

Treasury officials say the effort is not about tracking individual transactions and is not aimed at lower- or middle-class households. The $600 threshold was chosen to weed out accounts that are generally dormant or get little use, such as children’s accounts, while still giving the government the broadest possible visibility. Administration officials say audit rates for taxpayers who earn less than $400,000 per year will not go up.

“This is about making sure the top 1% can’t evade $160 billion per year in taxes,” said Alexandra LaManna, a Treasury Department spokesperson.

Top Democrats say that empowering the IRS is key to making the economy more fair. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts has warned that the IRS is handicapped when it comes to tracking the income of the wealthiest.

“The kinds of income that the IRS has the least visibility into are the kinds of income that are overwhelmingly concentrated among the very richest taxpayers,” Warren said. “Strengthening information reporting, as well as providing protected and sustained IRS funding, would ensure that we focus enforcement on the biggest fish.”

But the pushback is putting pressure on the Biden administration to scale back the proposal. Lawmakers are discussing raising the required disclosure level to $10,000 rather than $600, a Treasury official said, and making taxpayers who are paid through payroll-processing companies exempt from the required reporting. The Treasury estimates that could reduce the amount of money it could recoup to between $200 billion and $250 billion over a decade.

The outcry over the proposed measures stems in large part from a carefully planned lobbying campaign by the banking industry, which has spent months raising awareness and opposition to the plan in cities and towns across the country.

Banks say the reporting requirements would raise their costs and put them in the unenviable position of handing customer information over to the IRS.

Top industry trade groups have hammered the proposal in emails and phone calls to members. They have argued their case in clarks shoes uk meetings with senior administration officials, including Yellen and Charles Rettig, who runs the IRS. They established a social media hashtag, #KeepMyBankingPrivate, that some executives have used in sharing their doubts about the proposal.

“We proudly join @ICBA and others in telling Congress that we serve our customers, not the IRS,” Bankcda, whose main branch is in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, wrote in a recent Twitter post tagging the Independent Community Bankers of America, a trade group that caters to smaller banks and is helping to lead opposition to the measure.

After the initiative made its first appearance deep in the Treasury’s annual budget proposal in May, the American Bankers Association said it and its state-level partner groups quickly heard from hundreds of member banks, raising questions about the idea and its implications. The Independent Community Bankers of America began flagging the potential changes to its members, prompting many of them in turn to alert their customers.

Trade groups also helped gather signatures for a Sept. 17 letter to congressional leaders complaining about the proposal.

“Indiscriminate, blanket data collection would amount to a troubling effort to profile American taxpayers based on account characteristics without grounds for suspicion of tax evasion,” the letter argued. It was signed by more than 40 business groups, including the Mortgage Bankers Association, Global Cold Chain Alliance and Foodservice Equipment Distributors Association.

Awareness of the proposal has been amplified by ad campaigns, conservative news media coverage and Facebook posts, including one that caught the attention of Crystal Causey, a 39-year-old advertising account executive in Los Angeles.

“I wouldn’t allow my husband or my parents to monitor my bank account activity,” she said in an email. “There’s no way I would be OK with the government monitoring it.”

Industry representatives say it is unusual to see banks communicate with their account holders on a political matter. “This is the first time in 20 years that I’ve seen that banks have reached out to inform their customers on an issue” like this, said Paul Merski, who runs congressional relations for the community bankers association.

Jim Reuter, the chief executive of FirstBank near Denver, said concerns about the potential provisions have bubbled up frequently, including over a coffee he had with a small-business owner in early October.

“Their upshot is, ‘I pay my taxes, so why would you be sending additional information to the IRS?’” Reuter recalled. “I said I agree with them. We’re in the trust business. And it just goes without saying that sending the customer’s information somewhere without giving consent — that’s not what we do as a bank.”

The proposal’s critics have said the IRS appears ill-equipped to process and safeguard such an overwhelming amount of data to actually catch cheats.

“I have to tell you the proposal hey dude shoes that has been put forth about expanding the amount of information that the IRS is going to get on private bank accounts has been something I’ve been asked about at parks, at grocery stores, at convenience stores around the district,” Rep. Trey Hollingsworth, R-Ind., told Yellen at the congressional hearing last month. “This has people deeply afraid about the emergence of an apparatus that can be used against them.”

J.P. Freire, a spokesperson for Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas, the top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, said Texans were “terrified” of the IRS and that his boss was fielding inquiries about the proposed disclosures from at least three or four constituents every week.

Castilla, the community banker in Oklahoma, said a local schoolteacher had stopped by her office two weeks ago to share her anxieties about the idea of the government peering into her financial records. She told the teacher she believed the proposal was an overreach, Castilla recalled, and added that banking associations and Oklahoma’s congressional delegation were fighting it.

Even if the dollar threshold were raised to $10,000, Castilla said, it would still be onerous for her bank. “This would require a massive amount of infrastructure,” she said.

Treasury officials say they are flummoxed by the outrage, given that banks of all sizes initially told them they could comply with the rules, which would not take effect until 2024.

“They have made clear during conversations with banks that firms can easily implement a simple proposal like the one under consideration in Congress, and that any compliance costs would be minimal,” said LaManna, the Treasury spokeswoman.

Democrats seek new tax on America’s richest while scaling down other hikes

Tucked into the House Democrats’ tax plan to raise $2.2 trillion in tax revenue is a new tax on the country’s wealthiest Americans — but other, earlier proposals that target the rich have been scaled down or eliminated altogether.

The proposal from the House Ways and Means Committee includes a 3% surtax on individuals with an adjusted gross income of more than $5 million, something not included in President Joe Biden’s initial plan.

“[That] is significant,” Howard Gleckman, nike store senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, told Yahoo Money. “I suspect it’s going to be a surtax on taxable income… there’s still lots of ways for high-income people to reduce their taxable income.”

The 3% tax will be imposed on individuals, trusts, and estates and is expected to raise $127 billion over 10 years, according to the draft proposal. It is yet unclear whether the surcharge would apply only to ordinary income or would include capital gains, too, according to Gleckman.

WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 23: (L-R) Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), Rep. Richard Neal (D-MA) and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) attend a news conference at the U.S. Capitol on September 23, 2020 in Washington, DC. Pelosi and fellow House Democrats introduced a package of sweeping reforms aimed at curbing presidential abuse of power. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
(L-R) Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), Rep. Richard Neal (D-MA) and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) attend a news conference at the U.S. Capitol on September 23, 2020 in Washington, DC.

‘Avoid the higher capital gains tax’

The new tax comes as the Democrats scale down the increase to the top long-term capital gains and qualified dividends tax rate to 25% from 20%, which would generate $123 billion over a decade.

Biden initially proposed a top rate of 39.6% for those earning over $1 million.

“The capital gains rate increase is obviously much more modest than what Biden proposed,” Gleckman said, “A 25% rate is just not that much of a change.”

Another tax hike Democrats left out was Biden’s proposed change on how assets are taxed when passed onto heirs.

Under Biden’s proposal, gains over $1 million for single filers ($2.5 million for joint filers when keen shoes combined with existing real estate exemptions) would be taxed based on the asset’s value when it was initially acquired — rather than the value when it was inherited.

“What you’re doing is you’re essentially signaling investors to hold on to an unproductive asset to avoid the higher capital gains tax,” Gleckman said. “If you have unrealized gains at death, a lot of that incentive would go away.”

Biden’s proposal to increase the top individual income tax rate made it into the Democrats’ plan.

Both propose to revert the top individual income tax rate back to 39.6% for taxable income above $400,000. That rate is currently 37%, established by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 passed during the Trump administration. The provision is expected to raise $170 billion over 10 years.

US President Joe Biden speaks about coronavirus protections in schools during a visit to Brookland Middle School in Washington, DC, September 10, 2021. (Photo by SAUL LOEB / AFP) (Photo by SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images)
US President Joe Biden speaks about coronavirus protections in schools during a visit to Brookland Middle School in Washington, DC, September 10, 2021.

Overall, the House Democrats tax plan is estimated to raise $2.2 trillion over a decade, with $1 trillion coming from tax hikes on high-income individuals, $900 billion from corporate and international tax reform, and additional revenue from increased tax compliance. The majority of the changes would be effective after December 31, 2021.

The tax proposals may change as brooks shoes Democrats finalize the bill that they hope to pass in the coming weeks through reconciliation without any Republican support.

“That’s a fairly ambitious [proposal],” Gleckman said. “I don’t think they’re going to get that much, but that’s a very ambitious start.”

That time America almost had a 30-hour work week

The nature of work has undergone a lot of changes during the pandemic. Millions of office workers began working from home; the service industry has struggled to get workers to come back, and some businesses, like Kickstarter, are now experimenting with four-day workweeks – without reducing salaries. In Congress, Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif., has introduced legislation to make a 32-hour workweek standard.

This “Great Reassessment” of labor feels revolutionary. But we have been here before. In 1933, the Senate passed, and President Franklin Roosevelt supported, a bill to reduce the standard workweek to only 30 hours.

Americans have worked hard, perhaps too hard, since the Colonial era. brooks shoes English and other European colonists often had to work longer and harder on farms here than in the Old World, and a philosophy of working from sunrise to sunset prevailed, according to the Economic History Association. The Massachusetts colony even passed a law requiring a 10-hour minimum workday.

Enslaved people, whose labor profits were stolen, generally worked 10-16 hours a day, six days a week. Some studies estimate that when slavery ended, the hours African Americans spent working fell by 26-35 percent.

In the 1830s, workers in manufacturing were on the job roughly 70 hours a week, often in horrendous and even deadly conditions. By the 1890s that had dropped to about 60 hours. This period also saw the rise of labor unions, the creation of Labor Day as a national holiday, Grand Eight Hours Leagues and the motto “Eight hours for work, eight hours for rest, eight hours for what you will.” At that time, “what you will” did not include Saturday; workweeks were generally six days with only Sunday off.

The eight-hour day picked up in popularity in the decades preceding the Great Depression. Federal workers, railroad workers and Ford Motor Co. employees all moved to eight-hour shifts. CEO Henry Ford first instituted a six-day, 48-hour workweek for male factory workers in 1914, according to History.com. In 1926, a five-day, 40-hour workweek was extended to all employees, along with a pay raise. Ford argued that his employees were more productive in fewer hours; critics were skeptical they could be productive enough to make up the difference.

Then came the stock market crash, the Great Depression and record-high unemployment. After an underwhelming response from President Herbert Hoover, he faced New York Gov. Franklin Roosevelt in the 1932 election. Shorter work hours was a major issue among voters, and both candidates had ideas, according to historian Benjamin Hunnicutt in his book “Work Without End: Abandoning Shorter Hours for the ‘Right to Work.'” Roosevelt, a Democrat, pushed federal legislation to establish shorter work hey dude shoes hours – something he had already done at the state level in New York – while Hoover backed voluntary share-the-work drives. The idea was that if workers had shorter hours, no one would be unemployed, even if everyone ended up making less money, though unions were also pushing for a decent federal minimum wage.

After Roosevelt won the election but before he took office, Sen. Hugo Black, D-Ala., introduced a bill backed by the American Federation of Labor to temporarily shorten the workweek drastically, to only 30 hours – six hours a day, five days a week. For a while, it had Roosevelt’s support, and he began negotiating with business leaders behind closed doors; if they would shorten the workweek to 30 hours voluntarily, then he would go easy on antitrust reforms, he said, according to Hunnicutt.

As soon as Roosevelt took office on March 4, 1933, he called Congress into a special session – what would become its most productive streak in history. Over the next 100 days, Roosevelt and his Cabinet guided more than a dozen major bills through the House and Senate, stabilizing the banking system, regulating Wall Street, subsidizing farmers and getting relief checks into the hands of the unemployed.

Amid this flurry, on April 6, the Senate passed Black’s 30-hour week bill 53-30 in a bipartisan vote. Supporters claimed it would create 6 million jobs, The Washington Post reported. It was expected to pass the House, and Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins was publicly supportive.

Business leader were up in arms. “Instead of looking at the increase in leisure as inevitable or as potentially beneficial,” Hunnicutt wrote, they feared that if workers got a taste of a 30-hour week, they would never want to go back, and the law would become permanent. Men of industry held emergency meetings in Chicago and Philadelphia, and Perkins, who also supported a federal minimum wage, was flooded with messages of opposition.

Meanwhile at the White House, as Roosevelt worked on a comprehensive recovery plan, he began to turn against the 30-hour week. What if, rather than sharing available work, there was just more work? As the plan for a hoka shoes massive public-works program took shape, support for the 30-hour week collapsed. Instead, Roosevelt used the threat of it as leverage to get industry leaders to agree to ban child labor, set a modest minimum wage and limit the standard workweek at 40 hours, Hunnicutt wrote.

The resulting National Industrial Recovery Act was a triumph, but one that didn’t last. Two years later, in May 1935, the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional in a decision that so angered Roosevelt he threatened to expand the court.

In 1938, the minimum wage, 40-hour week and child labor ban returned in the form of the Fair Labor Standards Act. This time, Perkins asked Department of Labor lawyers to draft a law that had a better chance of passing judicial scrutiny. And they had another ace in their sleeve – a few months earlier, Roosevelt had nominated his first justice for the Supreme Court. He chose Hugo Black.

For decades, the 40-hour week has endured, but it didn’t seem like it would in the beginning. As Joe Pinsker of the Atlantic pointed out in June, many economists once assumed we would be working fewer than 40 hours by now. In 1956, even then-Vice President Richard Nixon predicted a 32-hours, four-day workweek in the “not too distant future.”

It hasn’t happened yet. In fact, in a 2014 Gallup poll, half of full-time employed respondents reported working 41 hours or more per week; 18 percent said they worked more than 60. Only 8 percent said they worked 39 hours or less.

Nothing to buy, nothing to rent: Some Americans are stuck in housing limbo

When Rebecca DiLorenzo’s landlord of 14 months informed her that he would be raising the rent by $300 a month on the apartment in East Greenwich, Rhode Island, she shares with her fiancé, Kyle, she started to look around for a place to buy.

“Our mindset last spring was, ‘We’re getting married, we need to buy a house’ and for a while we were going to open houses every weekend, but the market was just getting crazier and crazier,” she said.

After getting outbid on four houses — by as much as $50,000 — DiLorenzo knew they needed a Plan B. “We didn’t want to stay in our rental because it would have cost almost double what a mortgage would have been, but we also didn’t want to buy a house we really couldn’t afford,” she said.

Priced out of both the sales and rental market, the soon-to-be newlyweds are now living with family until things settle down.

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA - JUNE 02: A
A “for rent” sign posted in front of an apartment building on June 02, 2021 in San Francisco, California. After San Francisco rental prices plummeted during the pandemic shutdown, prices have surged back to pre-pandemic levels.

This scenario is becoming increasingly familiar, said Rick Sharga, executive vice president of RealtyTrac, a real estate information company.

“First there was nothing to buy and now there’s nothing to rent,” he said. “The eviction ban has also frozen a lot of inventory that would have otherwise come to market.”

Availability is limited across the board, said Jay Parsons, deputy asics shoes chief economist for RealPage, a leading provider of home rental analytics. “Apartment occupancy is now at the highest level in at least three decades, and it’s a similar story in single-family rentals,” Parsons said.

“There’s a great reshuffling under way and everyone’s moving all at once,” said Nicole Bachaud, an economic data analyst with Zillow. This includes workers moving out of shared situations and transitioning back to the office, ‘digital nomads’ exploring new locations now that they have more guidance from their employers, and new grads moving for their first jobs.

Competition is pushing rents higher in places like Phoenix, Riverside in California, Tampa, South Florida (especially West Palm Beach and Fort Lauderdale, but even Miami as well), Atlanta, Memphis, as well as Texas, the Carolinas, and most of the Sun Belt and Mountain regions, according to Parsons.

“It’s bonkers,” said Jeff Andrews, data journalist at Zumper, a national rental listing platform. “In ‘normal’ times you see steady growth in any given market, but the rent increases that are happening now — and the intensity and pace of it — is unprecedented. It’s not something we’ve ever seen in the U.S.”

In some markets, prices are increasing daily. Nowhere is this more apparent than in markets that were hit the hardest and are now rebounding quickly, such as New York City.

“Things started turning around in April as the city reopened, and now everything’s going in a ‘New York minute,’” brooks shoes said Brown Harris Stevens’ Justine Bray, who has worked in real estate in city for 27 years. “It’s insane.”

Recently, Bray was working with a client in Thailand who was eyeing an apartment in New York City’s Murray Hill.

“This apartment went from $5,164 to $5,559, then $5,715, $5,882, $5,929,” she recalled. “So every day my client was waking up and seeing it was costing more. We ended up getting it in July for a little over $6,200.”

Lexington, Minnesota, Homes for sale, with demand high and supply low, homes are going for more than sellers expect. (Photo by: Michael Siluk/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)
Lexington, Minnesota, Homes for sale, with demand high and supply low, homes are going for more than sellers expect.

Prices are escalating even after contracts have been signed.

Pam Crocker recently experienced this firsthand when she put in an offer — at full asking price — for a luxury two-bedroom rental apartment on Manhattan’s Upper East Side. After making a deposit (including first months’ rent plus security), and signing the lease, keen shoes she waited patiently for the owner who had accepted the offer to countersign.

“There was one delay after the next and they kept telling me there were all these other higher offers,” Crocker said. “I was getting annoyed to the point where I almost backed out, but I had my heart set on this apartment.”

It ended up costing her $1,200 more per month than the initially accepted offer. “I’ve done a lot of real estate transactions and owned villas in Jamaica, but had never been jerked around like this,” said Crocker.

When will things simmer down? Soon, Parsons said.

“What we’re seeing right now in the for-sale housing market is likely a sign of things to come in rental housing later this year,” Parsons said, “where the market goes from ‘really, really hot’ to just ‘hot.’”

No major organized religion objects to Covid vaccines. Will religious exemptions hold?

Religious exemptions could prove to be the latest legal battlefield of the pandemic, as Americans opposed to the coronavirus vaccines try to find ways around employer and government vaccination mandates.

Some evangelical pastors are reportedly providing religious exemption documents to members of their churches, and right-wing forums are sharing strategies to skirt vaccination requirements. Religious freedom groups are sending threatening letters to states, schools and employers ecco shoes and preparing legal challenges to fight vaccination mandates.

Only some federal agencies and states have made vaccinations mandatory for workers, and more private companies are doing or considering the same. But experts anticipate that religious liberty challenges will pick up as more mandates are put in place — especially when there is no national standard.

“There are some First Amendment implications here and there’s a patchwork of laws that could potentially be implicated by these mandates,” said James Sonne, a law professor at Stanford Law School and founding director of its Religious Liberty Clinic. “It’s certainly something we’ll see getting worked out in the courts.”

The challenge for governments and institutions is balancing American civil liberties with a worsening public health crisis.

Protesters holding placards expressing their opinion (Matthew Hatcher / SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)
Protesters holding placards expressing their opinion 

Experts say that the threshold for religious exemptions could come down to proving whether the person attempting to obtain one has “sincerely held beliefs” against getting vaccinated on religious grounds. They may even have to show a track record of opposition to receive an exemption.

Those challenging employer-created mandates cite Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which requires employers to make reasonable efforts to accommodate employees, while government-created mandates are being challenged under the First Amendment. Both, however, bring up the question of whether a person’s religious beliefs are sincere.

Thomas Berg, a self-described “strong supporter of religious exemptions” and a religious liberty advocate who teaches law at the University of St. Thomas, a Catholic institution in St. Paul, Minnesota, said he believes that there is a strong case to deny many nike sneakers of the religious claims and to test religious sincerity.

“In cases where you’ve got a lot of potential insincere claims — and I think there’s evidence that is what’s happening here in which people are raising religious objections when they’re motivated by fear of the vaccine or political opposition to it — testing sincerity makes sense,” he said. “We have to test sincerity or else we have to accept them all or deny them all, so I think the courts will provide room for testing that.”

One driver for testing sincerity is the fact that no major organized religion objects to the vaccines, and Roman Catholic and other Christian, Jewish and Muslim leaders have advised followers to get the shots. Pope Francis went so far as to say that getting vaccinated was “the moral choice because it is about your life but also the lives of others.”

Individually held beliefs, however, could provide some protections.

The challenge with religious exemptions

The Christian argument for religious exemptions follows two tracks typically: first, that the vaccine shots at some point in their production used aborted fetal cell lines. The second argument cites a Bible verse that claims that the human body is God’s temple of the Holy Spirit and argues that for that reason receiving a vaccine would be a sin.

Johnson & Johnson did use a replicated fetal cell line in the production of its vaccine, but Pfizer and Moderna did not. They did, however, use replicated fetal cell lines to test the effectiveness of their vaccines. Those cell lines, however, were isolated from two fetuses in 1973 and 1985 and then replicated numerous times over the ensuing decades. They are commonly used in the pharmaceutical and biotech industries to test and create medications.

Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor at New York University Langone Medical Center, said that people who oppose the coronavirus on religious grounds should also oppose numerous medications and vaccines developed over the past 30 to 40 years.

“There’s a lot more drugs, vaccines and medicines you should not be taking and protesting if you’re really worried about these fetal cells being used,” Caplan said. “I don’t think most of this is sincere. I think it’s just a way to get out of having to take a vaccine.”

But there are many groups that are taking it seriously and giving individuals support and advice on ways to obtain a religious exemption or even challenge a vaccination mandate.

On its website, Liberty Counsel — an evangelical ministry that provides legal assistance in religious liberty cases — provides a 23-minute video guide that has been viewed more than 150,000 times on how to file a religious exemption. It, like other groups, also provides a nike store handful of sample documents to file for an exemption.

Liberty Counsel is known for representing Kim Davis, a Kentucky county clerk whose refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples in 2015 led to a lawsuit. The group has also challenged the Affordable Care Act, attempted to reverse gay conversion therapy bans and supported lawsuits maintaining religious monuments and nativity scenes.

Since the start of the pandemic, the group has been dedicated to challenging Covid restrictions at places of worship, as well as mask mandates. It has shared misinformation on its social media accounts, podcasts and website alleging the vaccines are dangerous, and it has supported members of America’s Frontline Doctors — an anti-vaccination group whose founder stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

Over the past few months, Liberty Counsel has become one of the groups leading the charge on claiming religious exemptions to the growing number of vaccination mandates.

“Just in a few weeks, we’ve received over 10,000 people contacting us for help,” Mathew Staver, the group’s founder and director said. “It’s more than anything we’ve ever encountered before. We’re getting people calling. Some are very concerned and upset, some break down, because they are being forced on a very quick time frame to make a decision between getting one of the Covid shots and their jobs.”

How past cases held up

Last week, Liberty Counsel filed a lawsuit against Maine’s vaccination mandate, arguing it violates a worker’s right to object to the vaccines on religious grounds. The suit was filed on behalf of 2,000 unnamed Maine health care workers who objected to Maine’s vaccination mandate for health care workers on the grounds that the state did not allow for a religious exemption.

“We will vigorously defend the requirement against this lawsuit and we are confident that it will be upheld,” Maine Attorney General Aaron M. Frey said in a statement to NBC News. “For many years the state has required health care workers to be vaccinated against various communicable diseases and, to our knowledge, that requirement has never been challenged. The state has now simply added an additional disease — COVID-19 — to the list of ones for which health care workers must be vaccinated.”

The statement added that federal courts have consistently upheld mandatory vaccination requirements.

US-HEALTH-VIRUS-VACCINE-PROTEST (Mark Felix / AFP /AFP via Getty Images)
US-HEALTH-VIRUS-VACCINE-PROTEST 

Liberty Counsel has also sent letters to the states of New York and Washington, as well as United Airlines, which required its employees to be vaccinated. The letters threatened to sue the states and airline if they did not provide greater access to religious exemptions and accommodations.

Experts said some of their challenges have already been tested and pointed to past legal battles over vaccination mandates, such as those states created for children, nursing homes and hospitals.

Caplan, who was involved in developing some of the flu vaccination mandates that have become commonplace in hospitals, noted that states such as California, New York, Maine and Connecticut have entirely dropped religious exemptions for children.

“When brought to court, that was tested and it held up, so we already have a pattern of arguments,” Caplan said. “So now if your boss says you can’t come to work without a vaccine but you refuse to get one on religious grounds, employers don’t have to keep you on, they don’t have to hire you.”

Backlash to the latest push for religious exemptions could backfire, however.

Doug Opel, a bioethics and pediatrics professor at the University of Washington who has written about the challenges of religious exemptions and vaccination mandates, pointed out that arguing against and not allowing religious exemptions might do more harm than good.

Though there are certainly people who will attempt to falsely secure an exemption, he said he believed that only a small minority of the American population would likely try to obtain one. It might be better to allow religious exemptions to reduce the perception of coercion and allow the vaccination mandates to stand with fewer challenges, he said.

“A policy reason to have exemptions is to allow the very few people who want to opt out to opt out and then allow the mandate itself to stand and be acceptable and sustainable over time,” he said. “Even if a minority opt out, the vast majority will get vaccinated, and the mandate will have served its purpose of reducing transmission and disease.”

California families relay harrowing escape from Afghanistan

EL CAJON, Calif. (AP) — When Yousef’s wife and their four children boarded a July 15 flight in San Diego to attend her brother’s wedding in Afghanistan, they were looking forward to a month of family gatherings. It was long overdue — the coronavirus pandemic prevented them from traveling earlier.

Their return ticket was Aug. 15, two days before their children’s school year began in the San Diego suburb of El Cajon.

But the Afghan Americans found themselves brooks shoes dodging gunfire and trying to force their way into the crowds of thousands ringing the airport in Kabul after Afghanistan’s government collapsed and the Taliban seized power.

Yousef’s wife and children were among eight families from El Cajon who were trapped after U.S. troops raced to evacuate Americans and allies and then left the country. Yousef, who had stayed in California during his family’s trip, asked that only his first name be used because he still has relatives in Afghanistan who could be at risk.

All but one of the families got out with the help of the Cajon Valley Union School District and Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, whose district includes El Cajon, a city with a large refugee population. The families had traveled on their own over the summer to see relatives and were not part of an organized trip.

Several of the families, accompanied by Issa and school officials, spoke to reporters Thursday for the first time since they returned, recounting their harrowing experiences.

The parents described running with their kids as gunfire whizzed overhead. One father said he was beaten by the Taliban. They said they were blocked at Taliban checkpoints.

They said they are grateful to be back but their children have suffered nightmares, and they worry about the family that was unable to get out, along with countless others still stuck there, including distant relatives.

“My kids are now safe at home right now thanks to God and all of you,” Yousef said.

But he asked people not to forget about so many others, including U.S. citizens, green card holders and Afghans who are at risk because they helped the American government. He held in his hand a folder that he said contained the documents of 30 people who skechers uk qualified for a special immigrant visa and should be in the United States but are still in Afghanistan, desperate to escape.

President Joe Biden has said between 100 and 200 Americans were left behind when U.S. troops completed their withdrawal Aug. 31, many of them dual citizens. The State Department has given no estimate for others who hope to leave Afghanistan, including U.S. green card holders and people who received the special visas because they helped Americans during the 20-year war. Issa said he believes the number to be much higher for U.S. citizens and the others.

Many of the families he helped get back to California in the past week are green card holders. Some are U.S. citizens.

“We’re delighted to have these kids back in school and their parents united, but we also know that there’s a lot more work to do,” Issa said.

Yousef said he felt helpless being in California, thousands of miles away, fearing the life they had built would come to a halt and his wife and children would be trapped in the country ruled by the Taliban. He, his wife and children are all U.S. citizens. They came to the United States on a special immigrant visa after Yousef worked for the U.S. government in Afghanistan.

After they failed to get into the airport on Aug. 15, his wife and kids returned to their relative’s home.

Yousef alerted his family from El Cajon that the U.S. Embassy in Kabul was advising people not to go to the airport because of threats.

Eight hours later, suicide bombers set off explosions at the airport, killing 13 U.S. troops and more than 170 others.

Yousef said Issa’s team arranged a time for his family to go to the airport with an escort from U.S. authorities.

“It was like a situation room,” Yousef said of talking to Issa’s team while navigating his family through the chaos from afar. “I was sitting here talking to them. hey dude shoes They were sending their locations and stuff like this.”

His family returned home Friday. The first thing he did was take them to IHOP, their favorite restaurant.

He hopes more of those happy moments will overtake the traumatic memories his kids hold. His 7-year-old son, his youngest, has been talking about the violence.

“They are talking about it, about the gunfire, and being scared of the Taliban, but we hope they forget all that” and return to their life as regular American kids, Yousef said.

Higher taxes may be on the way for wealthy Americans after House vote

Wealthy people are bracing for potentially higher taxes that could hit their bank accounts as soon as this year, while lower- and middle-income Americans could end up enjoying tax breaks from Uncle Sam that were originally only temporary.

Last week, the House passed a $3.5 trillion budget brooks shoes plan that may ultimately include numerous Democratic proposals for taxing high-income earners and corporations and expanding tax credits for middle- and low-income earners.

Democrats are still writing the formal legislation they plan to pass through reconciliation in the Senate. When their tax policies — if any — could go into effect still remains unclear.

“Congress rarely makes tax changes retroactive, [so] everything will probably be applied to the 2022 tax year,” Howard Gleckman, senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, told Yahoo Money. “The one exception might be changes to the capital gains rate. If they’re going to raise the rate, they would make the effective date of that rate increase the date that committees approved the legislation.”

Here’s what to know.

President Biden speaks at a podium on tax cuts with Vice President Kamala Harris standing behind.
U.S. President Joe Biden delivers remarks with Vice President Kamala Harris on the day tens of millions of parents will get their first monthly Child Tax Credit relief payments on July 15, 2021, in Washington, DC. 

Raising the capital gains tax

One of President Joe Biden’s main tax proposals is targeting the investments of the top 0.3% by treating capital gains and income similarly. The proposal would mean wealthy individuals may pay double the current rate they pay on their investment returns and dividends.

Under the proposal, the top long-term capital gains and qualified dividends tax rate would increase to 39.6% from 23.8% and would apply to those earning over $1 million.

“Those are going to be very difficult for Congress to enact,”skechers uk  Gleckman said. “I think that there’s some chance that Congress will raise the capital gains rate, but I don’t think there’s very much chance that it will raise it to what Biden wants.”

If passed, the capital gains change may be enacted immediately so investors don’t have the opportunity to sell assets en masse to avoid the rate increase, according to Gleckman.

A woman's face is partially shielded by a large hat with many flowers and feathers.
A detail of a woman with a hat during the 145th running of the Kentucky Oaks on May 03, 2019 in Louisville, Kentucky.

Taxing assets upon death

Democrats also want to change how assets are taxed when passed onto heirs.

Under current tax law, the capital gain of inherited assets is calculated based on the value of the assets at inheritance — not when the assets were first acquired by the original owner. That means an heir typically pays much lower tax when those assets are sold.

Under Biden’s initial proposal, gains over $1 million for single filers ($2.5 million for joint filers when combined with existing real estate exemptions) would be taxed based on their value when initially acquired rather than inherited. Those gains may not be taxed if the property is donated, and certain exemptions would apply to family-owned businesses and farms.

That proposal is unlikely to gain enough support to be included in the final legislation, according to Gleckman.

“That’s going to be a pretty tough sell,” he said. “You’re already seeing a lot of pushback from people worried about family farms and small businesses, even though Biden’s proposed significant exemptions and deferrals for them.”

Higher income tax

Under Biden’s original plan, the top individual income tax rate would revert back to 39.6% for taxable incomes above $400,000. That rate is currently 37%, established by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 passed during the Trump administration.

The current rate gives a couple with taxable income of $2 million an annual tax cut of more than $36,400, according to estimates by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

“Raising the top individual rate I think is probably something that they’ll do,” Gleckman said. “It is clearly only on very hey dude shoes high income people. That one is probably one of the more likely changes.”

Tax compliance

The Democrats also plan to go after wealthy Americans by increasing tax compliance. Under Biden’s initial proposal, banks would have to report inflows and outflows from taxpayers’ accounts, giving the IRS additional information about business revenue and expenses to better target audits.

“The IRS needs more information,” Chuck Marr, senior director of federal tax policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, told Yahoo Money. “If the information is easily, very readily available for banks to provide, there’s no excuse not to do it.”

Rep. Maxine Waters and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sit together at a desk with a 'Biden child tax credit' sign.
Rep. Maxine Waters, left, D-Los Angeles, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, hold a news conference to discuss the importance of the Child Tax Credit on Thursday, Aug. 12, 2021 in Los Angeles, CA. 

Tax Credits

All these tax changes that target the wealthy would also help to pay for extending beefed-up tax credits that overwhelmingly put money in the pockets of middle- and low- income Americans.

Under Biden’s plan, the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Tax Credit would be extended through 2025 and made fully refundable permanently, meaning that taxpayers receive a refund even if the credit exceeds their total tax bill.

While an extension is likely to be included in the final legislation, it may be shorter than initially proposed, according to Gleckman, and the credits may be fully refundable for a few years rather than permanently.

“My sense is that they will agree to extend them, but probably not agree to extend them for very long,” he said. “They’re not going to have the money to extend it for what the Biden people would like to do.”