ATR Urges HHS Secretary Tom Price to Provide Regulatory Relief to Emerging Vapor Market

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Paul Blair on Wednesday, March 22nd, 2017, 12:09 PM PERMALINK

In a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, ATR president Grover Norquist today asked for an immediate two-year delay of pending pre-market review requirements imposed by the Food and Drug Administration's May 2016 "Deeming Rule." The Rule applies to vapor products, electronic cigarettes, and premium cigars. Absent immediate action by Congress or the Administration to roll back the FDA's new rules, more than ten thousand new businesses in the United States will be required to comply with an application process so expensive and onerous that over the next two years more than 95% of vapor product manufacturers and retail small businesses will be forced to shut down. 

The C.D.C. estimates that more than 9 million U.S. adult consumers use vapor products, which are at least 95% less harmful than cigarettes, according to the Royal College of Physicians and other leading public health organizations. 

Under the new rules, new smoke-free vapor products will be subject to the regulatory review process established in the 2009-passed Tobacco Control Act. From the letter:

"In 2009 when Congress passed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (TCA)... the FDA was granted authority to impose new regulations upon tobacco products such as cigarettes, smokeless and roll-your-own tobacco. A “predicate date” of February 15, 2007 was established whereby products on the market at or before this date were exempt from pre-market FDA review. That look-back period was just over two years when the TCA was signed in 2009. The look-back period for newly deemed products is ten years. 

The FDA’s May 2016 Deeming Rule requires products which did not exist in 2007 – such as vapor products – to undergo the pre-market review process set up in the TCA. The process was designed to make it extraordinarily difficult to introduce new products to market, which is why it was supported by organizations like the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids."

There were a number of new requirements established in the FDA's May 2016 Rule. 

"The most significant of the requirements imposed by the FDA’s new Deeming Rule is a requirement that all manufacturers of vapor products submit every product currently available to consumers for pre-market review, a process that every single manufacturer of cigarettes in the United State avoided when the TCA was signed into law. The Pre-Market Tobacco Application (PMTA) requires businesses to spend in excess of $300,000 per product and at least 500 hours of time per application. Even if businesses could afford this investment, the process is designed to end in failure. Many small businesses produce hundreds of these products and would be forced to close their doors as a result." 

ATR is requesting a two-year delay in the PMTA filing deadline for newly deemed products. 

I am asking you to delay the PMTA filing deadline by at least two years as Congress considers an alternative approach to regulating these very low risk products. There are multiple efforts with bipartisan support aimed at addressing the issues I’ve outlined, including the Cole-Bishop Amendment to the FY17 House Agriculture Appropriations Bill and House Resolution 1136, also sponsored by Congressman Tom Cole (R-Okla.). It is paramount that Congress acts this year to modernize the February 2007 predicate date for newly deemed products on the market. 

The FDA is an agency of HHS and its commissioner reports to the Secretary of HHS. 

With the emergence of smoke-free vapor products, millions of U.S. adults have successfully quit smoking traditional cigarettes with a variety of products that did not exist in 2007. ​Imposing this retroactive and onerous set of pre-market review rules upon reduced risk products is illogical and stands to harm decades of efforts to reduce the harm assocaited with cigarette use. The original Act was designed to make it extremely difficult to introduce new tobacco products, and not a single cigarette on the market today was forced to go through this review process. ATR strongly encourages HHS and the FDA to rein in this overreach with immediate action to delay all future filing and application deadlines imposed by the FDA's Deeming Rule. 

The full letter can be read here.

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Norquist: AHCA is One of the Most Conservative Pieces of Legislation DC Has Ever Seen

Posted by Hannah Daniel on Wednesday, March 22nd, 2017, 10:01 AM PERMALINK

ATR President Grover Norquist appeared on Mornings with Maria on the Fox Business Network to discuss the American Heath Care Act, calling it “one of the most conservative pieces of legislation this town has ever seen,” and tax reform, explaining that border adjustability is necessary in order to pay for the planned tax cuts in the House Republican tax blueprint.

On the repeal bill, Norquist said:

“To criticize the Trump-Republican plan, which cuts spending by $1.2 trillion a decade and taxes by $900 billion, reforms Medicaid by block granting it and giving us HSAs, it’s a little hard not to recognize that as one of the most conservative pieces of legislation that this town has ever seen. I'm always for improving whatever we do, and so the questions raised by the Freedom Caucus and the Republican Steering Committee, these are fine questions, and there are negotiations that appear to be moving very quickly to make some changes in the package that Trump and the Republicans will find fine.”

On tax reform, Norquist said:

“Border adjustability raises a hundred billion a year, or a trillion dollars over a decade. That’s part of paying for about the other three and a half trillion in tax cuts. Part of it is done by reducing the expected revenue that happens in fixing Obamacare by a trillion dollars, that gives us another trillion, six hundred billion we got by making the extenders permanent, we got almost a trillion dollars by looking at it in dynamic scoring, but now we need more resources if you’re going to take the rate down to twenty, and that’s where border adjustable or something like it gets in.”

Click below to watch the interview:

More from Americans for Tax Reform

ATR Statement in Support of American Health Care Act

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Alexander Hendrie on Wednesday, March 22nd, 2017, 9:00 AM PERMALINK

Congress will soon vote on the American Health Care Act (AHCA), legislation that repeals Obamacare and implements numerous reforms toward a system of patient-centered, free market healthcare.

Members of Congress should have no hesitation supporting and voting “YES” on the AHCA to begin the process of repealing Obamacare.

The AHCA makes important changes to entitlements, updates and improves HSAs and gives American middle class families and businesses important tax relief. It implements an efficient age-adjusted tax credit that is vastly superior to the existing credit and is not an entitlement. The legislation also begins the process of removing burdensome insurance regulations while leaving room for HHS Secretary Price to alleviate the burden of other regulations. 

It is an excellent first step in implementing a healthcare system that works for all Americans.

“The Obamacare repeal bill abolishes 14 taxes that today siphon off nearly one trillion dollars from American Taxpayers each decade,” said Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform. “The bill also expands Health Savings Accounts, making health care reform patient-centered rather than top-down command and control. And the reform block grants Medicaid to the states through a per capita allotment-- a long time Reagan Republican goal to empower states and reduce federal control.”

Opposition to this legislation means support for the status quo that is Obamacare. This is unsustainable and reckless. 

The law has resulted in one-size fits all insurance that is too expensive, despite numerous government subsidies. Over one thousand counties in the nation have just one insurer participating on an exchange. Premiums increased by close to 25 percent last year, a trend that will likely only increase if this legislation fails.

Many lawmakers in Congress have long promised their constituents they would repeal and replace Obamacare with a cost-effective, patient centered, sustainable alternative. By passing this legislation they can fulfill this commitment to voters.​

Repeal of Obamacare Taxes

When it was signed into law, Obamacare imposed roughly a trillion dollars in new or higher taxes that hit middle class families, raise the cost of healthcare, and reduce access to care. 

The law imposed a tax for failing to buy government-mandated insurance, a new tax on health insurance, a tax on medical devices, a tax on innovative medicines, taxes on Health Savings Accounts and Flexible Spending Accounts, and even a tax hike on Americans facing high medical bills.

This legislation repeals all of these taxes. It also delays the Cadillac tax on employer provided insurance plans until 2026. [Full list of Obamacare Taxes Repealed]

Repealing these taxes will provide much needed relief to the paychecks of families across the country. Repealing Obamacare will also undo former President Barack Obama’s broken promise not to sign “any form of tax increase” on any middle class American family.

Expands Health Savings Accounts

Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) are a key component to ensuring Americans have access to patient centered health care that best fits their needs and incentivizes keeping costs low. American families typically pay for some or their entire healthcare costs indirectly (doctors and hospital visits, medicines and treatments etc.). HSAs give individuals direct control over these funds so they can make healthcare choices that best fit their individual needs and in the most efficient way.

Not only does the repeal bill abolish several taxes on HSAs, the law also makes several improvements. The plan expands the contribution limits for HSAs ($6,550 for individuals and $13,100 for families) so they can now be relied on to cover more medical costs. The legislation also increases the flexibility of savings accounts by allowing spouses to make catch-up contributions to HSAs and allows HSAs to cover certain medical expenses incurred before the saving account has been established.

Implements New, Age-Adjusted Tax Credit

The legislation implements an improved advanced refundable tax credit that is administered based on a taxpayer’s age ($2,000 for individuals under 30 scaling up to $4,000 for individuals over 60). The credit is indexed to inflation plus one percentage point and applies to the oldest five individuals in a family. It can be used by anyone not receiving employee insurance or Medicare/Medicaid.

Compared to the flawed and highly wasteful income based Obamacare tax credit, this new tax credit is far more efficient and will result in taxpayer dollars being spent far more responsibly.

While some have claimed that this tax credit is an entitlement, it is a common feature of Republican alternatives to Obamacare. The plan put forward by Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) contains tax credits, as does the plan released by HHS Secretary Tom Price when he was in Congress. All of these plans contain tax credits because they are vastly superior to other alternatives such as a straight subsidy.

Enacts Medicaid Reform

The existing fiscal trajectory of Medicaid is unsustainable. Obamacare expanded Medicaid to millions of able-bodied adults, an approach with high costs and low outcomes.

The AHCA addresses this by block granting Medicaid to the states through a per capita allotment. This approach will control federal spending and ensure states retain flexibility to implement a system that best fits their individual needs. Streamlining the funding process will not only ensure that Medicaid enrollees have access to more appropriate care, it will also cut down on waste, and promote more efficient allotment of resources.

These reforms will also save hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade.

Addresses Obamacare’s Insurance Regulations

The legislation reduces the impact of many Obamacare insurance regulations. Most notably, the bill zeroes out the individual mandate and employer mandate tax penalties. Under the AHCA, these mandates become suggestions with no enforcement mechanism.

The bill also increases coverage options by repealing actuarial standards of Obamacare plans and permits changes to age-based ratings to give insurers greater flexibility over costs.

In other cases, this bill does not repeal or modify insurance regulations, because doing so would mean the AHCA is no longer reconciliation compliant and thus would be unable to pass the Senate under a simple majority. Adding new provisions repealing insurance regulations would trigger a 60 vote threshold in the Senate, which makes it virtually impossible to pass repeal legislation.

Fortunately, HHS Secretary Price has the authority to loosen or undo these regulations. Numerous sections of federal law grant the Secretary broad discretion to reinterpret federal law including what counts as a “qualified health plan” or “essential benefits,” or to grant states “innovation waivers” to Obamacare requirements. 

Photo Credit:

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Tax Simplification Should Include Repeal of FATCA

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Alexander Hendrie on Tuesday, March 21st, 2017, 3:00 PM PERMALINK

After more than 30 years, comprehensive, pro-growth tax reform may finally be signed into law in 2017. This is an opportunity to cut taxes for American families and businesses across the board, enact an internationally competitive system for businesses, and drastically simplify the tax code.  It should also be an opportunity to repeal the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA).

FATCA was signed into law in 2010 with the goal of stopping tax evaders that were using offshore bank accounts. However, it was designed as a blunt instrument that targets any American with a bank account overseas. Most who are forced to comply are expatriate Americans who have, little if any U.S. presence. 

As a result, compliance costs far outstrip any effectiveness in curbing tax evasion. American citizens overseas have become locked out of financial institutions including banks, stockbrokers, hedge funds, and insurance. Often, it is easier for these businesses to deny US citizens service.

“FATCA is the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) for Americans overseas—an intrusive, complicated, painful and unfair tax regime designed to be massive overkill in hunting for coins between the cushions,” said Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform. “We are finally abolishing AMT—after 48 years—in Trump’s tax reform package. We should put FATCA to sleep at the same time.”

Under FATCA, any overseas account held by U.S. citizens must be reported to the IRS. This means that millions of Americans must give up personal information and comply with burdensome IRS regulations and reporting requirements. The law requires financial institutions to collect and disclose this information. If they fail to do so, the IRS can impose a 30 percent withholding on an institution’s U.S. investments.

FATCA also requires American citizens to comply with tax filing forms if they have assets overseas meet or exceed $50,000. For overseas Americans, this means they must comply with the tax compliance laws in their country of residence in addition to IRS laws.

FATCA should be repealed as part of tax reform. In a letter to Congressional leaders, 23 conservative and free market groups urged Congress to repeal this burdensome law as tax reform efforts move forward.

However, this should be step one of reforming the taxation of overseas citizens. FATCA is merely a symptom of a larger problem.

Just as American businesses operating overseas are forced to comply with the outdated and burdensome worldwide system of taxation, Americans are forced to comply with a system of citizenship-based taxation.

This means that regardless of where a US citizen lives, they must comply with IRS rules and are double taxed on income - once when they earn it overseas and again because they are an American citizen. While repealing FATCA would ease the burden on citizens living abroad, a longer term solution should involve enacting residence-based taxation for Americans.

The current citizen-based system affects an estimated eight million Americans that live and work overseas. This system is nearly unique to America – every other country in the world with the exception of Eritrea has residence-based taxation.

In contrast, residence-based taxation subjects individuals to taxation based on location of residence without regard to citizenship. This would make tax compliance far simpler and should be part of any effort to simplify the code for individuals.

There is a clear need to reform this burdensome system and updated the way the tax code treats citizens living overseas. This can start with repealing FATCA, however it should not end until residence-based taxation is signed into law.

Photo Credit:

More from Americans for Tax Reform

GOP Senators Investigate Taxpayer Funding of Soros-linked, Left Wing Macedonian Political Organization

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Elizabeth McKee, Lorenzo Montanari on Monday, March 20th, 2017, 3:24 PM PERMALINK

Six GOP senators have written a letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, imploring him to investigate claims that the federal government is channeling millions of taxpayer dollars to left wing organizations that interfere in Balkan domestic politics. The signatories - who include Mike Lee and Ted Cruz - believe one of USAID’S partner organizations used taxpayer dollars to “push a progressive agenda and invigorate the political left” in Macedonia.

The organization in question is the Foundation Open Society Macedonia (FOSM), an offshoot of George Soros’s Open Society Foundation. In Macedonia, the VMRO-DPMNE party (one of Macedonia’s two major political parties), has accused FOSM of inciting violent protests in which 50 police officers were injured

Since 2012, USAID has awarded multiple grants totaling $5 million to FOSM, and has granted aid to as many as 61 FOSM affiliates. In 2015, USAID named FOSM as one of their top partners in the region, and recently earmarked $9.5 million to be spent by FOSM and its partner organizations.

According to the FOSM website, “the foundation has worked with young people to express their frustration with poverty and corruption through increased mobilization and activism on social and political issues.” Government officials speculate the “political issues” around which FOSM mobilizes young people are part of a liberal political effort to influence the party dynamics of Macedonia and other Balkan states. In particular, the self-avowedly Eurocentric FOSM may be working to counteract Eurosceptic political groups like the VMRO-DPMNE party.

Last month, members of the House of Representatives sent their own letter to the U.S. Comptroller General, demanding an investigation into the use of taxpayer dollars to influence Macedonian politics. Signed by seven Republican representatives, the letter asked, “What percentage of US aid money in the fields of democracy, civil society and media is funded through FOSM? Was any organization . . .  that receives US funds directly or indirectly, through FOSM or otherwise, reported to have been involved in violence, either against persons or property destruction, and have any police or security officers been wounded in connection to that violence?” So far, these questions have not been answered.

Macedonia is not the only Balkan state in which American taxpayers are funding one of Soros’s organizations. Foundation Open Society Albania (FOSA) also received funds from USAID during the Obama administration, and these funds, too, may have gone to serve a political purpose. In their letter, the senators suggest that FOSA used taxpayer dollars to enact legal reforms that “aimed to give the [Albanian] Prime Minister and left-of-center government full control over judiciary power.”

If these allegations are true, USAID is funneling money to Soros-backed organizations that work to foment political unrest in Macedonia and other Balkan states. This wasteful and destructive pattern of spending on the part of USAID undermines international conventions on diplomatic relations and state sovereignty - all at the expense of the taxpayer.

There is no justifiable reason why American citizens and businesses should be bankrolling Macedonian political activists. The budget request for the State Department and USAID jointly totals $50.1 billion for FY2017; not a penny of that should be used to interfere in Balkan domestic politics.


Photo Credit:

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Two Charts: How the AHCA Shrinks Federal Spending

Posted by John Kartch on Monday, March 20th, 2017, 3:18 PM PERMALINK

-Under the American Health Care Act, by 2021 federal spending on healthcare as a percentage of GDP is reduced from 6.9% to 6.3%. As time goes by, the spending reduction gets larger. See the first chart, below.

-Under AHCA, by 2027 total federal spending as a percentage of GDP is reduced from 23.4% to 22.4%. See the second chart, below.

"In addition to abolishing Obamacare's taxes, the AHCA reduces the total size of government permanently," said Grover Norquist president of Americans for Tax Reform.


Chart by Strategas Research Partners using OMB and CBO data

Chart by Strategas Research Partners using CBO data

More from Americans for Tax Reform

ATR Supports Biennial Budgeting Bill

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Natalie De Vincenzi on Monday, March 20th, 2017, 2:40 PM PERMALINK

ATR President Grover Norquist wrote a letter to Congressman Messer in support of H.R. 1065, the Biennial Budgeting and Enhanced Oversight Act of 2017. H.R. 1065 would reform the budget and appropriations cycle by extending it from one to two years, aligning the budget process with Congressional terms.

This key piece of legislation will increase efficiency and oversight over federal spending and remove any practices that promote wasted spending. The failure of Congress to complete a budget and appropriations process numerous times over the last 40 years is an issue that needs to be addressed. A biennial budgeting process, like the one created by this bill, would help resolve that problem. Read the letter here or below. 

March 20, 2017

The Honorable Luke Messer
United States House of Representatives
1230 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Congressman Messer,

I write to express support for your bill, the Biennial Budgeting and Enhanced Oversight Act of 2017. The legislation, H.R. 1065, offers a new approach to solve Washington gridlock, and promote efficiency in federal spending.

 The 1978 Budget Act has created a broken system that is rigged toward higher spending. In the last 40 years, the appropriations process has been completed just four times. Within the last 20 years, it has been completed just once. Congress has even failed to pass a budget in 9 of the last 18 years.

H.R. 1065 would reform the budget and appropriations cycle by extending it from one to two years, aligning the budget process with Congressional terms. This would allow Congress ample time to allocate how it spends taxpayer dollars and conduct oversight over federal programs. Lawmakers would be required to complete the budget process in non-election years, so they are not impeded by campaign responsibilities.

By using election years to focus on studying long-term budgetary and economic effects, your legislation will ensure strong oversight over federal spending. In turn, this will allow Congress to better understand and highlight how much money an agency or program needs based on the economic implications it would produce. Wasteful or unnecessary programs can then be better identified and cut.

A biennial budget process like the one created by H.R. 1065 could reverse current practices that are biased towards waste, not prudence. Agencies are rarely able to plan effectively in the shortened budget windows created by stopgap measures. As a result, the current system encourages federal agencies to abide by a “use it or lose it” mentality, in which they spend billions during the last few weeks in order to avoid having their budget reduced for the next year.

It is clear that our current budget system does not work. Your legislation recognizes that and implements key reforms that aim to streamline the budget process to allow Congress to better conduct oversight and combat waste. I urge your colleagues to support H.R. 1065, the Biennial Budgeting and Enhanced Oversight Act.


Grover Norquist
President, Americans for Tax Reform

Photo Credit:

More from Americans for Tax Reform

There are no related posts.

Repeal Bill Abolishes Obamacare’s Chronic Care Tax on Middle Class

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Hannah Daniel on Monday, March 20th, 2017, 12:11 PM PERMALINK

Obamacare’s Chronic Care Tax is an income tax hike that hits 10 million households that happen to have high out of pocket medical expenses in a given year – the average income of households paying this Obamacare tax is $53,000

Though rarely if ever mentioned by the mainstream media, Obamacare is loaded with tax hikes on the middle class. Today we look at just one of these taxes, the Obamacare Chronic Care Tax:

-The Obamacare Chronic Care Tax violated Obama’s middle class tax pledge. Obamacare imposed a $1 trillion tax hike on the American people, and violated President Obama’s own “firm pledge” not to raise any form of tax on any middle class American. One of the most widespread Obamacare tax hikes is the Chronic Care Tax.

-The Obamacare Chronic Care tax is an income tax hike. Before Obamacare, Americans facing high out of pocket medical expenses were allowed an income tax deduction to the extent that those expenses exceeded 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI). Obamacare now imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI. Therefore, Obamacare not only makes it more difficult to claim this income tax deduction, it widens the net of taxable income.

-The Obamacare Chronic Care Tax hits at least 10 million American households each year. According to IRS data, each year approximately 10 million households are hit with the Obamacare Chronic Care Tax, and nearly all were middle class. The average household income of those hit with this Obamacare tax: $53,000.

-The Obamacare Chronic Care Tax is a $35 Billion Tax Hike over 10 years. By raising the threshold that Americans can claim the chronic care tax deduction to 10 percent, ATR estimates that the income tax increase for the average family claiming this tax deduction is $200 - $400 per year. The latest CBO score shows that the Obamacare Chronic Care tax hits these families with $35 billion in higher taxes over ten years.

-The Repeal Bill abolishes the Chronic Care Tax, providing significant tax relief for low and middle income households. The AHCA restores the pre-Obamacare 7.5 percent threshold, providing significant middle class tax relief.

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Five Reasons Connecticut Should Oppose a Carbon Tax

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Daniel Uzi Frydman on Friday, March 17th, 2017, 9:19 AM PERMALINK

Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) this week released a letter to the Connecticut General Assembly urging legislators to oppose House Bill 7247, an “Act Establishing a Carbon Price for Fossil Fuels Sold in Connecticut.” Connecticut consumers and businesses already face the eighth worst overall state tax burden in the country. The Connecticut carbon tax proposed in HB 7247 would only make matters worse by levying a $15 per ton carbon tax on the state, which would increase $5 annually.

A carbon tax is likely to hinder economic competitiveness in the Constitution State by inflating the cost of energy, in turn negatively impacting businesses, jobs, and the price of consumer goods, thus increasing costs across the board for Connecticutians.

A study by the National Association of Manufacturers, based on a $20 per ton tax rate, explores where the brunt of this misguided legislation will be felt if the tax is implemented. If HB 7247 becomes law, Connecticutians will experience employment loss, increased prices at the pump, and elevated energy bills. Just one year after implementation, with a rate of $20 per ton, Connecticutians can expect the following:

1. Increased Prices at the Pump. In 2016 Connecticut’s gas tax was the 6th highest in the nation, and the proposed carbon tax would only drive that rate higher. In addition to the federal gas tax of 18.4 cents per gallon and the Connecticut state gas tax of 37.51 cents per gallon, HB 7247 would add an additional 20 cents per gallon, totaling up to a 75.9 cents tax per gallon for topping off the tank.

2. Raised Electricity Costs. The cost of natural gas is projected to increase by more than 40 percent in the state, driving up energy costs for residents and businesses. Homeowners would suffer as HB 7247 would cause significant increases to household electricity rates. Such an increase in energy prices would also jolt through the economy raising the costs of consumer goods, an impact that would fall hardest on the state’s low-income residents.

3. Eliminated Employment Opportunities. A $20 per ton carbon tax could deal a blow to employment in Connecticut, with a potential loss of worker income equivalent of up to 9,000 jobs after just the first year, rising above “18,000 jobs by 2023.” 

4. Economic Sectors Would Spiral South in 2023. Connecticut economic sectors such as services, energy-intensive manufacturing, and non-energy-intensive manufacturing face an aggregate loss in economic output that could reach a projected 3.2 percent by 2023.

5. Crippled Economic Competitiveness. Connecticut currently ranks as the 43rd worst state on the bipartisan Tax Foundation’s 2017 State Business Tax Climate Index. Implementing HB 7247 in Connecticut would only slow down an already burdened intrastate tax climate. Bordering states would gain more of a competitive edge over Connecticut if HB 7247 were to become law, which would only hinder the state’s competitiveness, and deter business investments in Connecticut further.

If passed, Connecticut’s residents and businesses will see employment loss, economic sectors deteriorate, electricity bills jolt up, and prices at the pump pile up. Lawmakers should oppose House Bill 7247 and protect the residents and businesses in the great state of Connecticut.

Photo Credit: Ilirjan Rrumbullaku

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Norquist On Tax Reform: “Voters Are Smarter Than The Democrats Think They Are.”

Posted by Hannah Daniel on Thursday, March 16th, 2017, 3:32 PM PERMALINK

Today ATR president Grover Norquist was a guest on Fox Business Network’s Varney & Company. Grover and Stuart Varney discussed Rachel Maddow’s Al Capone vault debacle, Obamacare repeal, and federal tax reform. See highlights and video below:

Norquist: “The repeal of Obamacare is somewhere around $900 billion in reduced taxes in the next decade including for people with Flexible Spending Accounts, Health Savings Accounts, and many middle class tax cuts. They [the Left and Democrats] don’t want to talk about that. They certainly don’t want to talk about taking the business tax down from 35 percent to 20 percent, the individual rate down to three rates, getting rid of the Death Tax, getting rid of the AMT. These are very popular with the American people. They would be very helpful to the economy. They would rather talk about whether we saw a 12 year old tax return number which points out that the president paid 25 percent of his earnings in federal taxes. That’s before you get to state taxes and local taxes in New York.”

Norquist: “Voters are smarter than the Democrats think they are. In Obamacare, there is a tax on prescription drugs. Poor people, low income people, middle income people buy prescription drugs. They know that a tax on prescription drugs is a tax on them. They know that a tax on insurance policies if they have insurance is a tax on them, not the insurance company. The insurance company doesn’t have any money that they don’t get from you and me and the general public when they sell insurance. They understand that taxes on businesses are what keep them or their brother or their sister or spouse from having a job. So the American people are a lot wiser than the left-wingers think they are. They understand the damage that tax does may be indirect, but it hurts.”

View the full interview below

More from Americans for Tax Reform