Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(108,273 posts)
Fri Dec 10, 2021, 02:27 PM Dec 2021

Senate Democrats are leaving the billionaires' tax out of their climate and spending plan due to

Source: Business Insider

widespread resistance in their ranks

Senate Democrats are not sticking with their previous plan for a billionaires' tax in their $2 trillion social and climate spending bill as they race to finalize the details and approve it before Christmas.

Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the Senate Finance Committee chair, said his panel would release new bill text on Friday.

He's long pushed a tax on billionaires' assets, introduced in late October. But the Oregon Democrat conceded it would not form part of the new Senate legislation.

"I do not expect that it will be," Wyden told Insider on Thursday evening. "I have continued to talk to my colleagues and there is widespread awareness that this is the largest amount of money that has been scored by the Joint Committee on Taxation."

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/senate-democrats-are-leaving-the-billionaires-tax-out-of-their-climate-and-spending-plan-due-to-widespread-resistance-in-their-ranks/ar-AARGQMN

14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Senate Democrats are leaving the billionaires' tax out of their climate and spending plan due to (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Dec 2021 OP
Hate to put it bluntly, but grumpyduck Dec 2021 #1
Crumbly crumbly crumbly Fullduplexxx Dec 2021 #2
There goes the selling point that it's completely paid for with higher taxes on the rich MichMan Dec 2021 #3
This Bayard Dec 2021 #4
Manchin Again!! No surprise. riversedge Dec 2021 #8
VERY disappointing 😟 Ziggysmom Dec 2021 #5
Not surprising. n/t BeckyDem Dec 2021 #6
Nope. Not at all. (n/t) OldBaldy1701E Dec 2021 #7
Good Sgent Dec 2021 #9
Placing economic concerns above environmental necessities is a lose, lose, lose approach. Magoo48 Dec 2021 #10
This message was self-deleted by its author Calista241 Dec 2021 #11
Then we should keep the SALT cap, or even lower it to $5k. Calista241 Dec 2021 #12
This has been off the table for weeks... brooklynite Dec 2021 #13
Kick ck4829 Jan 2022 #14

Bayard

(22,172 posts)
4. This
Fri Dec 10, 2021, 05:21 PM
Dec 2021

One of the big reasons it was so popular. Is this supposed to appease Manchin? Because he's not going to get on board, no matter what.

Sgent

(5,857 posts)
9. Good
Sat Dec 11, 2021, 04:09 AM
Dec 2021

the tax as designed would have encouraged privately held businesses and discouraged public companies. Public companies are much better for the economy overall.

Magoo48

(4,721 posts)
10. Placing economic concerns above environmental necessities is a lose, lose, lose approach.
Sat Dec 11, 2021, 10:00 AM
Dec 2021

Taxing the rich is imperative. Most wealth can be traced back to environmental exploitation. Capitalism based upon extraction economics must pay a high price now for centuries of its reckless, greedy rampage. The bill is due. If the bill isn’t paid in full, globally, and relatively fast, well, the best science has laid out the exact consequences and a startling timeline for those consequences to occur.

Response to Magoo48 (Reply #10)

Calista241

(5,586 posts)
12. Then we should keep the SALT cap, or even lower it to $5k.
Sat Dec 11, 2021, 11:44 AM
Dec 2021

SALT IS a tax on rich people. The SALT cap raises $100b / year in taxes, and coming up with a new tax to replace it seems to be unworkable.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Senate Democrats are leav...