Donald Trump and Kamala Harris are in a tax policy arms race, copying and one-upping each other’s proposals in a bid to court key battleground state voting blocs ahead of a looming battle in Washington to rewrite the tax code.
The duel highlights the central place of the economy in November’s vote, with American households battered by high costs and the campaigns seeking to emphasize pocketbook issues.
The back-and-forth over taxes has escalated in recent days. In an interview with CBS News over the weekend, Republican vice presidential nominee JD Vance tried to outflank Democrats by floating a $5,000-per-child tax credit — $3,000 more than the size of the current credit and even larger than President Joe Biden has proposed.
Harris, rallying supporters in Nevada, endorsed a version of Trump’s own promise to exempt tipped wages from taxes.
Her pitch, in the same battleground state where Trump made his proposal two months ago, drew the ire of the Republican presidential nominee, who accused his Democratic rival of stealing his idea.
“The tit-for-tat here is amazing,” said Marc Goldwein of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget in an interview with Bloomberg’s Balance of Power.
“Joe Biden wants a Child Tax Credit, so JD Vance wants a bigger Child Tax Credit. Donald Trump says, ‘No tax on tips,’ so Kamala Harris says, ‘No taxes on tips,’ ” he said.
Goldwein, though, raised a critical question: “Who’s going to pay for all this?”
The scope of the tax changes being floated by the candidates could be budget-busting. While the Trump campaign has not released key details of its proposals, increasing the Child Tax Credit could cost $2 trillion over the next decade. If the tax credits are refundable — meaning taxpayers would get money back even if they don’t owe taxes — it could be closer to $3 trillion.
‘Detached from reality’
Trump has also proposed ending the tax on Social Security benefits entirely, replacing current policy that gives targeted tax breaks to lower-income seniors. His proposal could cost as much as $1.8 trillion and ultimately endanger the Social Security trust fund itself, according to nonpartisan budget watchers.
Largely absent from the discussion, for now, are the tax cuts from Trump’s 2017 tax law that will expire at the end of 2025. Extending those cuts carries a $4.6 trillion price tag.
“We’re not dealing with the elephant in the room, which is the expiration of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,” said Erica York of the nonpartisan Tax Foundation. “It’s scattershot, and it’s really detached from reality.”
None of the proposals being floated give any consideration to how the tax cuts will shift the tax burden — from older taxpayers to younger ones, from parents to people without dependent children, and from tipped workers to salaried ones.
“I wish we were in a situation where they were trying to one-up each other on serious tax proposals,” York said. “But instead the entire discussion is on the silly side of things.”
Election-year politics is driving the frenzy of proposals.
Trump won voters 65 and older by 5 percentage points in 2020, according to network exit polls. A recent New York Times/Siena College poll showed him in a dead heat with that demographic against Harris.
Vance’s Child Tax Credit proposal came during a round of weekend interviews in which he tried to deflect a barrage of attacks over past comments that the U.S. was run by “childless cat ladies.” Saying the Tax Code should support “pro-family” policies, Vance proposed a massive expansion of the CTC, with no income limits. That means middle- and upper-income families will get a bigger benefit from a tax provision that was originally designed as an anti-poverty program.
And it’s no coincidence that Trump first made his no-tax-on-tips pledge at a rally in the critical battleground of Nevada, a state with the largest proportion of food service and accommodations workers in its workforce. Those employees have historically relied on tips.
Guerrilla marketing
Trump has made “no tax on tips” a centerpiece of his stump speech, and his campaign is employing guerrilla marketing tactics to promote the policy. Donors to his campaign can receive stickers that read “VOTE TRUMP FOR NO TAX ON TIPS” to put on their restaurant checks.
Harris, too, chose Las Vegas to make a similar campaign promise to cut taxes on tips — although her proposal would apply only to federal income taxes and leave payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare intact. That largely accounts for the difference in price tags: about $250 billion over 10 years for the Trump plan, perhaps half that for Harris.
The Trump campaign responded by giving Harris a new nickname: “Copy Cat Kamala Harris.” But the proposal was already generating bipartisan support in Congress, especially among Democratic members of the Nevada delegation.
Vance’s proposal to increase the CTC marked an abrupt departure from his party’s orthodoxy. In a Senate vote this month, only three Republicans voted to increase the amount of the refundable credit.
Vance, who was campaigning in Arizona, skipped the vote. He blamed Harris for the measure failing, telling CBS’s Face the Nation that she “failed to show fundamental leadership.”
President-elect Donald Trump and his Republican party clarified one aspect of the uncertainty surrounding taxes with a resounding victory in the election.
That means that the many expiring provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 — which Trump signed into law in his first term — are much more likely to remain in force after their potential sunset date at the end of next year. Financial advisors and tax professionals can act without worrying that the rules will shift underneath them to favor much higher income duties.
However, the result also presents Trump and incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota and House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana with a series of thorny tax policy questions that have tricky, time-sensitive implications, according to Anna Taylor, the deputy leader, and Jonathan Traub, the leader, of Deloitte Tax’s Tax Policy Group. Once again, industry professionals and their clients will be learning the minutiae of House and Senate procedures. Taylor and Traub spoke on a panel last week, following Trump’s victory and their release of a report detailing the many tax policy questions facing the incoming administration.
Considering the fact that the objections of former Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee “slowed down that process for a number of weeks in 2017” before Republicans “landed” on a deficit increase of $1.5 trillion in the legislation, Taylor pointed out how the looming debate on the precise numbers and Senate budget reconciliation rules will affect the writing of any extensions bill.
“They’re going to have to pick their budget number on the front end,” Taylor said. “They’re going to have to pick that number and put it in the budget resolution, and then they’ll kind of back into their policy so that their policies will fit within their budget constraints. And once you get into that process, you can do a lot in the tax base, but there are still limits. I mean, you can’t do anything that affects the Social Security program. So they won’t be able to do the president’s proposal on getting rid of taxes on Social Security benefits.”
Individual House GOP members will exercise their strength in the negotiations as well, and the current limit on the deduction for state and local taxes represents a key bellwether on how the talks are proceeding, Traub noted.
The president-elect and his Congressional allies will have to find the balance amid the “real tension” between members from New York and California and those from low-tax states such as Florida or Texas who will view any increases to the limit as “too much of a giveaway for the wealthy New Yorkers and Californians,” he said.
“You will need almost perfect unity — more so in the House than the Senate,” Traub said. “This really gives a lot of power, I think, to any small group of House members who decide that they will lie down on the train tracks to block a bill they don’t like or to enforce the inclusion of a provision that they really want. I think the place we’ll watch the most closely at the get-go is over the SALT cap.”
Estimates of a price tag for extending the expiring provisions begin at $4.6 trillion — without even taking into account the cost of President-elect Trump’s campaign proposals to prohibit taxes on tips and overtime pay and deductions and credits for caregiving and buying American-made cars, Taylor pointed out. In addition, the current debt limit will run out on Jan. 1.
The Treasury Department could “use their extraordinary measures to get them through a few more months before they actually have to deal with the limit,” she said.
“But they’re going to have to make a decision,” Taylor continued. “Are they going to try to do the debt limit first, maybe roll it into some sort of appropriations deal early in the year? Or are they going to try to do the debt limit with taxes, and then that’s going to really force them to move really quickly on taxes? So, I don’t know. I don’t know that they have an answer to that yet. I’ll be really interested to see what they say in terms of how they’re going to move that limit, because they’re going to have to do that at some point — rather soon, too.”
Looking further into the future at the end of next year with the deadline on the expiring provisions, Republicans’ trifecta control of the White House and both houses of Congress makes them much more likely to exercise that mandate through a big tax bill rather than a temporary patch to give them a few more months to resolve differences, Traub said.
Both parties have used reconciliation in the wake of the last two presidential elections. A continuing resolution-style patch on a temporary basis would have been more likely with divided government, he said.
“Had that been what the voters called for last Tuesday, I think that the odds of a short-term extension into 2025 would have been a lot higher,” Traub said. “I don’t think that anybody in the GOP majority right now is thinking about a short-term extension. They are thinking about, ‘We have an unusual ability now to use reconciliation to affect major policy changes.'”
Aprio, a Top 25 Firm based in Atlanta, is expanding to Southern California by acquiring Kirsch Kohn Bridge, a firm based in Woodland Hills, effective Nov. 1.
The deal will grow Aprio’s geographic footprint while enabling it to expand into new local markets and industries. Financial terms were not disclosed. Aprio ranked No. 25 on Accounting Today’s 2024 list of the Top 100 Firms, with $420.79 million in annual revenue, 210 partners and 1,851 professionals. The deal will add five partners and 31 professionals to Aprio.
KKB has been operating for six decades offering accounting, tax, and business advisory services to industries including construction, real estate, professional services, retail, and manufacturing. “There is tremendous synergy between Aprio and KKB, which enables us to further elevate our tax, accounting and advisory capabilities and deepen our roots across California,” said Aprio CEO Richard Kopelman in a statement. “Continuing to build out our presence across the West Coast is an important part of our growth strategy and KKB is the right partner to launch our first location in Southern California. Together, we will bring even more robust insights, perspectives and solutions to our clients to help them propel forward.”
The Woodland Hills office will become Aprio’s third in California, in addition to its locations further north in San Francisco and Walnut Creek. Joe Tarasco of Accountants Advisory served as the advisor to Aprio on the transaction.
“We are thrilled to become part of Aprio’s vision for the future,” said KKB managing partner Carisa Ferrer in a statement. “Over the past 60 years, KKB has grown from the ground up to suit the unique and complex challenges of our clients. As we move forward with our combined knowledge, we will accelerate our ability to leverage innovative talent, business processes, cutting-edge technologies, and advanced solutions to help our clients with even greater precision and care.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson said Donald Trump’s plan to end income tax on tips would have to be paid for, injecting a note of caution into one of the president-elect’s key campaign pledges.
“This is one of the promises that he wants to deliver on,” Johnson said Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union. “We’re going to try to make that happen in the Congress. You’ve got to do the math.”
Johnson paired his comment with pledges to swiftly advance Trump’s economic agenda once the newly elected Congress is in place with Republican majorities in the House and Senate. The former president rolled out a series of tax-cut proposals during his successful bid to return to the White House, including rescinding taxes on overtime, Social Security checks and tips.
“You have got to make sure that these new savings for the American people can be paid for and make sure the economy is a pro-growth economy,” said Johnson, who was among allies accompanying Trump to an Ultimate Fighting Championship event at New York’s Madison Square Garden on Saturday night.
Congress faces a tax marathon next year as many of the provisions from the Republicans’ 2017 tax bill expire at the end of 2025. Trump’s declared goal is to extend all of the personal income tax cuts and further reduce the corporate tax rate.
A more immediate challenge may be ahead as Trump seeks to install loyalists as cabinet members for his second term starting in January, including former Representative Matt Gaetz as Attorney General, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as secretary of health and human services and former Representative Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence.
Gaetz was under investigation by the House Ethics Committee for alleged sexual misconduct and illicit drug use, which he has denied. RFK Jr. is a vaccine skeptic and has endorsed misleading messages about vaccine safety.
Donald Trump Jr., the president-elect’s son who has been a key player in the cabinet picks, said he expects many of the choices will face pushback.
“Some of them are going to be controversial,” Trump Jr. said on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures. “They’re controversial because they’ll actually get things done.”
‘Because of my father’
Trump Jr. suggested the transition team has options if any candidate fails to pass Senate muster.
“We’re showing him lists of 10 or 12 people for every position,” he said. “So we do have backup plans, but I think we’re obviously going with the strongest candidates first.”
Trump Jr. said incoming Senate Majority leader John Thune owes his post to the president-elect.
“I think we have control of the Senate because of my father,” he said. “John Thune’s able to be the majority leader because of my father, because he got a bunch of other people over the line.”