FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Tax Breaks for Scions…to Hell with Poor Kids

by CHRISTOPHER BRAUCHLI

One of the inequities of the 2001 tax act, insofar as the rich are concerned will be cured by a Bill passed by the House of Representatives before leaving on their third vacation this year, if approved by the Senate. Among provisions in the 2001 tax act that did not benefit the rich was the $1,000 per child tax credit which provides in part that a family with children gets a tax credit of up to $1,000 per child.

The credit is tied to income levels. Those with high incomes and those with low incomes do not get the benefit. At first blush that may seem like a good thing since not only were there a number of tax breaks that primarily benefitted the rich, but the provision represented one of the few instances where the tax code treated the rich and the poor alike. Thanks to the House’s recent actions, treatment of the quite rich and the poor will, if the Bill is approved by the Senate, be separated. The quite rich will find this to their liking since they always welcome additional tax breaks and see it as their just desserts for contributions made by them to society, contributions not always obvious to the rest of us.

Under the 2001 act, the child tax credit was not available to families with incomes in excess of $149,000 and less than about $10,300. The House bill provides that the credit will be available in whole or in part, depending on the number of children in a family, to those with income of up to $309,000. Some might think that is a change of little moment since fewer than two percent of Americans earn more than $250,000 a year. That approach overlooks the fact that two hundred fifty thousand dollars today is not the same as it was 10 or 20 years ago and for that reason, if none other, extending the benefit to more of the wealthy makes sense. Under the House Bill, over the next ten years families with two children and incomes between $150,000 and $250,000 will get $22,000 in tax credits. Families with incomes between $250,000 and $309,000 will get lesser but not insignificant amounts depending on the size of their families.

Making the child tax credit more inclusive will, according to the Tax Policy Center, cost only $69 billion through 2014, a small percentage of the overall government spending that will take place during that period. If passed by the Senate, that legislation (which also makes the child tax credit permanent) goes a long way toward curing the problems with the 2001 act. Because the House is mindful of the less fortunate, those at the other end of the income scale will also be helped.

A two-child family with an income of $12,000 has been receiving a child tax credit of $125 per child. That amount was scheduled to increase next year. Under the proposed law, that family will not have to wait a year. Although not easy to fathom in detail, part of the House bill moves the increase up to this year resulting in an apparent one time benefit to that family of $300.

As the foregoing demonstrates, almost everyone benefits from the new provisions. The only exceptions are those earning less than the minimum wage of $10,300 who pay no taxes. They get nothing since they pay no taxes. David Harris, president of the Children’s Research and Education Institute estimates that about eight million children are in families who will get no tax credit. The message of those children to their parents should be “Go out and get a (better paying) job.” The eight million omitted children are offset in part by the children in the 2.1 million families earning at least 15 times more than the minimum wage who will now become eligible to participate in the child tax credit.

It is not yet clear that the Senate will go along with the House. Former exterminator and now majority leader in the House, Tom Delay is annoyed at that. “I can’t believe that one or two members, particularly Republican members of the Senate, would hold up such an incredible budget. For what? To make it more difficult to give tax relief to the American public.” Explaining why she voted for the House bill, Rep. Nancy Johnson, R. Conn., a typical example of a compassionate Republican legislator, said: “This is about children. It’s about families. It’s tough to raise a family today.” The parents of the eight million omitted children would surely agree.

CHRISTOPHER BRAUCHLI is a Boulder, Colorado lawyer. His column appears weekly in the Daily Camera. He can be reached at: brauchli.56@post.harvard.edu

 

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

March 30, 2017
William R. Polk
What Must be Done in the Time of Trump
Howard Lisnoff
Enough of Russia! There’s an Epidemic of Despair in the US
Ralph Nader
Crash of Trumpcare Opens Door to Full Medicare for All
Carol Polsgrove
Gorsuch and the Power of the Executive: Behind the Congressional Stage, a Legal Drama Unfolds
Michael J. Sainato
Fox News Should Finally Dump Bill O’Reilly
Kenneth Surin
Former NC Governor Pat McCory’s Job Search Not Going Well
Binoy Kampmark
The Price of Liberation: Slaughtering Civilians in Mosul
Bruce Lesnick
Good Morning America!
William Binney and Ray McGovern
The Surveillance State Behind Russia-gate: Will Trump Take on the Spooks?
Jill Richardson
Gutting Climate Protections Won’t Bring Back Coal Jobs
Robert Pillsbury
Maybe It’s Time for Russia to Send Us a Wake-Up Call
Prudence Crowther
Swamp Rats Sue Trump
March 29, 2017
Jeffrey Sommers
Donald Trump and Steve Bannon: Real Threats More Serious Than Fake News Trafficked by Media
David Kowalski
Does Washington Want to Start a New War in the Balkans?
Patrick Cockburn
Bloodbath in West Mosul: Civilians Being Shot by Both ISIS and Iraqi Troops
Ron Forthofer
War and Propaganda
Matthew Stevenson
Letter From Phnom Penh
James Bovard
Peanuts Prove Congress is Incorrigible
Thomas Knapp
Presidential Golf Breaks: Good For America
Binoy Kampmark
Disaster as Joy: Cyclone Debbie Strikes
Peter Tatchell
Human Rights are Animal Rights!
George Wuerthner
Livestock Grazing vs. the Sage Grouse
Jesse Jackson
Trump Should Form a Bipartisan Coalition to Get Real Reforms
Thomas Mountain
Rwanda Indicts French Generals for 1994 Genocide
Clancy Sigal
President of Pain
Andrew Stewart
President Gina Raimondo?
Lawrence Wittner
Can Our Social Institutions Catch Up with Advances in Science and Technology?
March 28, 2017
Mike Whitney
Ending Syria’s Nightmare will Take Pressure From Below 
Mark Kernan
Memory Against Forgetting: the Resonance of Bloody Sunday
John McMurtry
Fake News: the Unravelling of US Empire From Within
Ron Jacobs
Mad Dog, Meet Eris, Queen of Strife
Michael J. Sainato
State Dept. Condemns Attacks on Russian Peaceful Protests, Ignores Those in America
Ted Rall
Five Things the Democrats Could Do to Save Their Party (But Probably Won’t)
Linn Washington Jr.
Judge Neil Gorsuch’s Hiring Practices: Privilege or Prejudice?
Philippe Marlière
Benoît Hamon, the Socialist Presidential Hopeful, is Good News for the French Left
Norman Pollack
Political Cannibalism: Eating America’s Vitals
Bruce Mastron
Obamacare? Trumpcare? Why Not Cubacare?
David Macaray
Hollywood Screen and TV Writers Call for Strike Vote
Christian Sorensen
We’ve Let Capitalism Kill the Planet
Rodolfo Acuna
What We Don’t Want to Know
Binoy Kampmark
The Futility of the Electronics Ban
Andrew Moss
Why ICE Raids Imperil Us All
March 27, 2017
Robert Hunziker
A Record-Setting Climate Going Bonkers
Frank Stricker
Why $15 an Hour Should be the Absolute Minimum Minimum Wage
Melvin Goodman
The Disappearance of Bipartisanship on the Intelligence Committees
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail