President Biden and Russia’s President Vladimir Putin shake hands at the U.S.-Russia summit in Geneva, Switzerland, June 16, 2021. The challenge will be to convince them of that before the tax hikes are voted on in Congress. It shouldn’t be hard to convince Americans they’ll be hurt by the new taxes that could pass. The credibility of the Biden administration since the Afghan debacle is shot, and its reputation for transparency is in the tank.
#Su podium browser not recognizing license full#
The full document can be found here.Ĭan anybody explain how taxing plastics and energy doesn’t break President Biden’s promise not to tax anyone making less than $400,000?ĭemocrats privately say they will be able to get away with that if they shower lower-income taxpayers with rebates for some of the higher prices they would be paying. The menu includes an increase in the corporate tax, an excise tax on stock buybacks, an increase in the top individual income-tax rate, a corporate AMT, doubling the capital-gains tax and making death a realization event, phasing out the 199A exclusion, taxing UNREALIZED capital gains (“mark-to-market for billionaires”), doubling the size of the IRS, and these two gems.
The Senate Finance Committee’s list of tax hikes they’d like to include in their $3.5 trillion tax-and-spend bonanza has leaked, and it has some real doozies. The House’s passage of a budget resolution has given the first clues to just how Democrats plan to raise taxes by $3 trillion over the next decade.īloomberg News reports that progressives are “ discussing a wider range of tax proposals than President Joe Biden has proposed, including levies on stock buybacks, carbon emissions and executive compensation.” Those increases would be used to pay for $3.5 trillion “in child care, education and other social programs.”
And then we realized that we can’t sue them because they’re complying with the law!”įor the time being and at least for several days, much of the machinery of abortion had ground to a halt in Texas while Roe and Casey are still on the books, a truly extraordinary accomplishment. “And so when we get two or three days before the effective date of the law,” recalls state senator Bryan Hughes, the chief legislative proponent of the law, “we’re talking to some of our lawyers about what to do - we’re filing our first lawsuit, we can sue them. This was an eventuality shocking even to the most committed proponents of the bill.
When the morning of September 1 arrived, though, they realized this legal strategy had a fundamental problem - there were apparently no abortion providers violating the statute to sue.Ībortionists had, as far as anyone could tell, ceased performing abortions after six weeks in the state of Texas. They’d sue an abortion provider under the law to try to get the inevitable litigation about the statute going in the most favorable district court under the best circumstances for their side. Texas pro-lifers had a legal strategy in mind when the state’s heartbeat law, also known as S.B. I have a big piece up on the home page about how the Texas heartbeat bill came about and the thinking behind it:
0 kommentar(er)
