Today, Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist sent a letter in support on progress in the C-band to members of the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee.

Though ATR initially opposed the plans offered by the C-Band Alliance, the alliance has made changes to their proposal, which is now more transparent, clears more spectrum, and acknowledges taxpayer interests. Because of these changes and the importance for the United States to win the 5G race, the FCC should pursue this solution.

Read the full letter below or linked here.

Grover G. Norquist 

President 

October 16, 2019 

Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations
Room S-128, The Capitol, Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Senators: 

As the American economy demands more and faster connectivity, Americans for Tax Reform believes that the FCC should make getting spectrum into the hands of wireless carriers that will deploy 21st century networks a top priority. Though we initially opposed the plans set forward by the C-Band Alliance, we are encouraged by the changes they have made to their proposal, which is now more transparent, clears more spectrum, and acknowledges taxpayer interests. 

We maintain that the best solution to spectrum scarcity is to make additional government spectrum available for commercial auction. But in working with what is currently attainable to close this gap, the Federal Communications Commission is rightly focused on the C- Band. Mid-band spectrum is a key element in bringing 5G to Americans. Currently, US Companies are operating at a deficit compared to other international competitors, especially China which is making 500 MHz of mid-band spectrum available to its carriers. 

When it comes to spectrum, Americans for Tax Reform supports free markets without government set rates, and government should halt its involvement with an asset after it has been sold. To that end, two of best tools that the FCC has at its disposal are spectrum auctions and secondary market transactions. In many circumstances private spectrum sales can be appropriate, and government should make sales, trades, and swaps between willing buyers and sellers in the marketplace as frictionless as possible so that the spectrum can be put to its highest, best use. 

The C-Band is not only the most readily available mid-band spectrum, it is also globally harmonized, a rare valuable benefit that would enable wireless carriers to keep costs lower through economies of scale. It is fortunate that the incumbent satellite companies have shown a willingness to work with the FCC to find a win-win solution to re-organizing the band. The revised proposal gets us closer to that goal. 

Through the course of the FCC’s C-Band proceeding, we have been pleased that the CBA has accepted feedback and revised its proposal. The CBA’s modified proposal addresses our concerns. 

First, CBA has indicated it intends to increase the amount of spectrum cleared and recognizes the FCC goal of clearing 300 MHz. By unleashing the secondary market forces that have served America so well over the last 30 years, the CBA proposal will get C-Band spectrum into the hands of wireless carriers far faster than any of the alternatives proposed to date. Under the revised CBA proposal, well over 200 MHz of the C-Band spectrum will be cleared and ready for 5G deployment within 36 months, with more than 60 megahertz cleared in 46 major markets within the first 18 months of an FCC order. We look forward to seeing a significant increase in the amount of spectrum cleared. 

Second, the CBA has now repeatedly committed to make a significant contribution to the U.S. Treasury. We have found over time that each auction or sale of spectrum is unique and has its own considerations at play. For these particular licenses and for this particular transaction, we believe that taxpayers do have a seat at the table. That does not mean that every time there is a spectrum transaction the government must extract its pound of flesh. CBA’s commitment to make a contribution to the U.S. Treasury addresses our concerns as taxpayer advocates in this particular transaction. 

Finally, there will be reasonable FCC of oversight over the transition of this spectrum to private market ownership and flexible licensing. While we appreciate the CBA’s support for basic measures ensuring an open, transparent, fair, and competitive process, we caution that the government should ensure that transactions between willing buyers and sellers in the marketplace are truly market-based so the spectrum can be put to its highest, best use—and as quickly as possible. 

In light of the significant changes the CBA has made to its proposal, and the importance for the U.S. to lead on 5G, we hope the FCC will use its existing authority to quickly pursue this viable solution. 

If you should have any questions or comments, please contact me, or Katie McAuliffe by phone, 202-785-0266, or email, kmcauliffe@atr.org. 

Onward,
Grover Norquist 

Medicare for All will require $32 trillion in higher taxes over the next decade, according to a report by the Urban Institute and the Commonwealth Fund. 

The study analyzes several healthcare reform options including socialized healthcare. The report describes this plan: 

Single Payer Enhanced: This plan covers all U.S. residents, including undocumented immigrants, and features a broader set of benefits than Single Payer “Lite,” including adult dental, vision, and hearing care as a well as a home- and community-based long-term services and supports benefit. In addition, there are no cost-sharing requirements. There is no private insurance option

The report lists four cost estimates for this reform ranging from $29.031 trillion to $34.884 trillion over a decade:

• Single-payer enhanced with broad benefits and no cost sharing - $32.015 trillion
• Single-payer enhanced assuming higher provider payments - $34.884 trillion
• Single-payer enhanced assuming state maintenance of efforts - $29.031 trillion
• Single-payer enhanced assuming lower administrative costs - $30.568 trillion
   

As Joe Biden tweeted, this will require significant tax increases on the middle class:

Let’s put this in perspective: if you eliminate every single solitary soldier, tank, satellite, nuclear weapon, eliminate the Pentagon and it would only pay for 4 months of Medicare for All. 4 months.

Where do the other 8 months come from? Your paycheck.

Biden has pointed out before that Medicare for All will require middle class tax increases. On Sept. 23 Biden said: "It’s going to cost a lot of money and she's going to raise people's taxes doing it.”

Despite this, Elizabeth Warren has refused to answer whether Medicare for All will raise taxes on the middle class at least 17 times.

There is no way to come close to paying for Medicare for All without dramatic tax increases on the middle class. The proposal released by Bernie Sanders contains $14 trillion in tax hikes, roughly 40% of the total cost of Medicare for All.

It is also important to note that a significant portion of Sanders’ $14 trillion tax increase relies on eliminating healthcare options for American families ($4.2 trillion) and a 7 percent tax on employers large and small ($3.5 trillion).

Regardless, taxes on “the rich” will not come close to paying for Medicare for All.

For instance, a “wealth tax,” a financial transactions tax, a 10 percent surtax on “the wealthy,” a 70 percent top rate, and doubling the tax rate on capital gains would pay for roughly 20 percent of the cost of Medicare for All according to the best-case scenario estimates by the left.

These estimates assume no negative economic feedback, no changes in behavior, and do not account for any revenue loss from the co-mingling of taxes: 

• A wealth tax (2% annual tax on $50 million in wealth, 3% annual tax on $1 billion) – a $2.75 trillion tax increase
• A financial transactions tax (0.1 percent on every transaction) – a $777 billion tax increase
• A 10 percent surtax on the wealthy ($2.9 mil in income and above) -- an $800 billion tax increase
• 70 percent top marginal income tax rate – a $353 billion tax increase
• Doubling tax rates on capital gains -- a $1.5 trillion tax increase
   

 Total: $6.17 trillion (19 percent to 21 percent of the $32 - $36 trillion cost of “Medicare For All.”)

"Elizabeth Warren won’t admit the obvious. She will impose broad-based tax hikes on the middle class,” said Americans for Tax Reform president Grover Norquist.

In his op-ed for Townhall, ATR’s Ryan Goff examined the result of politically motivated divestments from CalPERS’ portfolio, finding lost revenues exceeding $3.5 billion. As demonstrated in his piece, the state’s pension is only 70% funded and the prospect of further divestment away from private prisons — potentially renewed after the recent passage of Assembly Bill 32 banning state contracts with such prisons — only stands to exacerbate a critical problem. Read the full op-ed here.

Joe Biden said during the CNN/NYT Democratic debate that he'd double the capital gains tax rate to almost 40% from 20%.

Biden: "I would raise the capital gains tax to the highest rate of 39.5 percent, I would double it."

In September, Biden said he'd double the capital gains rate to 40%.

Since the launch of his presidential campaign, Biden has repeatedly said the capital gains tax was “too low.” Biden’s comments and his long Senate voting record mean voters should expect him to push for capital gains tax hikes if elected.

During his time in the Senate, Biden consistently voted against tax cuts on capital gains.

In 2003, Biden voted against the reduction in the capital gains rate from 20 percent to 15 percent. In 2005 and 2006, Biden voted against extending the 15 percent rate.

In 2012, then-Vice President Biden and President Obama insisted the cap gains rate revert to 20 percent.

Biden and Obama had already piled on another 3.8 percent capital gains tax hike -- the Net Income Investment Tax -- one of the many tax increases in Obamacare. The 3.8 percent tax hike took effect Jan. 1, 2013.

Increasing the capital gains tax burden would harm Americans’ ability to build a nest egg and hurt the value of their homes, farms, and businesses.

Currently, long-term capital gains are taxed at zero percent, 15 percent, or 20 percent, depending on household income level the year the gain was realized. Households subject to Obamacare’s 3.8 percent Net Income Investment Tax pay a 23.8% rate. 

In August Biden called for a capital gains tax rate increase to 39.6 percent. If Biden is elected and raises the rate to his most recently stated 40 percent, the top capital gains tax rate would end up at 43.8 percent.

If you want to stay up-to-date on Democratic candidates and their threats to raise taxes, visit www.atr.org/HighTaxDems.