Clara Diaz

Lawmakers Should Reject Any Efforts to Undermine FTC Contact Lens Rule

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Clara Diaz on Tuesday, February 23rd, 2021, 8:00 AM PERMALINK

ATR today released a letter urging members of the House of Representative and Senate to reject any efforts to undermine the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Contact Lens Rule. The rule was issued on a unanimous, bipartisan basis to ensure that consumers have the freedom to purchase contact lenses from wherever they want whether that is from their optometrists or from a third party.  

Blocking the FTC’s Contact Lens Rule would undermine patient freedom for the 45 million contact lens users across the country. Passing legislation now, during a pandemic, also threatens to increase costs and reduce healthcare choice and access. 

In 2003, President George W. Bush signed the Fairness to Contact Lens Consumers Act (FCLCA), which was enacted to ensure consumers had the freedom to purchase contact lenses from wherever they choose without interference. The new FTC rule builds on the FCLCA by requiring optometrists to obtain signed acknowledgement from patients that they have received a copy of their prescription. The FTC rule also continues to allow automated phone prescription verification, which is one of the most effective ways to preserve competition and consumer freedom. Rather than forcing a third-party retailer to wait indefinitely for a prescriber to verify the prescription, this requires the retailer to wait a full business day (eight hours) before fulfilling a consumer’s order.  

These reasonable requirements were adopted because of cases where bad actors attempted to infringe on the freedom of consumers to fill their prescription wherever they choose to, whether that be through the optometrist directly or through a third party.  

While lawmakers should support proposals that lower the regulatory burden and reduce red tape, there should not be concerns that the FTC rule adds to an optometrist’s regulatory burden.  

Moving forward, Members of Congress should ensure the free market is protected and that consumers have the freedom to purchase contact lenses from optometrists or from a third party.

Blocking the rule will only make it more difficult and more costly for Americans to fill their prescriptions, creating unnecessary financial and healthcare burdens on the American people during the pandemic. Any efforts to undermine or delay the FTC Contact Lens Rule should be rejected.  

Photo Credit: Güldem Üstün


Biden HHS Pick Xavier Becerra Supports Socialized Healthcare & Middle Class Tax Hikes

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Clara Diaz on Friday, February 19th, 2021, 1:11 PM PERMALINK

Xavier Becerra, Attorney General of California and President Biden’s pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, is an advocate for socialist healthcare and Medicare for All.

Confirming Becerra would be a step toward radical, government-controlled healthcare. These policies would end current health care plans for 180 million Americans, result in tax hikes for every American, and restrict access to quality care. 

Biden campaigned as a moderate who opposed Medicare for All, yet his pick to lead the administration on healthcare policies is a self-described single-payer advocate. “For me, health care is a right,” Becerra told Kaiser Health News in February 2019. “I’ve been a single-payer advocate all my life.” 

Medicare for All would result in trillions of dollars in tax increases. A study by the Urban Institute and the Commonwealth Fund Medicare estimated that Medicare for All will require between $29 trillion and $35 trillion in higher taxes.

While some on the left claim that middle class families will be better off under this plan, the reality is that they will pay significantly higher taxes. Taxes which target the "rich" like a wealth tax, a financial transactions tax, a 10 percent surtax on “the wealthy,” a 70 percent top income tax rate, and doubling the tax rate on capital gains would only pay for about 20 percent of the cost of Medicare for All, according to the best-case scenario estimates by the left. Clearly, taxing “the rich” will not come close to paying the full cost of Medicare for All.

The existing Medicare for All proposal released by socialist Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) already calls for trillions of dollars in higher taxes on the middle class, including a $3.9 trillion 4 percent payroll tax on workers. This proposal  raises less than half of the full $32 to $36 trillion cost of socialized healthcare, so additional taxes on middle class American families will, inevitably, be needed.  

Even Joe Biden has admitted government healthcare will require significant tax increases on the middle class. As he tweeted:

“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.”

Needless to say, this plan would also violate Biden’s pledge not to raise taxes on anyone making less than $400,000.

In addition to harming American families through higher taxes, socialized healthcare would also lead to a rationing of care through a combination of price controls and a reduction of payments for doctors and hospitals.  This rationing of care exists in countries that already utilize government healthcare. For instance, in Canada, patients reportedly wait over 20 weeks on average to receive treatment from a specialist. At any one time, over one million Canadians are waiting for a procedure. It is even worse in the United Kingdom where patients often wait over six months to receive treatment.   

A single payer healthcare system would end private, quality health insurance for 180 million American families. Most Americans are satisfied with their health insurance plans and wish to keep them.  According to a survey by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) and Greenwald & Associates, 81 percent of Americans were satisfied with their employer provided care including 51 percent of Americans “very or extremely satisfied” and 30 percent “somewhat satisfied.”  

President Biden’s pick of Becerra is more proof that Biden will push progressive policies. If confirmed to lead HHS, Becerra will be an advocate for socialized healthcare which will end private health insurance for Americans across the country, force rationing of care, and increase taxes on the middle class. 

Photo Credit: Knight Foundation


Blue State Dems Call for Repeal of SALT Cap in Next COVID Bill

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Clara Diaz on Friday, January 29th, 2021, 4:03 PM PERMALINK

group of New Jersey and New York Members of Congress are again trying to rollback the cap on state and local tax deductions as part of President Joe Biden’s Coronavirus relief proposal. This proposal has nothing to do with the pandemic, will subsidize high-tax blue states, and will do little or nothing to help the middle class.  

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) passed in 2017 imposed a $10,000 limitation on state and local tax deductions (SALT). This provision was one of several base broadeners that helped facilitate tax reductions for middle class American families.

The hypocrisy of Democrats is clear. On one hand, they are falsely arguing that repealing the SALT cap helps the middle class. On the other hand, they are calling for repeal of the TCJA, arguing it did nothing to help American families.

The fact is, SALT almost exclusively benefits wealthy blue states – 94 percent of the benefits from repealing the SALT cap would go to taxpayers making more than $200,000 a year. While some Democrats, such as Congressman Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.), claim that the SALT deduction cap amounts to “double taxation,” they ignore the fact that the underlying problem is that New York and other states impose excessively high state and local taxes. In addition, most Americans never had a chance to mitigate this supposed double taxation because they do not claim the state and local tax deduction and instead take the standard deduction. 

While SALT does little for middle income Americans, the TCJA – the tax cut that Dems repeatedly promise to repeal – significantly reduced taxes for families across the country.

Prior the TCJA, taxpayers could deduct an unlimited amount of state and local taxes from their federal tax returns. This created a two-tiered system that overwhelmingly benefited high-tax blue states. Many Americans claimed $0 in state and local taxes because they took the standard deduction instead. The law cut tax rates, doubled the standard deduction, and doubled of the child tax credit. Thanks to these provisions, a typical family of four with median annual income of $73,000 has seen a tax cut of more than $2,058, a roughly 60 percent reduction in federal income taxes. 

Furthermore, IRS data compiled by Americans for Tax Reform shows that middle income American families saw the biggest tax cut – measured as the percentage decrease in "total tax liability" between 2017 and 2018 – from the Trump-Republican TCJA. Americans with adjusted gross income (AGI) of $50,000 to $74,999 saw a 13.2 percent reduction in average tax liabilities between 2017 and 2018. While Americans with AGI of $1 million or above saw a 5.8 percent reduction in average federal tax liability between 2017 and 2018. This is less than half the tax cut seen by Americans with AGI between $50,000 and $100,000.  

It is completely unclear whether we even need another COVID relief bill at this time. The US has already spent nearly $5 trillion in COVID relief packages, including $900 billion one month ago.

However, if another package is deemed necessary, repeal of the SALT cap should not be included. Rolling back the SALT cap does nothing to help fight the Coronavirus, nor would it do anything to help the middle class.  

The proposal to repeal the SALT cap is a clear example of using the pandemic to push unrelated policy priorities. If Democrats actually want to help the middle class, they should focus their efforts on extending the TCJA, not fighting solely for their wealthy constituents.  

Photo Credit: Jiuguang Wang


ATR Supports Rep. Budd's Pandemic Healthcare Access Act

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Clara Diaz on Monday, January 25th, 2021, 2:25 PM PERMALINK

Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist today released a letter of support for H.R. 295, the “Pandemic Healthcare Access Act,” introduced by  Representative Ted Budd (R-NC). This legislation expands Health Savings Accounts (HSA) so that all Americans can pay for their healthcare tax free for the duration of the Coronavirus pandemic. This legislation will also increase access to healthcare and cut taxes for millions of Americans.  

Because of the government mandate that says HSAs are only available when paired with a high deductible health plan (HDHP), hundreds of millions of Americans do not have access to an HSA. The Pandemic Healthcare Access Act suspends this requirement for as long as the coronavirus emergency declaration is in effect, which will allow Americans on Medicare, Medicaid, those that receive care through the VA, Indian health plans, Obamacare, and any employer plan to have an HSA. 

The Pandemic Healthcare Access Act increases healthcare access choice and cuts taxes for American families. HSAs offer triple tax benefits to users – contributions made are tax free, interest and investment are earned tax free, and payments made to qualifying health expenses are tax free.

Not only will this bill cut taxes, it will also promote strong savings for American middle class families. For example, an HSA user can accumulate as much as $360,000 after contributing to an account for 40 years assuming a rate of return of just 2.5 percent, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute. With a rate of return of 5 percent, an HSA user can accumulate $600,000 over 40 years.  

ATR applauds Representative Budd’s efforts to expand HSAs so that Americans can save, invest, and spend healthcare dollars tax free. The Pandemic Healthcare Access Act should be supported by all members of Congress.   

Photo Credit: Images Money


ATR Releases Coalition Letter Opposed to Most Favored Nation Drug Pricing Final Rule

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Clara Diaz on Monday, January 25th, 2021, 4:00 AM PERMALINK

75 free market, conservative, and libertarian organizations and activists today released a letter in opposition to the interim final rule to implement the Most Favored Nation (MFN) drug pricing proposal. The signatories urge this proposal to be withdrawn.

The proposal imports foreign price controls into America’s healthcare system, which will harm medical innovation and the development of new medicines. It will threaten high-paying American manufacturing jobs and do nothing to stop foreign freeloading. Instead, it will shift the U.S. closer to a system of socialized healthcare.

The need for free market policies that promote American medical innovation is clear. Manufacturers have developed several highly effective COVID-19 vaccines at the fastest rate ever. This good news is only possible because the U.S. leads the world when it comes to developing innovative, lifesaving and life enhancing medicines.

The full letter can be found here and a summary of points is below.

The MFN would do nothing to stop foreign freeloading

Though one of the goals of the MFN is to end foreign freeloading, the proposal would instead surrender to foreign freeloading by basing U.S. prices on the prices of countries with socialist policies.

Foreign countries pay less for medicines because they utilize price controls. There is little or no negotiation between foreign government and manufacturers which often forces innovators to accept lower prices in a “take-it-or-leave it” proposition.

The MFN would reduce access to new cures

Foreign price controls will cause less medical innovation and result in fewer new treatments and cures. If the U.S. had the same price controls utilized by foreign countries, we would have many fewer innovative cures available to patients today. As the letter notes:

“According to a study by the Galen Institute, patients in the U.S. had access to nearly 90 percent of new medical substances launched between 2011 and 2018. By contrast, other developed countries had a fraction of these new cures. Patients in the United Kingdom had 60 percent of new substances, Japan had 50 percent, Canada had 44 percent, and Spain had 14 percent.”

The MFN will threaten millions of high-paying jobs

America is a leader of high-paying pharmaceutical manufacturing jobs and medical innovation is a key driver of job creation. This innovation accounts for 800,000 direct jobs and over 4 million jobs when indirect and economically induced jobs are taking into account.

Politicians on both sides of the aisle routinely call for the creation of more high-paying manufacturing jobs. We should be pursuing policies that help create more of these jobs, rather than policies that threaten existing jobs. 

The MFN will move America one step closer to a government run healthcare system

The MFN would put the U.S. on the path towards socialized medicine by placing price controls on Medicare Part B.  This would eventually lead to significant tax and spending increases and the loss of existing coverage for millions and millions of Americans.

It would also lead to health care rationing, which occurs in other nations that have socialized health care, such as Canada and the United Kingdom. In the UK for instance, there was a shortage of 10,000 doctors and 43,000 nurses in 2019, with 9 in 10 managers in the National Health Service saying that having too few doctors and nurses presents a danger to patients. At any one time, 4.5 million patients were waiting for hospital care.

The MFN Utilizes Obamacare to Circumvent Article I of the Constitution

The MFN is being proposed through CMMI, an agency created by Obamacare. The MFN demonstration is mandatory and being conducted nationwide as a major policy change that circumvents Congress. As the letter notes:

“CMMI and the MFN violate Article I of the Constitution, which gives Congress, not the executive branch the authority to make law. CMMI is not under the normal appropriations process and automatically receives $10 billion every decade in perpetuity. As a result, Congress is limited in its ability to conduct routine, necessary oversight.”

Photo Credit: Chris Potter


An Ossoff-Warnock Win Will Impose the AMT on 120,000 Georgia Families

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Clara Diaz on Thursday, December 10th, 2020, 9:38 AM PERMALINK

Georgia’s January 5, 2021 Senate runoff elections will determine which party takes control of the Senate for the 117th Congress. If Democrats Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock win those seats, they will be the deciding votes for enacting the Biden-Harris agenda of higher taxes and bigger government.

The Biden-Harris agenda includes repealing the Republican Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017, which would result in millions of Americans paying an alternative minimum tax (AMT). The TCJA enacted a high alternative minimum tax (AMT) exemption and raised the income level at which the exemption begins to phase out.

The AMT was initially passed to ensure 155 high-income Americans paid some federal income tax. However, many Americans today are forced to calculate their taxes twice if their income is higher than the AMT threshold. They then pay the higher amount of either the AMT or the normal tax burden. This is expensive and time consuming.

According to IRS data, prior to the TCJA, in 2017, 5,106,080 households paid an alternative minimum tax. After its implementation, 263,720 households paid an alternative minimum tax in 2018.

In Georgia, over 120,000 households benefited from the AMT reduction under the TCJA:

  • In 2017, the alternative minimum tax hit 127,790 households in Georgia.
     
  • In 2018, the alternative minimum tax hit 7,080 households in Georgia.

 

Incumbent Republican Senators Loeffler and Perdue oppose taxes of any kind. Sen. Perdue voted for the TCJA, which reduced taxes for American families and businesses. Sen. Loeffler was not in Congress at that time, but she supports tax cuts and is a Taxpayer Protection Pledge signer, a written commitment to her constituents to oppose any and all income tax increases.

Senator Loeffler and Senator Perdue will fight to keep taxes low. A vote for Ossoff and Warnock is a vote for the Biden-Harris tax-hike agenda, which will result in 120,000 families in Georgia being forced to pay the alternative minimum tax once again.

 

Photo Credit: Thomas Cizauskas


An Ossoff-Warnock Win Will Result in Tax Hikes on Georgia Small Businesses

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Clara Diaz on Wednesday, December 9th, 2020, 11:34 AM PERMALINK

If Georgians elect Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff in the January 5th runoff election, the Senate will be under Democratic control, effectively sealing the deal for a Biden-Harris tax hike agenda.

President-elect Joe Biden has pledged to repeal Republican Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017 “on day one”.

The TCJA established a tax cut for pass-through businesses (partnerships, S-Corporations, LLCs) in the form of a 20 percent deduction for qualified business income, also known as the “pass-through deduction.”

Repealing the TCJA will eliminate this tax cut, increasing taxes on small businesses in Georgia and across the country.

There are about 30 million pass-through businesses in the United States, and the deduction reduced the top tax rate on pass-through entities from 37 percent to 29.6 percent. After Republicans passed the TCJA and President Trump signed it into law, 3,887,160 business in Georgia utilized the deduction, saving a total of $64,932,105 in 2018 according to IRS data collected by Americans for Tax Reform. 

The Coronavirus pandemic has caused at least 800 small businesses to close their doors per day. As we look towards recovering from the pandemic and rebuilding the economy, the last thing small businesses need is a tax hike.

Incumbent Republican Senators Loeffler and Perdue have been consistent defenders of the Georgia taxpayer. Perdue voted for the TCJA, which reduced taxes for Georgians across the board. While Loeffler was not in Congress at the time, she has been a consistent voice for lower taxes and is a Taxpayer Protection Pledge signer, a written commitment to her constituents to oppose any and all income tax increases.

On January 5th, the choice is clear. Loeffler and Perdue will fight for small businesses in Georgia. A vote for Ossoff and Warnock is a vote against Georgia’s small businesses. 

 

 

Photo Credit: John Ramspott


100,000 Georgia Families Will See Return of Obamacare Mandate Tax Under Warnock and Ossoff

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Clara Diaz on Wednesday, December 2nd, 2020, 9:00 AM PERMALINK

If Democrat Senate candidates Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff win their runoff elections on January 5th, 2021, they will provide the deciding votes for the Biden-Harris agenda of tax increases on families and businesses in Georgia and across the country.

This will result in the reinstatement of the Obamacare individual mandate tax penalty, increasing taxes on over 100,000 low and middle-income Georgia families.

The individual mandate tax forced American families to purchase government approved health insurance or pay a $695 tax for an individual and $2,085 for a family. It was zeroed out in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) passed by Congressional Republicans and signed by President Trump.

When it was in effect, the tax was one of the regressive in the code and hit millions of low- and middle-income Americans across the country and in Georgia. According to IRS data:

In 2017, the tax hit 143,180 Georgia households. 

  • 127,620 of those households, or 89 percent, had annual income of $50,000 or less.
  • 135,360 of those households, or 94 percent, had annual income of $75,000 or less.
     

In 2018, the tax hit 116,430 Georgia households.

  • 100,800 of those households, or 86 percent, had annual income of $50,000 or less.
  • 108,290 of those households, or 93 percent, had annual income of $75,000 or less
     

While Warnock and Ossoff support the Biden agenda of higher taxes, Senator Perdue and Senator Loeffler oppose efforts to reimpose the individual mandate. 

By voting for the TCJA in 2017, Sen. Perdue voted to zero out the mandate and reduce taxes for middle class families.

While Sen. Loeffler was not in Congress for this vote, she has consistently opposed new tax increases on the American people.  She recently released the “Modernizing Americans’ Health Care Plan,” a framework that directly repudiated the left’s plan to raise taxes and impose socialized healthcare. Instead, her proposal calls for increased healthcare choice and access through free market, patient-centered policies.

On January 5th, a vote for Ossoff and Warnock is a vote to reimpose the Obamacare mandate tax on over 100,000 middle class Georgia families. 

See also: 

Georgia Middle Class Families Will Pay Higher Taxes If Warnock and Ossoff Win

Ossoff and Warnock Vow To End Georgia's Right To Work Protections

Photo Credit: John Ramspott


Rep. Emmer Reintroduces the Retirement Inflation Protection Act

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Clara Diaz on Tuesday, October 27th, 2020, 11:39 AM PERMALINK

Congressman Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) has reintroduced the “Retirement Inflation Protection Act,” legislation that will amend the tax code to index capital gains taxes to inflation for American taxpayers over the age of 59 ½. 

All Members of Congress should support this important, pro-taxpayer legislation to ensure seniors are not taxed on inflationary gains.

Currently, if a senior purchases a stock for $100, and later sells that same stock for $400, he must report and pay taxes on a $300 capital gain. In many cases, much or all of the capital gain is merely inflation.  With an historical inflation rate of 3%, inflation halves the real value of all assets every 24 years.  While this is bad enough, paying taxes on purely inflationary gains adds insult to injury.

Ending the taxation of inflationary gains will have clear, immediate economic benefits.

Indexation would free up “sticky capital”—buildings, land, stocks—that are held by individuals or businesses rather than sold and put to higher and better use because much of the “capital gain” is inflation and the high capital gains tax discourages mobility of capital. The value of all property in America would increase.

Lowering the capital gains rate would also encourage the formation of more capital and would result in the creation of more jobs, raising wages and worker productivity. 

Ending the capital gains tax would help Americans all across the country. Whether one is a worker saving for retirement or a farmer selling off a parcel of land to acquire capital for new equipment and machinery that would help grow their family business, eliminating capital gains will be beneficial to business.

Recent history shows that reducing the tax on capital gains increases short-term federal revenues by creating an unlocking effect, where pent-up gains they had built up over time are realized at greater rates than they would be if the tax was not changed.

While this bill is a good first step, capital gains taxes should be indexed to inflation for everyone. Americans should not be punished by being taxed on inflationary gains.

There is strong support for indexing capital gains taxes to inflation. ATR President Grover Norquist last year led a coalition of 51 conservative, free-market, pro-business, and pro-family activists and organizations in calling for President Trump to end the inflation tax on capital gains. This policy is also supported by Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), White House Chief Economic Adviser Larry Kudlow, Vice President Mike Pence,  Ways and Means Republican Leader Kevin Brady (R-Texas), The National Federation for Independent Business, The Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council, the Republican Study Committee, and The Farm Bureau.

Even current Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) once supported ending inflation tax on capital gains. In a 1992 video then-congressman Chuck Schumer stated:

“If we really want to increase growth, there are proposals that we can do. I would be for indexing all capital gains and savings and borrowing.”

Current House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) also supported indexing capital gains to inflation in 1992. He said

“The capital gains provisions in H.R. 4287 benefit small business by indexing newly purchased assets. Income gauged would be much more reliable so that, real not inflationary gains will be taxed, and taxed at the same 28 percent maximum rate on gains.”

Passage of the Retirement Inflation Protection Act will ensure that seniors are protected from the inflation tax. It will ensure Americans keep more of their own money for retirement by ensuring they do not have to pay taxes on inflationary gains. This is great start, but Congress should continue working towards indexing the capital gains tax for all Americans.

Photo Credit: Mike Lawrence


House Republicans Introduce Commitment to American GROWTH Act

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Clara Diaz on Monday, October 19th, 2020, 1:46 PM PERMALINK

House Minority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and Ways and Means Ranking Member Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) have released H.R. 11, “The Commitment to American Growth, Renewal, and Opportunities for Workers, Technology, and Health” (GROWTH) Act.   

This legislation contains targeted tax cuts that will help the American economy rebound as the pandemic runs its course. 

This effort from House Republicans draws a sharp contrast to Democrat nominee Joe Biden’s plan to impose at least $4 trillion in new or higher taxes including income tax increases, business tax increases, and capital gains tax increases. As part of this proposal, Biden has called for repealing the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), which will increase taxes on Americans at every income level.  

The Commitment to American GROWTH Act will benefit workers, families, and small businesses with further tax cuts that will foster innovation, encourage research and development, and secure America’s medical supplies through four main provisions: 

Strengthening Pro-Growth Tax Cuts to Boost Jobs and Wages 

First, the bill locks in key provisions from the Trump Tax Cuts that support American jobs and paychecks.  This legislation would make full business expensing permanent, as well as the business interest limitation of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA). 

Full business expensing reduces taxes by allowing businesses to deduct the cost of new investments (machinery, equipment etc.) in the year they are made, which incentivizes growth, increases productivity, creates jobs, and raises wages. This also simplifies the tax code by equalizing the tax treatment of new investments with other business expenses such as wages, rent, and healthcare costs.

In a post COVID-19 world, expensing will help businesses make vital investments as they seek to bring workers back, onshore manufacturing capabilities, and ramp up production. Making these provisions permanent will incentivize long-term investments by providing business certainty. 

Supporting and Strengthening American Innovation 

This bill also encourages investment in research and development (R&D) so American businesses can continue to make, buy, and sell American made products.  

Much like full business expensing of new investments, full R&D expensing creates an incentive to increase capital investment, which leads to stronger economic growth, more jobs, and higher wages. The bill proposes doubling the R&D tax credit, which will encourage more American investment and economic growth.  The R&D credit is a general business tax credit companies that incur research and development (R&D) costs in the United States.

Jobs tied to R&D are quality, high paying jobs. In 2017, the average wage for R&D related jobs was $134,978 – 2.4 times higher than the average wage, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Doubling the R&D tax credit will help create more of these quality jobs. 

Incentivizing research will make America a more attractive place to grow a business, and it supports high-paying jobs in production and applied research, ultimately, a higher standard of living for all Americans. 

Encouraging investments in advanced medical manufacturing  

In addition, to strengthening R&D, the bill contains targeted reforms to strengthen American medical development so that our country is not overly reliant on China.

Startup businesses seeking to develop a cure usually have no revenue; therefore, they see no benefit from R&D credits. This provision fixes this aspect, but also provides additional liquidity to startups so they can continue their research. This credit is to be monetized in order to help pre-revenue medical research companies – such as small biotech firms on the frontlines of cures research. In addition, it encourages outside investment in infectious disease drug development firms by allowing any losses to offset other income.  

Investments in advanced manufacturing will help the United States regain its status as a global leader in manufacturing. Growth in America’s medical independence will help retain and create high paying jobs, support domestic innovation, and enhance national security—especially from China—and increase public health. 

Providing liquidity for businesses as they seek to develop cures 

This bill encourages growth and innovation in technology breakthroughs by incentivizing outside investment in startup medical research firms.  

By giving additional tax benefits to investors in certain infectious disease drug development firms, this will help induce investment in medical research startups. This bill will allow America’s innovators to create new companies, such as ones that are working on cures to deadly and rare diseases.  H.R. 11 will allow research startups that change ownership to utilize net operating loss carrybacks which will give startup businesses an additional source of liquidity.  

Growth in innovation and technology breakthroughs gives American innovators a leg up as they work on research and development of new technological findings. 

The best path to rebuilding the economy is pro-growth policies, not tax hikes and intrusive regulations. The Commitment to American GROWTH Act contains a number of targeted provisions that will help the economy recover, policies that draw a sharp distinction to the tax hikes that Democrats support. 

Photo Credit: Brook Ward


Pages

×