Senate Passes Climate, Healthcare and Tax Bill With Manchin and Sinema on Board

In a 51-50 vote Senate Passes Democrats’ Climate, Healthcare and Tax Bill.

The legislation, which largely survived a review by the Senate’s parliamentarian, raises more than $700 billion in government revenue over 10 years, with much of that coming from a 15% minimum tax on large, profitable corporations and money generated by enhancing tax-collection efforts at the Internal Revenue Service. Empowering Medicare to negotiate lower prescription-drug prices and imposing a 1% tax on stock buybacks will also add revenue to the government’s budget in the next decade.

About $430 billion of those funds would be dedicated toward incentives for companies and individuals to reduce carbon emissions and an extension of subsidies for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. The legislation dedicates the rest of the new revenue toward reducing the deficit.

The bill meets “all of our goals: fighting climate change, lowering healthcare costs, closing tax loopholes abused by the wealthy, and reducing the deficit,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) said Saturday. “This is a major win for the American people,” he said.

A final test for the bill emerged Sunday afternoon when Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D., Ariz.) and other Democrats joined Republicans to support an amendment from Sen. John Thune (R., S.D.) to shield individual companies operating under the umbrella of a single owner from the 15% corporate minimum tax, a step that would help the private-equity firms that own such companies.

Under the Thune proposal, the $35 billion in lost revenue from the change would be replaced by a one-year extension of the $10,000 cap on state and local taxes, a levy loathed by Democrats in high-tax states such as New York and New Jersey. It is currently set to expire after 2025.

I do not understand why hedge funds need tax breaks. But that was Sinema’s demand. 

Senator Bernie Sanders criticized the bill as inadequate and flawed. 

“What I am asking today is for all 50 Democrats to come together and begin the process of addressing the major crises facing working families,” he said, adding that the bill “has some good features, but also some very bad features.”

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D., Ohio), in opposing a Sanders amendment to expand the child tax credit, said the party must focus on passing the core package. “This does not advance that cause because we could lose the underlying bill,” he said. “This is a fragile arrangement.”

What’s Inside?

  1. The bill will implement a 15% corporate minimum tax. This targets large corporations that report big profits but pay little or nothing in income taxes. Amazon is an example.
  2. Beginning in 2026, the bill will allow Medicare to negotiate the prices of a limited set of drugs selected from among those that account for the biggest share of government expenditures. 
  3. A cap out-of-pocket drug costs for Medicare beneficiaries at $2,000 a year starts in 2025.
  4. Starting 2023, free vaccines for Medicare enrollees. 
  5. Subsidies enacted last year as part of the American Rescue Plan will be extended for three years, through 2025, at a cost of $64 billion.
  6. Extension of a $7,500 tax credit to buy electric vehicles.
  7. Builders, homeowners and small businesses can take advantage of “green banks” which will receive $20 billion to provide low-cost financing for energy-efficient products such as heat pumps, windows, solar panels, insulation and electric-vehicle charging stations.
  8. Including tax credits, the package will spend about $369 billion on climate and energy.
  9. The tax credits will channel billions of dollars to wind, solar and battery developments that put clean power onto the grid.
  10. According to Rhodium Group, an independent research firm, the bill would cut greenhouse-gas emissions 31% to 44% below 2005 levels in 2030, compared with 24% to 35% under current policy.

Budget Reduction and Climate Debate

The bill is a hodgepodge of energy subsidies and tax breaks that according to the Senate will raise a total of $739 billion in revenue, and spend a total of $433 billion. 

The Congressional Budget Office says it will reduce the deficit by about $102 billion over a decade.

I suspect it will raise less and cost more. 

Since most corporations don’t really pay taxes, any taxes on corporations will turn into taxes on consumers, lower dividends, or lower shareholder appreciation, mostly consumer tax hikes.

Regarding point number ten, color me skeptical. 

Paul Krugman On Ending Poverty

Penn Wharton Estimate

Please consider the Penn Wharton Preliminary Estimates of the Inflation Reduction Act.

  • PWBM estimates that the Inflation Reduction Act would reduce non-interest cumulative deficits by $248 billion over the budget window with no impact on GDP in 2031.
  • The Act would very slightly increase inflation until 2024 and decrease inflation thereafter. These point estimates are statistically indistinguishable from zero, thereby indicating low confidence that the legislation will have any impact on inflation.
  • We project no impact on GDP by 2031 and an increase in GDP of 0.2 percent by 2050. These estimates include the impact of debt and carbon reduction as well as capital and labor supply distortions from rising tax rates.

What About Earned Income Credit Fraud?

Will the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 Do Anything?

On July 31, I asked Will the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 Do Anything at All?

I came to the same conclusion as Penn Wharton. 

If accurate, that is about the best we could realistically expect from any bill passed by Congress.

This post originated at MishTalk.Com.

Thanks for Tuning In!

Please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

32 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Now, let’s talk about the IRS. Rumor has it that the IRS is about to DOUBLE in size. Let’s NOT think about what means…however, if I was running a small business, I’d be glad I didn’t cheat on my prior returns…
Let’s hope diminishing returns sets it, not economies of scale.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
Even when they double in size, I doubt they go back and look at prior returns. The goal will be to look forward to capture current and future revenue. My guess is the only way they back audit is if your current tax is found to be suspicious so as long as your good going forward any past indiscretions will be water under the bridge.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
An important question is being overlooked here. How/why are companies in the position of paying minimal/if any tax with incomes over $1 billion?
Pick one of the following most likely to meet the 15% rule.
1: A company practicing fraudulent accounting practices, eg. hiding overseas income.
2: A mature, dividend-paying company with aging infrastructure and steady income (with (global) competition).
3: A company with high ongoing and sunk infrastructure costs, and variable income.
4: An innovative, high-growth company building a massive global infrastructure, and not paying dividends.
You picked four, right?
These are the same companies that are responsible for most of today’s growth, and future GNP. They are usually global. They invest heavily in themselves–in innovation and growth. Their cap-x generates vast depreciation deductions/depletion allowances (in accordance with the law). They seldom pay dividends. They borrow extensively to fund their growth… SO LET’S TAX THEM!
The average Democrap IQ is below 100.
whirlaway
whirlaway
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
Today’s mature, dividend-paying companies were once growth companies too. They were (and are) global and they invested too. They also paid a higher tax rate. If today’s so-called innovative and growth companies can’t deal with the same situation, it is their problem.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  whirlaway
You miss the point. FIX the tax code–for every company. Don’t punish a few because they are successful. Get rid of depreciation/depletion allowances for all, put limits on it, etc. BUT DO IT FOR ALL. Politicians would not be picking winners and losers.
At the time those mature companies were fast-growing they paid tax at the then-current rate, with legal deductions for depreciation and asset depletion. Eventually, those companies get fat and lazy. They will go the way of Sears, too dumb to respond to market changes, far too dumb to innovate.
whirlaway
whirlaway
1 year ago
“The bill will implement a 15% corporate minimum tax. This targets large corporations that report big profits but pay little or nothing in income taxes. Amazon is an example.”

The only problem is, even with something that sounds as simple as that, the DONORcrat politicians are sure to have put in loopholes for the large corporations to drive through.

Corporations used to pay $1 out of every $3 tax revenue, some 50+ years ago. Now, they pay $1 out of every $8 or $9 of tax revenue.

KidHorn
KidHorn
1 year ago
“PWBM estimates that the Inflation Reduction Act would reduce non-interest cumulative deficits by $248 billion over the budget window”
Is there a place where one can bet if a piece of legislation delivers on what’s proposed? Because there’s no way this will come true.
Casual_Observer2020
Casual_Observer2020
1 year ago
Also if this allows the Fed to keep hiking rates, it is a good thing. Higher rates are better for savers and reduce overall portfolio risk.
Casual_Observer2020
Casual_Observer2020
1 year ago
Don’t agree regarding corporations passing on expenses to consumers. At some point they are forced to pay out of profits. Logically it never made sense for a company like WalMart to have their employees on public assistance and pay no federal corporate taxes. Now those companies who avoid taxes will have to pay a minimum and it will be mainly out of profits.
threeblindmice
threeblindmice
1 year ago
Walmart paid $4.76bn last year in income taxes. That’s a 25% rate. That figure ignores sales, payroll and real estate taxes. Our politicians can’t be counted on to make do with the $4+ trillion we send them annually already. So, sure, let’s send them more because the Fed gov’t is so constrained and spends what we give them so carefully and responsibly.
whirlaway
whirlaway
1 year ago
To the extent they can pass the taxes to the customers, the reason for that is the markets are concentrated. The mega corporations should be broken up so that no single corporation has more than 10 percent of the market – the number that antitrust regulators used to stick to, before the entire government was purchased by the corporate sector.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Whatever a corporation does to pay taxes it must first take the money from it’s customers.
Corporations cannot print money, nowadays only Governments do that.
Felix_Mish
Felix_Mish
1 year ago
Since most corporations don’t really pay taxes
This might be said of any taxpayer. Taxpayers will pass the expense along as best they can, and, in the end, probably proportional to how they pass along any money they have coming in.
MPO45
MPO45
1 year ago
So what does this mean for investment portfolios?
1. Dividends may get cut but only for large corporations, need to look at my portfolio and find out where there may be damage.
2. Need to see which Pharmaceutical stocks will be impacted by this however…
3. Out-of-pocket caps of $2000? Wait Medicare will negotiate lower prices but senior caps at $2k? This will just open the flood gates for more meds from big pharma. Neutral for my pharma stocks.
4. Free vaccines – good for my pharma stocks.
5. More spending – good for stocks. bad for inflation
6. Tax credits – good for stocks. bad for inflation
7. financing for energy – good for stocks. bad for inflation
8. good for stocks bad for inflation.
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  MPO45
Thank you. I’m not sure I could keep reading the comment section if it wasn’t for level headed commenters such as you.
Too many closed minded, political cultists and not enough practical investment advice.
One of the reasons I sold most of my US oil stocks and loaded up on Canadian oil stocks was due to the possibility of increased taxes on US oils. The second reason was better valuations.
I am not expecting Canada to enact extra taxes on oil companies, though they might surprise me.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  MPO45
During the Clinton era, flu vaccine prices were ‘fixed’ in a similar fashion ( a side ‘benefit’ of the The Clinton health care plan in1993). The plan failed; however, the Democrats passed a “law that attempted to reduce the cost of vaccinations so that all
children can be vaccinated. The federal government now limits the amount
of profit afforded to the vaccine companies to ensure low prices.”
By 2004, all but three manufacturers had exited the flu vaccine market, leading to a shortage….
PapaDave
PapaDave
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
lol!
As I said:
Too many closed minded, political cultists and not enough practical investment advice.
Thanks for the confirmation.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Just a block of wood.
If you want investment advice, I recommend Robinhood…
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
Gosh! Now who would have thought that price controls would affect supply.
Siliconguy
Siliconguy
1 year ago
Did they extend the end of the ACA cliff? That unpleasant income when you just barely overshoot the four times poverty and lose the entire subsidy?
Just setting the subsidy cap at 8.5% of income ( or 9.5% for that matter) is a much more reasonable way doing it. Finding out you made 401% of poverty on Jan 3 and now have to repay the entire $900/month for the previous year is really a pain. I dodged the bullet last year thanks to the Covid law, if I can dodge it for this year and 2023 then I’m “safely” on Medicare.
Irondoor
Irondoor
1 year ago
Thank goodness I finished lunch before taking a minute to contemplate the sheer stupidity and gross incompetence of the idiots making laws in this once-great country. I hate being sickened while eating.
To add continuing insult to injury, every day the news shows massive numbers of unaccompanied males nonchalantly crossing our southern border. They are from virtually every country in the world. Do they have job prospects? Do they have education, skills, capital to invest? Of course not, so I hope the Governor of Texas sends thousands of them to NY, DC and Chicago. Those are so-called “sanctuary cities”. The Libs wanted them, so here they are.
MPO45
MPO45
1 year ago
Reply to  Irondoor
NY, DC and Chicago has huge labor shortages and that cheap labor will do nicely. I walked past half a dozen shops and restaurant shops with help wanted signs. Abbot thinks he is teaching these cities a lesson and he is which is “Texas will send free cheap labor at Texan taxpayer expense to blue states and cities.”
Suggest you read the CBO report that just came out about immigrants. That’s where 75% of the population growth will come by in 2040.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  MPO45
Time for all of us and our children and our grandchildren to learn to speak Spanish fluently.
kansasdude
kansasdude
1 year ago
Reply to  Irondoor
Do they have monkeypox, etc? Kansas City is starting to look like the Congo.
shamrock
shamrock
1 year ago
“Since most corporations don’t really pay taxes, any taxes on
corporations will turn into taxes on consumers, lower dividends, or
lower shareholder appreciation, mostly consumer tax hikes”
I don’t remember corporations lowering prices for consumers after Paul Ryan’s corporate tax cuts, corporations charge as much as the market will bear regardless of tax burdens. So I’m guessing if they have to pay more in taxes it will come out of shareholder value, hard to feel bad for Bezos and so on.
Siliconguy
Siliconguy
1 year ago
Reply to  shamrock
If they lower my dividends I will notice. Those dividends are part of my retirement income.
Karlmarx
Karlmarx
1 year ago
Reply to  shamrock
I really don’t understand why people personify “corporations.”
Simply out a tax or a regulation is a cost just like labor or electricity or accounting.
Higher or lower costs are reflected in prices profits wages or quality. In the end people pay them not “corporations”
shamrock
shamrock
1 year ago
Reply to  Karlmarx
Yes, corporations pay taxes on behalf of the owners, who are people. As Romney famously said “corporations are people my friend”.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
1 year ago
Reply to  shamrock
A corporation is a useful legal fiction.
It is not a “people” in any sense.
Jmurr
Jmurr
1 year ago
Reply to  Karlmarx
Only politicians do.
Jojo
Jojo
1 year ago
Reply to  shamrock
Corporate taxes are just a way to make personal taxe seem a bit lower. If we didn’t have corporate taxes, then personal taxes would have to be increased. Same with state lotteries. If we didn’t have lotteries, then whatever revenues they bring in would have to come from higher personal taxes. Everything is a scam.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
1 year ago
With regard to the EITC…. The IRS offers this classic statement of gross incompetence:
Some of the errors are unintentional caused by the complexity of the
law,
but some of the claims are intentional disregard of the law.”

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.