Stacy French - August 24th, 2017
Stacy French - August 22nd, 2017
Rachael Slobodien - July 27th, 2017
Washington, DC – Club for Growth Vice President Andy Roth offered the following statement in response to the news that a Border Adjustment Tax (BAT) would not be included in the tax reform principles the White House and GOP Congressional leaders unveiled today. Club for Growth played an instrumental role in influencing the BAT debate and ensuring its ultimate demise. Earlier this year, Club for Growth spent nearly $700,000 on ad buys urging Republican Members of Congress to oppose the BAT. Links to these ads are included at the bottom of this release.
Club for Growth Vice President Andy Roth remarked:
“Today is a great day for the American taxpayer. From the get-go, Club for Growth led efforts to inform the public of the harmful economic impacts a BAT would cause.
“Talk of a BAT had quieted as Congress began realizing – in part because of the attention Club for Growth brought to the issue – the harm a BAT would wreak on our nation’s economy and the pocketbooks of hardworking Americans. But until today’s announcement, the BAT was lurking in the shadows ready to rear its ugly head.
“As Club for Growth President David McIntosh remarked earlier this summer, ‘we should kill the BAT, bury it, and give it a funeral.’ Well, we’re pleased today to do exactly that. In fact, we’ll lead the procession.
“Now that the BAT is dead and buried, we look forward to working with congressional leaders and the White House to push for pro-growth tax reform. The Club strongly supports lower tax rates for individuals and businesses, lower taxes on capital, and a simplified tax code that supercharges the economy.”
The ads ran in the following districts and can be viewed by clicking the links below.
Rachael Slobodien - June 20th, 2017
“A border adjustment tax is a ball and chain that is dragging down real, pro-growth tax reform.”
Washington, DC – Today, ahead of Speaker Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) speech at the National Association of Manufacturers, Club for Growth President David McIntosh offered the following statement outlining factors that make for pro-growth tax reform. In his statement, McIntosh also encourages Republicans to resist implementing a border adjustment tax as part of any tax reform proposal.
“Roughly one year ago this week, House Speaker Ryan unveiled the House Republicans’ blueprint to overhaul the tax code,” Club for Growth President David McIntosh stated. “In an attempt to craft pro-growth tax reform, the blueprint called for lower tax rates and a territorial tax system for international corporations.”
“But, here we are a year later, and Congress has made little progress towards cutting taxes – even though voters overwhelmingly sent Republicans to Washington with a clear mandate to reduce taxes.
“The biggest impediment to pro-growth tax reform is the Border Adjustment Tax (BAT). It is a political loser. The BAT has become a ball and chain that is dragging down real, pro-growth tax reform. The Republican Senate has made it clear that the BAT is a nonstarter. President Trump’s proposal also wisely sidesteps the issue entirely – choosing correctly to focus on pro-growth tax cuts, rather than middle class tax increases, which would be the inevitable consequence of a BAT.
“Any member who campaigned on lowering taxes should not even entertain the idea of a BAT. However, Speaker Ryan and a few members of Congress, like Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady (R-TX), continue to push the idea of a border adjustment tax. Their unwillingness to abandon the proposal now threatens to doom the best prospects Republicans have to pass meaningful tax reform.
“No matter how Rep. Brady and others may try to sell it—like with a five-year transition period—a BAT will effectively be a $5 trillion tax hike on American consumers. Those in favor of a BAT try to rationalize it by arguing it is necessary to lower tax rates on corporations. Club for Growth flatly rejects Speaker Ryan’s green eyeshade notion that in order to pass pro-growth tax cuts, Republicans have to raise taxes. The BAT would do so at the expense of hardworking American families struggling to make ends meet. Republicans in Congress should not support it.
“Since its inception, Club for Growth has fought to enact tax reform to lessen the tax burden on American families and businesses and in so doing, unleash economic growth. Just last week, Club for Growth and Americans for Tax Reform made the case for lasting tax reforms by extending the budget window beyond ten years. And that’s one of many pro-growth approaches to tax reform, but the border adjustment tax is not.”
Stacy French - June 14th, 2017
“The budget window has traditionally been a decade.
But the Senate could make it 25 years.”
Club for Growth President David McIntosh and Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist penned an opinion editorial in The Wall Street Journal making the case for extending the budget window to 25 years or more.
“Americans know what kind of tax reform they want: a bill that cuts rates across the board, kills the death tax and the alternative minimum tax, expands the personal and family exemptions, and eliminates politically directed loopholes. If lawmakers passed such a plan it would supercharge the economy and create millions of jobs.
The challenge is how to get from here to there, given the rules of Congress.
Tax reform can be enacted with a simple majority in the Senate under the process known as budget reconciliation… [A]ny tax reform meant to spur economic growth should be permanent so that businesses and entrepreneurs can plan ahead. If they don’t know what the rules will be a few years down the road it is tougher to build factories, hire new workers, invest in equipment, or spend on research and development.
Conventional wisdom says that the only way to pass lasting tax cuts is to offset them with corresponding tax increases, base broadening or, best of all, permanent spending cuts.
There’s another option: Extend the budget window to 25 years—or more. The 10-year window is not set in stone. The Budget Act of 1974 simply says that the window has to be at least five years in duration.
The idea of modifying the time frame isn’t new, and it certainly isn’t radical. The budget window was expanded in 1995 from five years to seven, and then in 1999 to 10 years, where it has remained for no particularly good reason.
We say extend the budget window to 25 years. Why? Because the people creating jobs and investing in new products think long-term. Depreciation schedules for new plant and equipment often run to 25 years or more.
Lawmakers simply should write this year’s budget to say that all tax cuts can last 25 years, which would allow rate reductions to go into effect now and be offset later with revenue from higher growth or spending restraint.”
“… As President Trump says, “prime the pump” now and the economy will start to flow, creating millions of jobs and more tax money for Washington… Extending the budget window to 25 years would cut the Gordian knot, unravel the Byrd Rule and allow serious tax reform to create millions of jobs in the years to come.”