Democrats, Sinema reach deal on new taxes in Inflation Reduction Act

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: Washington Post

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) said she would “move forward” on a revised version of Senate Democrats’ health care, climate and deficit-reduction package, after party leaders agreed to scale back some of their original tax proposals.

The new approach — along with other changes to the proposal known as the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 — satisfied Sinema’s chief concerns and helped set in motion a plan to approve it as soon as this weekend.

In a statement, Sinema said Democrats had “agreed to remove” a key tax targeting wealthy investors and had made changes to a second provision that aims to impose a new minimum tax on corporations that currently pay nothing to the U.S. government. From here, Sinema said she would await a final review from the chamber’s parliamentarian — a critical step in the process that allows Democrats to move their spending bill — at which point she would “move forward.”

The changes in total appear to have helped Democratic leaders thread a narrow needle, satisfying Sinema while still preserving the thrust of the deal that Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) worked out with another moderate — Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.).

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2022/08/04/inflation-reduction-act-sinema/

---

No paywall link

[spooky3]

1. Here's a link I could "gift"--it may work when others don't.

https://wapo.st/3vFWaBR

[BumRushDaShow]

14. Thanks! I did just find a no paywall one and added it to the OP

[50 Shades Of Blue]

2. And behind the scenes, Sinema and Manchin are high-fiving.

[nycbos]

3. This is a BFD.

Is it everything we wanted? No. But this bill will help a lot of people and getting something done is better than getting nothing done.

[texasfiddler]

4. I agree. I will take incremental change over zero change any day.

The Climate Change and Prescription Drug parts of the bill are very important to me.

[Walleye]

5. I totally agree with that. We can't count our chickens before they hatch though

[yaesu]

9. its a long, long way from a BFD but when we have fascist roadblocks in our own party

I guess crumbs are better than nothing.

[onetexan]

17. I wouldn't call it crumbs, it is a BFD given its midterms & we need

Every accomplishment Dems can get done.

[democratsruletheday]

41. crumbs? Gimme a break 'yaesu'....

that's pretty far from the truth and you know it deep down. Don't let Sinema and/or Manchin pee on our parade. The bill is a damn good one overall but as someone else said: no bill is perfect. Embrace it, enjoy it and go have a drink. Cuz as someone else said:it's a BFD and the Dems just accomplished something the Repukes never could. They are worthless.

[Mme. Defarge]

13. By securing this win for the people of the U.S.

it should further bolster the Dems chances in the upcoming mid-term election. With more Democratic Senators we can pass new legislation that fills in the missing pieces.

N’est-ce pas?

[yaesu]

6. Sounds like they are leaving out the best part of the bill, why even bother at this point?

"Sinema said Democrats had “agreed to remove” a key tax targeting wealthy investors and had made changes to a second provision that aims to impose a new minimum tax on corporations"

[texasfiddler]

10. That is your opinion.

My favorite is the renewable part for Climate Change. I weird like that.

[AllyCat]

32. I like that part too, but how is it paid for if Sinema's

REAL constituents (oil and the investment industries) aren’t paying their fair share? Again.

[Johnny2X2X]

11. Climate change

This is the biggest investment in fighting climate change in history.

[former9thward]

21. It gives all sorts of benefits to the oil industry.

The bill will reinstate an 80 million acre sale for the Gulf of Mexico that a federal judge had invalidated. With the bill the Interior Department will be required to offer at least two million acres of federal land and 60 million acres of off shore areas to oil and gas producers every year for the next decade. If they don't they will be banned from giving permits to wind or solar projects on federal land.

Shell Oil CEO Ben van Beurden applauded the deal and highlighted its promise of new lease sales to come.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/senate-climate-bill-is-a-boon-for-fossil-fuels-11659045759

[Johnny2X2X]

22. Paywalled

Are you trolling?

[femmedem]

52. There's nothing wrong with posting paywalled links.

Reputable news sources need revenue to survive.

[Fiendish Thingy]

46. With all the new leases, I don't see you 40% emission reduction is achieved. Nt

[Johnny2X2X]

53. Well then you aren't reading all that's in the bill

Environmental groups are already looking at the data and agreeing it reduces carbon emissions as stated.

[Fiendish Thingy]

55. The information about the new leases has 9th become public in the past day

I saw no mention of the new leases in coverage of the bill prior to yesterday. All analysis of emissions reduction focused only on the reduction measures in the bill, and didn’t factor in the additional emissions that will be created by the new leases.

[drray23]

15. that's not the best part.

this bill lowers the price of prescription drugs, significantly funds climate change, funds the IRS so that they can go after tax evasion.

Those things alone are a huge step forward.

Apparently Sinema got one of the tax measures dropped and tweaked but still kept the other measure on minimum tax for corporations. If this gets us everything else it's a good compromise.

[Lonestarblue]

7. Here's hoping that getting some legislation passed will also help this November .

Along with pounding personal freedom and getting government and Republican politicians out of our bedrooms.

[Me.]

8. Well There Can Be No Doubt NOw

where her concerns are centered. For whom the bells toll Senator.

[drray23]

16. do you even know what's in it ?

Apparently not.

It reduces the price of prescription drugs, funds the IRS to go after tax cheats, massively funds climate change measures, insures corporations pay a minimum tax ( that was tweaked but still there).

Those things alone are a huge deal. For example so many people can't afford prescription drugs right now.

[former9thward]

19. "Funds climate change measures"?

Not so much.

The bill gives a big boost to the fossil fuel industry.

The bill will reinstate an 80 million acre sale for the Gulf of Mexico that a federal judge had invalidated. With the bill the Interior Department will be required to offer at least two million acres of federal land and 60 million acres of off shore areas to oil and gas producers every year for the next decade. If they don't they will be banned from giving permits to wind or solar projects on federal land.
Shell Oil CEO Ben van Beurden applauded the deal.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/senate-climate-bill-is-a-boon-for-fossil-fuels-11659045759

[drray23]

20. the whole thing is nearly 400 billions for climate change

and yes some parts are for the fossil industry. It's a given that this was needed to get Manchin on board.

[former9thward]

25. The entire deal is $369 billion.

Over ten years and that includes health care and tax issues.

[drray23]

33. I think you are mistaken.

it's 740 billions, the climate change part itself is the number you quote.

https://www.agweb.com/news/policy/politics/what-changed-senator-manchins-mind-about-740b-reconciliation-bill

[JohnSJ]

39. +++

[lapucelle]

36. That's the climate piece alone.

https://bit.ly/3SuRSH6

[spooky3]

38. +1 thanks for fact checking! Nt

[lapucelle]

40. The Wall Street Journal is the source of the dollar amount error.

The WSJ article with that error has been cited twice in this thread.

[spooky3]

42. Glad you caught them. It's interesting how small the

Carried interest piece is relative to, for example, the corporate minimum tax revenue. It’s understandable why a compromise was reached on that for now, but if Dems do well in November, I hope they go back to remedy the injustice.

[lapucelle]

57. Perhaps the possibility of negotiations on carried interest was baked in from the start.

At any rate, it is likely that the carried interest loophole will be revisited in the near future. That's why it's important to grow our majority in the Senate.

We'll have opportunities for reconciliation bills in the 118th Congress (January 2023) if we hold our majority.

That's why it's disappointing to see this bill mischaracterized on this forum. It serves to depress the Democratic vote.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To make up for the lost revenue, Democrats have agreed to add a 1 percent excise tax on stock buybacks, according to two people familiar with the agreement. That provision had been included in earlier iterations of the bill, including the version the House passed last November.

Sinema said she’s willing to consider legislation changing the taxation of carried interest and would work with Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., a centrist Finance panel member, on it after the budget reconciliation measure advances.

“Following this effort, I look forward to working with Senator Warner to enact carried interest tax reforms, protecting investments in America's economy and encouraging continued growth while closing the most egregious loopholes that some abuse to avoid paying taxes,” she said.

https://rollcall.com/2022/08/04/sinema-ready-to-advance-budget-bill-after-tax-changes/

[spooky3]

58. Agree nt

[TiberiusB]

51. "Energy Security" seems like an open door for abuse, but

https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/summary_of_the_energy_security_and_climate_change_investments_in_the_inflation_reduction_act_of_2022.pdf

Here's a break down of some of what's in the bill.

[lapucelle]

54. Thanks, but I know what's in the bill.

Why does the phrase "energy security" seem like an open door for abuse? The bill is specific and detailed as to exactly what it is funding.

[The Inflation Reduction Act] increases American energy security through policies to support energy reliability and cleaner production coupled with historic investments in American clean energy manufacturing to lessen our reliance on China, ensuring that the transition to a clean economy creates millions of American manufacturing jobs, and is powered by American-made clean technologies.

snip===========================================================

[The Inflation Reduction Act] focuses investments into disadvantaged communities to ensure that communities that are too-often left behind will share in the benefits of the transition to a clean economy.

snip===========================================================

[The Inflation Reduction Act] supports resilient rural communities by investing in farmers and forestland owners to be part of growing climate solutions, and by ensuring rural and communities are able to better adapt to a rapidly changing climate.

snip============================================================

This bill will support energy reliability and cleaner energy production coupled with historic investments in American clean energy manufacturing. It includes over $60 billion to on-shore clean energy manufacturing in the U.S. across the full supply chain of clean energy and transportation technologies. These manufacturing incentives will help alleviate inflation and reduce the risk of future price shocks by bringing down the cost of clean energy and clean vehicles and relieving supply chain bottlenecks.

snip============================================================

Building on regular engagement with EJ leaders from across the country, this package includes over $60 billion in environmental justice priorities to drive investments into disadvantaged communities.

snip===========================================================

This bill will make historic investments to ensure that rural communities are at the forefront of climate solutions. The investments affirm the central role of agricultural producers and forest landowners in our climate solutions by investing in climate-smart agriculture, forest restoration and land conservation. It also makes significant investments in clean energy development in rural communities.

[texasfiddler]

23. There are so many prime BLM and off-shore leases offered to the oil and gas industry right now.

Offer them first dibs. Who cares. Economics will win. This was the carrot that Manchin needed. The SEIA is very excited about this bill, so I don't think it is the piece of shit bill you think it is.

[former9thward]

28. Yes, the solar industry will get tax subsidies from the bill.

[Johnny2X2X]

26. Stop posting the same thing over and over.

Especially when it’s paywalled.

[former9thward]

29. You post what you want and I will do the same.

That is how it works. If I didn't post a link then the complaint would be "where is the link?"

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

18. So former Green Sinema held out for a removal of a "key tax targeting wealthy investors"

What a fake.

The bill is better than nothing but I'm hoping she gets primaried when she's up for reelection.

[ancianita]

27. Yep

because her donors said they'd primary her if she didn't deliver. So now the party will primary the hell out of her whenever she goes to re-up.

[Rhiannon12866]

44. Same here.

[AllyCat]

24. She wanted lower taxes on the wealthy.

What is that telling us?

[IronLionZion]

31. People who benefit from carried interest loophole must have paid her tons of money

hardly anyone is affected by that but they are fabulously wealthy. She's actually to the right of Manchin on this.

I hope we get the 1% tax on stock buybacks. There's a lot of that with cash rich companies who decided not to lower prices or increase wages, just prop up their own stock price.

Arizona is not known as a manufacturing state. Who lobbied her to remove the minimum corporate tax? She claims she's protecting manufacturing jobs.

[Lasher]

35. Is she asking for the carried interest loophole legislation to be removed?

Trump promised to end it but of course he did not. That would be a real big deal to me.

[IronLionZion]

43. Yes, here's the excerpt from the WaPo article

In a statement, Sinema said Democrats had “agreed to remove” a key tax policy targeting wealthy investors that aimed to address what is known as the “carried interest loophole.” She also signaled they had made additional tweaks to a second provision that imposes a new minimum tax on corporations that currently pay nothing to the U.S. government.

The latter set of revisions are likely to benefit some manufacturers, according to two people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition anonymity to describe the unreleased details. Many corporate executives, including local Arizona business leaders, had petitioned Sinema to consider the consequences of the tax in recent days.

[Lasher]

47. Thanks.

It is not spelled out that way in the no paywall version. But I see that it is in this one.

This is unfortunate indeed. But like they say it's better than nothing.

[Gore1FL]

34. She got the attention she wanted. nt

[czarjak]

37. Who kicked and who screamed is all I want to know.

[BaronChocula]

48. Happy for the positive reactions here.

I do hate the Sinema compromise, and frankly, I dislike her and Manchin greatly, but they are the reality we have to deal with. Let's take their judicial votes and move on. But not until we CELEBRATE another Biden-era victory. I'm having a drink!

[regnaD kciN]

49. So, are we confident Manchin will go along with Sinema's revisions...?

I wouldn't count on anything until the bill is signed into law -- including that the parliamentarian (who, if I recall correctly, is a Republican who has shot down our reconciliation proposals in the past) will approve it if S&M both signal their assent.

[lapucelle]

56. What makes you think she is a Republican or, indeed, partisan at all?

She was appointed by Harry Reid in 2012.

[quakerboy]

50. Let me know when its actually passed

Im a skeptic. I wont believe it till its actually signed and done.

[LiberalLovinLug]

59. Just what I was going to write

Manchin or Sinema. But I actually trust Manchin's old school word over the slippery sleazy Sinema.

I would not be surprised one iota if she pulls a last minute tantrum, knowing she has them over a barrel and any sudden defeat now would be devastating to the party she obviously despises.

[quakerboy]

60. I dont think she does

I dont think she cares one way or the other about the party. Or the voters. Or anyone.

She also doesnt care much about power, or is extremely short sighted, because its hard to win future elections when your own party despises you, your basic existance is unacceptable to the opposition, and noone with an ounce of sense would trust you.

That pretty well leaves money. Its pretty much got to be money. This is where an actually active, investigative justice system would be real helpful.