ALL OF MARYLAND AND BALTIMORE POLS ARE WALL STREET GLOBAL CORPORATE NEO-CONS AND NEO-LIBERALS PUSHING FORWARD WITH MORE TAXATION AND COMING SOON TO UPPER-MIDDLE AS WELL.
Today I will talk stock taxation and even though the working class and poor may not experience stock policy----these bad policies are ALSO what are causing everyone's taxes to rise. Please consider what these policies mean in our to know when a candidate is
PRETENDING TO HELP PEOPLE ON TAX POLICY BUT HAS NO INTENTIONS OF DOING SO.
Democratic voters noticed how Obama and Clinton neo-liberals were all about raising taxes on the rich while doling out trillion dollar bank bailouts and allowing the Bush tax cuts continue through 2010 when a trillion dollars in taxation cuts on the rich were allowed to occur. They did that on purpose---no one made them--Obama could have simply denied the extension pushed by Republicans and neo-liberals. From 2009 and 2010 when Democrats had the super-majority of Congress and a President------the rich received trillions of dollars in bailouts and tax breaks all while these same pols were shouting to TAX THE RICH.
Obama and Clinton neo-liberals posed progressive in taxing the rich with stock tax policy----capital gains and dividends is were the rich pay taxes. These pols watched as corporations changed executive pay policies that removed executives from paying any income tax by paying them ALL IN STOCK OPTIONS. The response to this evasion of the rich to paying any income tax----we will raise taxes on stocks. Why was this posing progressive? The IRS under Obama has not audited the rich or corporations and placed a green light to go ahead and not pay them because we are not looking. Now, Clinton and Bush did this as well as global corporate and wealth Republicans----but this soared under Obama as all income was now pushed to stocks----with no oversight or enforcement for tax fraud.
How are capital gains and dividends taxed differently?
By Daniel Kurt
A:The U.S. tax code gives similar treatment to dividends and capital gains, although this will change slightly in 2013.
Currently, ordinary dividends and short-term capital gains those on assets held less than a year are subject to one's income tax rate. However, "qualified dividends" and long-term capital gains benefit from a lower rate. Qualified dividends are those paid by domestic or qualifying foreign companies that have been held for at least 61 days out of the 121-day period beginning 60 days prior to the ex-dividend date.
In the case of qualified dividends and long-term capital gains, individuals in the 25% or higher tax bracket currently pay a 15% tax, whereas those in lower brackets are exempt from any tax. Beginning in 2013, the long-term capital gains rate will jump to 10% for lower income earners and 20% for investors in the higher brackets.
Meanwhile, the preferential treatment given to qualified dividends is set to disappear completely. As of 2013, individuals will have to pay their income tax rate on all dividend income they receive.
In Canada, tax treatment is a little simpler because there's no parsing of capital gains and dividends into different categories. In the case of capital gains, residents pay their marginal tax rate, but only on half the amount. Under certain conditions, selling one's primary residence is exempt from taxation altogether.
Dividends also get preferential treatment in Canada, although it may not seem that way on the surface. Investors have to pay their marginal income tax rate, and 125% of the dividends are taxable. However, national and provincial credits (the federal dividend tax credit alone is 13.33% of the taxable amount) help offset one's liability. Consequently, the actual tax can end up being significantly lower than one's income tax rate.
Here's an example. Let's assume you're in the 25% tax bracket and received $10,000 in dividends for the year. Your earnings are "grossed up" to $12,500, so your initial tax liability is $3,125. But if you assume a 5% provincial tax credit, that amount is reduced by $625 ($12,500 x 0.05 = $625) and by an additional $ ($12,500 x 0.1333 = $1,666.25) at the federal level. In the end, your tax liability is only $833.75, or 8.3% of your actual dividend income.
This is important not only in curbing tax evasion abuse by the rich and corporations----it is tied directly to our Congressional pols who have made themselves rich these few decades of Clinton/Bush/Obama ignoring the enforcement of any Federal laws our the US Constitution. Remember, in developing nations the people ruling are rich----even the government that is supposedly elected. Wall Street global pols made Egypt's generals billionaires----the Asian leaders allowing US International Economic Zones are billionaires----the Afghanistan leadership are now heading towards being billionaires---AND THIS IS HOW GLOBAL NEO-LIBERALISM EXPANDS. Well, they brought that to the US these few decades and now we have Congressional pols having been in office these few decades non-stop and I am here to say----most of them are rich from illegal actions and that includes tax evasion.
There was a scandal early in Obama's term where a government watchdog group uncovered Insider Trading by Congress with pols identified as earning millions illegally----allegedly because it was never investigated by the Federal government or Congressional ethics committee charged with that duty. This watchdog group was only able to afford to investigate a small sample of Congressional pols so the numbers are far greater than that exposed. The actions of Congress after being exposed as acting illegally was immediately to pass a law saying Congress was accountable to Insider Trading laws and had to stop these illegal actions. Well, Congress was already held accountable to Insider Trading laws because in the US----ALL CITIZENS ARE ACCOUNTABLE EQUALLY UNDER LAW. This is when you know your national leaders are totally corrupt. To make matters worse---after the national media highlighted this Congressional vote-----Congress went back without media coverage and reversed this law.
JUST BECAUSE THIS LAW WAS REVERSED DOESN'T MEAN CONGRESS IS NOT TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE TO INSIDER TRADING LAWS.
Congress Tells Court That Congress Can’t Be Investigated for Insider Trading
May 7 2015, 11:28 a.m.(This post is from our new blog: Unofficial Sources.)
In a little-noticed brief filed last summer, lawyers for the House of Representatives claimed that an SEC investigation of congressional insider trading should be blocked on principle, because lawmakers and their staff are constitutionally protected from such inquiries given the nature of their work.
The legal team led by Kerry W. Kircher, who was appointed House General Counsel by Speaker John Boehner in 2011, claimed that the insider trading probe violated the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branch.
In 2012, members of Congress patted themselves on the back for passing the STOCK Act, a bill meant to curb insider trading for lawmakers and their staff. “We all know that Washington is broken and today members of both parties took a big step forward to fix it,” said Rep. Bill Johnson, R-Ohio, upon passage of the law.
But as the Securities and Exchange Commission made news with the first major investigation of political insider trading, Congress moved to block the inquiry.
The SEC investigation focused on how Brian Sutter, then a staffer for the House Ways and Means Committee, allegedly passed along information about an upcoming Medicare decision to a lobbyist, who then shared the tip with other firms. Leading hedge funds used the insider tip to trade on health insurance stocks that were affected by the soon-to-be announced Medicare decision.
Calling the SEC’s inquiry a “remarkable fishing expedition for congressional records,” Kircher and his team claimed that the SEC had no business issuing a subpoena to Sutter. “Communications with lobbyists, of course, are a normal and routine part of Committee information-gathering,” the brief continued, arguing that there “is no room for the SEC to inquire into the Committee’s or Mr. Sutter’s purpose or motives.”
Wall Street investors routinely hire specialized “political intelligence” lobbyists in Washington to get insider knowledge of major government decisions so that they may make trades using the information. But little is known about the mechanics of political intelligence lobbying, which falls outside the scope of traditional lobbying law, and therefore does not show up in mandatory lobbying disclosure reports.
There are occasional hints, though.
Personal finance forms reveal that from July of 2011 through May of 2013, David Berteau served as a consultant to Height Analytics, the political intelligence firm at the center of the SEC’s current probe. At the time of his work for Height Analytics, Berteau simultaneously worked as a vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a prominent think tank in Washington. Berteau is now the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness.
Congressional travel forms show that on December 12, 2012, Emily Porter, at the time an employee of Boehner’s office, traveled to New York on a sponsored trip to meet with JNK Securities for a group lunch with business clients. According to the Wall Street Journal, JNK “has emerged as one of the most aggressive” political intelligence firms on Capitol Hill.
This is hardly the first time Congress has moved to undermine its own ethics rules. In 2011, congressional Republicans quickly abandoned their promise to post the text of bills online “for at least three days” before voting on them.
While all this was going on, Republicans/Clinton neo-liberals were shouting ITS ALL THOSE SOCIAL PROGRAMS AND PUBLIC SERVICES DRIVING HIGHER TAXATION. Again, Congress, Statehouses, city halls do not have to pass laws saying these pols are held accountable as all citizens are----THEY ARE ALREADY HELD TO THAT STANDARD.
The Congressional pols will shout they didn't 'break any rules' but as this article and everyone understands Congress cannot create rules that make them immune to laws everyone else has to follow. Just because they have Insider Information on policies that lead to great investments and profit doesn't mean they should do that. When a politician is elected he/she is bound by laws of office against graft, ethics violations, and know they are not in office to advance their own wealth. This is what global market and wealth has done to our national political structure. When Congress was dealing with local and regional business dealings they could not amass great wealth even if they were involved in graft----but now with global corporations and billionaire status----they are now locked into this graft, no-ethic- we can violate any law we want mode.
A functioning US Justice Department would have prosecuted this-----a functioning Congressional Ethics committee would have discovered this and removed from office those pols involved in all this........this is why having a REAL Democrat in office is so important. Republican pols have always allowed this graft but Republican voters don't like it now because it's gone global and state and city citizens are not benefiting from all this graft.
'Kroft: Why does Congress get a pass on this?
Schweizer: It's really the way the rules have been defined. And the people who make the rules are the political class in Washington. And they've conveniently written them in such a way that they don't apply to themselves'.
If you have not cared if a pol was corrupt because you were winning as well----you are about to be a great big tax loser.
Congress Cashes in on Insider Trading
In 2011, a CBS investigation blew the lid off of one of Washington’s most poorly-kept secrets: members of Congress were routinely exploiting legal loopholes to engage in insider trading and line their own pockets — a criminal offense for regular citizens. In the ensuing public outrage, Congress passed a law called the STOCK Act, and took a loud victory lap for supposedly putting an end to their own unscrupulous behavior.
Now that they think nobody’s watching, Congress has gutted a key disclosure provision of the STOCK Act. Worse still, the House Counsel’s Office, led by Speaker John Boehner’s handpicked lawyer, is actively stonewalling the first ever investigation into Congressional insider trading by claiming “immunity” from the very law they bragged about passing just a few years earlier.
The only reason the STOCK Act passed in the first place was due to a massive public outcry. Unless there’s another wave of public outrage, Congress will continue to flout the rules and make it near-impossible to enforce the laws that are already in place.
This isn’t a scandal yet, but we can make it one — will you add your name to demand that John Boehner’s handpicked lawyer stops stonewalling investigators?
Just 12 days before the 2008 economic meltdown, several members of Congress pulled their money out of the stock market. Congress had been forewarned about the impending economic bombshell in secret meetings with the Treasury Department and the Fed, and they used that information to move their personal funds out of the market at lightning speed. Meanwhile, millions of Americans lost their homes and their life savings.
The day after the meeting with the Treasury, at least 10 senators made trades to protect their financial interests, while Americans remained in the dark. Senator Shelley Capito (R-WV) and her husband dumped between $100,000 and $250,000 of Citigroup stock on the 18th of November 2008 at $83 per share. The next day Citi stock fell to $64 per share. Congressman Jim Moran jumped ship too, frantically trading stock in 90 different companies — his biggest trading day of the year.
Representative Spencer Bachus publicly tried to prevent the American economy from crashing — while privately betting it would. He cleverly arranged his portfolio so that if the American people lost, he would make a profit.
It’s appalling. Insider trading is a criminal offense for most Americans, but these trades were 100% legal for the members of Congress who used positions as “public servants” to turn a handsome profit for themselves.
IPOs as Legal Bribery LEGAL BRIBERY? OH, REALLY???
Trading stock based on classified government information isn’t the only way our elected officials have made it big in the stock market. Companies give members of Congress special access to IPO stock before it’s available to the public.
Just ask Nancy Pelosi. In 2008, Visa offered congresswoman Pelosi IPO stock access just as legislation, which Visa strongly opposed, arrived at the House.
Apparently fearless of a conflict of interest, Pelosi and her husband bought 5,000 shares of the stock at the rock-bottom price of $44 per share. Two days later, the value skyrocketed to $64 per share, and Pelosi made $100,000 virtually overnight thanks to her Visa IPOs.
The tough new credit card legislation that Visa didn’t want? Pelosi, who was Speaker of the House at the time, never allowed it to the floor for a vote.
Fake reform and stonewalled investigationsAfter an embarrassing 2011 “60 Minutes” investigation revealed our lawmakers’ affinity for insider trading, Congress passed the STOCK (“Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge”) Act to stem the outpouring of public outrage. In theory, the STOCK Act made it clear that members of Congress and their staff have to play by the same insider trading rules as everyone else. Unfortunately, Congress has quietly returned to its old ways now that it thinks nobody is looking.
First, Congress quietly gutted a key disclosure provision of the STOCK Act — a change that President Obama signed into law despite trumpeting the original Act as a victory for transparency. The change was made as quietly as possible: according to an NPR investigation, “The whole process took only 30 seconds. There was no debate.” The White House’s official statement was just one sentence long, as issued on April 15, 2013 — the same day as the Boston Marathon bombing.
Now, Congress is taking things a step further by actively stonewalling the first ever investigation into Congressional insider trading under the STOCK Act. Brian Sutter, a former staffer for the House Ways and Means Committee, is at the center of it all — it’s alleged that in April 2013, he told a lobbyist about an imminent change to Medicare. That lobbyist then shared the information with other firms who were able to use it to trade on health insurance stocks that would be impacted.
In other words, the exact kind of behavior the STOCK Act was designed to prevent.
Yet, Kerry W. Kircher, Speaker John Boehner’s handpicked House General Counsel, has repeatedly refused to turn over documents related to the investigation and refused to comply with subpoenas issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission, claiming members of Congress and their staff are “immune.”
Below you see an article about the super-rich but the same things are happening with upper-middle class and higher in avoiding paying that capital gains and dividend tax that Obama and Congress are using to PRETEND they are taxing the rich. We have known that the rich haven't paid capital gains and dividend taxes for decades of Reagan/Clinton/Bush/Obama----so when they raise those taxes global pols know that raise will only hit the middle-upper-middle class that actually PAY CAPITAL GAINS AND DIVIDEND TAXES. They do because the IRS has only audited in these few decades these main street groups-----small and regional businesses and working/middle-class citizens. So, there is still a fear of being caught and audited for the masses------and no fear of that for the rich and corporations. Just during Obama's terms government watchdogs showed hundreds of billions of dollars in tax avoidance and by now that is over a trillion by rich and corporations.
Meanwhile, austerity cuts from all this fraud cuts Federal aid to states and that drives taxes higher and higher at state and local level-----and it is all driven because of the Republican stance of downsizing government, deregulating to the point there is no government agencies providing oversight and accountability ----and no government justice department looking for it.
That is why any candidate for Mayor or city/state/national office needs to be a social Democrat that wants to build that oversight ---that wants to enforce Uniformity Tax laws to make sure rich and corporations are paying their share. If you have a mayor's forum of the same establishment pols having allowed all this to occur---and yes, they had the power to stop this-----then shouting TO LOWER TAXES is not going to occur----they are working for Wall Street Baltimore Development and global Johns Hopkins who drives all this bad tax policy and fraud.
How The Super Rich Avoid Paying Taxes
If you're one of the 1% of Americans who control over 40% of the country's wealth, life is full of choices. Among them -- how best to keep all that money away from the government? The U.S. economic system offers no shortage of loopholes allowing the ultra-rich to shortchange Uncle Sam.
Tax rates for those making >$1 million level out at 24%, then declines for those making >$1.5 million. Those making $10 million a year pay an average income tax rate of 19%. $70-$100 billion is the estimated tax revenue lost each year due to loopholes. So how exactly do the super rich hide that much money from the government every year?
1. Put It in the Freezer
- Trust Freezing: A way to transfer valuable assets to others (such as your children) while avoiding the federal estate tax.
- "Freeze" the value of assets many years before you plan to pass them on to exclude all asset appreciation from the estate, and any taxes.
- Popular method: Trade common for preferred stock.
- Problem: If you sell your common stock you might owe a large amount of capital gains tax.
- Solution: Trade your common stock for preferred stock, then put some of the preferred stock in a trust and live off the dividends.
- Tax havens: Registering your business or putting your money in an account in another country with lower taxes.
- ~$21 trillion is being hidden in offshore tax havens.
- David Bowie, U2 and the Rolling Stones have all benefited from tax havens at one time or another.
- Popular cash hideout: The Cayman Islands, home to >85,000 companies -- making it home to more registered organizations than people.
- By taking part of your compensation in stock options you can control when and if you pay taxes, since most options are only taxed when they are exercised.
- Execs who have opted for options: Howard Schultz (Starbucks), Fred Smith (FedEx), William Weldon (Johnson & Johnson) and many others.
- Shell company: A type of company that only exists on paper, allowing you to funnel money through it and avoid paying taxes.
- Has a legal existence but typically provides few or no actual products or services.
- Often used for buying and selling to avoid reporting international operations conducted, and avoid taxes on the profits.
- Shady business: Mitt Romney caught some flak for allegedly using a shell company in Bermuda to avoid taxes.
- Equity swap: An agreement that allows 2 parties to exchange the gain and loss of assets without actually transferring ownership.
- The swap avoids transaction costs, and typically, local taxes on dividends.
- Capital gains tax: A tax on the profits from a sale of non-inventory assets originally purchased for a lesser amount, such as stocks, bonds, property or precious metals.
- Popular loophole: Purchasing stock options, which sets the share price at a fixed rate, then borrowing money from an investment bank using the shares as collateral.
- The borrower then repays the loan either with money made with the money borrowed or by handing over the shares, avoiding the capital gains tax.
- Problem: being in a higher income tax bracket has less tax advantages than being a corporation.
- Solution: You can incorporate your own personal brand, which allows you to: 1. Channel wages through a nominal "corporation"; 2. Pay yourself an interest-free wage; 3. Claim expenses; 4. Reduce your income taxes.
- Mitt Romney claimed the management fee of his corporation as a capital gain rather than income, reducing his tax rate significantly.
- You can put part of your payday in a deferred-compensation plan, instead of taking it all at once.
- This allows your earnings to continue growing tax-deferred for +10 years.
- 79% of CEOs at Fortune 100 companies were offered deferred compensation plans.
- Gift-giving and charitable donations are a real win-win: Avoid taxes and look and feel good doing it!
- Gifts to anyone of up to $13,000 are tax-excluded, with an unlimited exclusion for gifts given to a spouse.
- Allows you to circulate cash within the family as "gifts" while writing it off.
- Popular donation tactic: Deduct the fair market value of a donated item from your tax liability.
- Example: 1. Buy a sculpture for $1,000; 2. Have it appraised at $10,000 some years later; 3. Donate it and deduct the $10,000 from that year's taxable income.Score!
- Owning a yacht or multiple homes aren't just status symbols -- they offer tax benefits as well!
- Popular earner: Claim your "second home"
- Spend at least 2 weeks of the year on your yacht, outfit it like a home, and categorize it as a second home for tax purposes.
- If the home's value appreciates over time, the profits from selling it can be considered capital gains and taxed at a lower rate than salary or other investment income.
- A second home can be rented for up to 2 weeks a year without requiring the owner to claim the rent as income!
If you are the upper-middle class and modestly rich doing all this avoidance-----you will be soaked in taxation soon .
Here is the next progressive posing tax policy coming from Wall Street global corporate neo-liberals-----the national media again leads the way in highlighting all this having never mentioned any of the above.
Republicans and Clinton/Obama neo-liberals want to do a corporate tax reform that fits the global corporate tribunal model to be installed in national connected to Trans Pacific Trade Pact and this model will have global corporations paying no taxes ----this is the current goals of Congress. To pretend none of this is going to happen----here we see Obama and Republicans now so concerned about that trillion dollars in tax-avoidance on overseas operations---even as they watched over a trillion in corporate tax fraud in domestic corporations and rich. Why are they posing progressive?
It is tied to MOVING FORWARD as Clinton/Obama global neo-liberals like to say with installing US International Economic Zones and Trans Pacific Trade Pact policies. Remember, the goal of global pols is to wait until these are in place to send a trillion dollar stimulus for national infrastructure building that they intend to hand to the global corporations now attaching to our city infrastructures across the nation......mostly in counties targeted as US International Economic Zones. In addition to sending that Federal stimulus----Obama and Republicans want all of that off-shore global corporate tax to come into the US forgiving much of the tax requirements under the guise of sending those funds to these US infrastructure projects---they call that CORPORATE SKIN-IN-THE-GAME. It is really privatizing that public infrastructure to these global corporations that will probably never actually send those off-shore profits to these projects but they will be privatized to global corporations.
Obama and Republicans have no intentions of sending all that off-shore global corporate tax to these projects---they are simply getting ready to send a trillion in Federal funding to privatize all these public infrastructure.
Obama Wants a New Tax on U.S. Companies' Overseas Profits
Richard Rubin and Jonathan Allen
January 31, 2015 — 7:07 PM EST Updated on February 1, 2015 — 1:47 PM EST
President Barack Obama will propose that U.S.-based companies pay a minimum 19 percent tax on their future foreign earnings, capturing profits that are now often beyond the government’s reach.
Obama will also seek a 14 percent mandatory tax on about $2 trillion in stockpiled offshore profits, said two people familiar with his budget proposals, declining to be named because the document won’t be made public until Feb. 2. Companies would pay that tax regardless of whether they bring the money back to the U.S., the two said, creating a revenue stream the president would use to pay for roads, bridges and other infrastructure projects.
Obama’s latest proposals add new details to the administration’s efforts to revamp the U.S. business tax system. The issue has been stalled in Congress, though lawmakers of both parties say they see potential room for agreement on business taxes.
In one sense, Obama is offering U.S. companies the kind of system they have sought -- one with lower corporate marginal tax rates and with future foreign profits subject to little or no extra U.S. tax when brought home.
However, he’s offering to do so on terms that are less favorable than companies would want, with rates that could mean significant tax increases for companies that have been shifting profits to jurisdictions such as Bermuda and Ireland and paying less than 10 percent on their foreign profits.
Tax Reform“The basic outline of a deal on the most important component of corporate tax reform is falling into place,” said Ed Kleinbard, a tax law professor at the University of Southern California who has criticized the current system that often lets companies avoid paying taxes anywhere.
A proposal last year from Dave Camp, then the Republican chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, would have taxed the one-time profits at 8.75 percent for cash and 3.5 percent for other assets. Camp didn’t use a pure minimum-tax system for future profits, and still, his plan didn’t get universal acclaim from U.S. multinational corporations.
Even though Obama’s proposed rates are higher, “that’s what negotiations are for,” Kleinbard said.
$4 TrillionThe president will unveil the proposals as part of a $3.99 trillion budget designed to help lower- and middle-class Americans. The plan would yield $565 billion over 10 years, according to one of the people. The one-time tax on stockpiled profits would produce $238 billion, according to an administration document.
Obama’s plan estimates gross domestic product in 2016 will reach $18.8 trillion, up from $18 trillion this year.
Under current law, U.S. companies owe the full 35 percent U.S. tax on income they earn around the world. They get tax credits for payments to foreign governments and don’t have to pay the U.S. tax until they bring the money home.
That system gives companies an incentive to push profits outside the U.S. and leave them there. Apple Inc. and Google Inc. are among the many U.S. companies doing that, and companies’ disclosures indicate how little foreign tax they pay.
Microsoft Corp., for example, holds $92.9 billion in profits outside the U.S. If that money were brought home, the company would owe $29.6 billion in U.S. taxes -- or a 31.9 percent rate.
Foreign TaxesBecause tax rules call for paying the difference between the foreign tax rate and the 35 percent corporate levy, that means the company could have paid as little as 3.1 percent in foreign taxes on that income.
Obama wants to lower the corporate tax rate to 28 percent, and 25 percent for manufacturers. Republicans want a 25 percent rate for all corporations.
A 19 percent minimum tax on foreign earnings -- without an extra layer of tax upon repatriation -- could give companies an incentive to move profits overseas.
It would also mean that U.S. companies operating in most major industrialized countries would owe little or no U.S. tax on those profits. The exception would be places such as Ireland, with its 12.5 percent corporate tax rate.
Obama’s proposal, however, will include rules that would make it harder for U.S. companies to shift profits overseas or to change their addresses through inversion transactions, according to the administration document.
Republican ScrutinySenator Orrin Hatch, a Republican from Utah who is chairman of the Finance Committee, “looks forward to examining the full details,” said Julia Lawless, a spokeswoman for the lawmaker.
With Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew testifying before the panel later this week, “expect the chairman and members of the committee to take a closer look at whether these proposals will put American-based companies at a further disadvantage, incentivize foreign takeovers, and make America a comparatively less advantageous place to center business investment and activity,” she said.
The president’s taxing and spending plans, which will meet stiff resistance from the Republican-led Congress, would result in a deficit of $474 billion for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, according to the administration’s projection.
While that number is a little above estimates for the current fiscal year -- 2015 -- it gives Obama much more flexibility than the $1.4 trillion deficit that racked up in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. The deficit as a percentage of gross domestic product would be 2.5 percent, down from 3.2 percent in fiscal 2015. Over the next decade, the budget estimates it wouldn’t rise above 2.6 percent in any year.
Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal.
Obama looking like he is making global corporations pay while at state and local level citizens will be tied to all that municipal debt by Wall Street leveraging and bond deals-------that is why they use all this Wall Street financial deals with all local development.
Look below to see the earlier infrastructure funding in 2009 to get an idea of how a larger one will be dispensed. Most people in Maryland and Baltimore understand that all major infrastructure is being privatized to global corporations. O'Malley oversaw the consolidation of BGE with Exelon and know Exelon has outsourced all work on our energy sector to global corporations----from SMART METERS to physical gas and electric cables and pipeline. Local businesses might to included as subcontractors to subcontractors earning almost no profit. A few contract businesses get lots of work and are allowed to grow regionally if they pay-to-play with the establishment pols. This entire system creates the corruption and dysfunction of Baltimore's local economy. The global corporations attached to the original awards get most of it a profit-----they get the control of the infrastructure----and they decide how and where it will be done----THEY OWN AND CONTROL THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND OUR BALTIMORE CITY AGENCIES ARE SIMPLY CUSTOMER SERVICE---our as citizens will tell you-----no customer service.
The Governor of Maryland is always a global corporate pol---from Ehrlich/O'Malley/now Hogan----they will all advance these policies in our state. We don't have to have these kinds of global pols-----a social Democrat would stop this pattern and demand the Federal funds come to Baltimore to be distributed by City Hall to rebuild our Baltimore Public Works Department and outsourced to local contractors. THAT IS HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO WORK.
Much of what is outlined below doesn't happen. No oversight and accountability allows all of the regulations---contract commitments by the global corporation and contractors -----all of the final project goals be ignored----and what we have at the end will be the same set of fraud, corruption, lack of quality of work-----and local and state taxpayer paying billions of dollars in taxes and Wall Street fees----none of which has to occur.
THAT IS WHY IT MATTERS TO KNOW NATIONAL PUBLIC POLICY AND GOALS OF CURRENT POLS----IT IS WHAT DRIVES THE HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT, LOW WAGES, HIGH TAXES AT BALTIMORE AND MARYLAND LEVELS. THESE ARE REPUBLICAN TAX POLICIES AND CLINTON/OBAMA ARE REAGAN REPUBLICAN GLOBAL CORPORATE NEO-LIBERALS.
Please glance through-----just see what should be happening and no not much of it is----but funds for water infrastructure in BAltimore are going to VEOLA ENVIRONMENT.
Federal Stimulus Funding for Water Quality & Drinking Water Infrastructure
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Stimulus), includes $4 billion for Clean Water State Revolving Fund projects and $2 billion for Drinking Water State Revolving Fund projects. Maryland is expected to receive $96 million for the Water Quality Revolving Loan Fund (WQRLF) and $27 million for the Drinking Water Revolving Loan Fund (DWRLF.) The Stimulus legislation includes the following provisions:
- Waives the mandatory 20 percent State matching requirement for WQRLF and DWRLF.
- Requires that not less than 50 percent of the federal grant funds be used to provide assistance for additional subsidization in the form of forgiveness of principal, negative interest loans or grants, or any combination of these.
- Requires EPA Administrator to reallocate stimulus funds (awarded to States) where projects are not under contract or construction within 12 months.
- Allocates 80 percent of the WQRLF and DWRLF (can be more than 80 percent if insufficient eligible green infrastructure, water or energy efficiency, and environmentally innovative projects are available to use 20 percent of the funds) be provided to wastewater, non-point source and drinking water projects, traditionally funded under the two RLF programs. Example projects:
- Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements.
- Sewerage Collection/Conveyance Systems including New/Replacement Sewers.
- Correction of Sewerage Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) and/or Combined Sewer Overflow.
- Sludge Handling Facilities at Wastewater Treatment Plants.
- Landfill Leachate Pretreatment Facilities.
- Back Wash Facilities at Drinking Water Treatment Plants.
- Wellhead Protection (Drinking Water Sources).
- Landfill Capping/Closure.
- Stream Corridor Restoration/Protection.
- Hazardous Waste Clean-up (Brownfields).
- Shoreline Erosion Controls.
- Stormwater Management Facilities.
- Agricultural Nutrient Management Best Management Practices.
- Upgrade of Existing Drinking Water Treatment Facilities to Maintain Compliance.
- Water Storage Facilities (Finished/Treated Water).
- Water Transmission/Distribution.
- Source Water Wells.
- Requires not less than 20 percent of WQRLF and DWRLF be provided to green infrastructure, water or energy efficiency, and environmentally innovative (water quality) activities, to the extent there are sufficient eligible project applications. Example projects:
- Implementation of comprehensive street tree or urban forestry programs, including expansion of tree box sizes to manage additional stormwater and enhance tree health.
- Implementation of green streets (combinations of green infrastructure practices in transportation rights-of-ways), for new development, redevelopment or retrofits.
- Implementation of water harvesting and reuse programs or projects, where consistent with state and local laws and policies.
- Implementation of wet weather management systems for parking areas which include: the incremental cost of porous pavement, bioretention, trees, green roofs, and other practices that mimic natural hydrology and reduce effective imperviousness at one or more scales.
- Establishment and restoration of riparian buffers, floodplains, wetlands and other natural features.
- Downspout disconnection to remove stormwater from combined sewers and storm sewers.
- Comprehensive retrofit programs designed to keep wet weather out of all types of sewer systems using green infrastructure technologies and approaches.
- Installation of water meters.
- Retrofit or replacement of water using fixtures, fittings, equipment or appliances.
- Efficient landscape or agricultural irrigation equipment.
- Systems to recycle gray water.
- Reclamation, recycling, and reuse of existing rainwater, condensate, degraded water, stormwater, and/or wastewater streams.
- Collection system leak detection equipment.
- Energy efficient retrofits and upgrades to pumps and treatment processes.
- Leak detection equipment for treatment works.
- Producing clean power for treatment works on site (wind, solar, hydroelectric, geothermal, biogas powered combined heat and power.)
- Pro-rata share of capital costs for offsite publicly owned clean energy facilities that provide power to a treatment works.
- Green Infrastructure/Low Impact development stormwater projects
- Decentralized wastewater treatment and/or reuse projects that reduce energy consumption, recharge aquifers and reduce water withdrawals and treatment costs.
- Projects that employ development and redevelopment practices that preserve or restore site hydrologic processes through sustainable landscaping and site design.
- Projects that use water balance approaches (water budgets) at the project, local or state level that preserve site, local or regional hydrology. Such an effort could pilot and show-case efforts to plan and manage in a concerted manner, surface and groundwater withdrawals, stream base flow (aquatic species protection), wetland and floodplain storage, groundwater recharge and regional or local reuse and harvesting strategies using a quantified methodology.
- Projects that demonstrate the energy savings and climate change implications of sustainable site design practices and the use of green infrastructure such as green roofs, increased tree canopy, reduced water consumption and potable water, rainwater harvesting and reuse, and reductions traditional infrastructure needed to manage stormwater and combined sewer overflows.
- Projects that demonstrate the differential uses of water based on the level of treatment and potential uses as a means to reducing the costs of treating all water to potable water standards.
- Projects that identify and quantify the benefits of using integrated water resources management approaches.
Application Process for Stimulus Funding
The Applicant must submit a pre-application to MDE by 2/28/09 (unless project is already on the FFY 2008 Project Priority List based on last year’s application). Project must be ready to start construction by 12/31/09 to be considered for stimulus funding. The pre-application form is available on MDE website. If selected for funding, the Applicant will be notified in March 2009. The list of projects selected for stimulus funding will also be posted on the MDE website.
MDE Project Selection Process and Grant/Loan Funding Determination
- Projects will be selected from the Water Quality & Drinking Water FFY 2008 Project Priority Lists (PPLs).
- New project applications (due to MDE by 2/28/09) for eligible projects starting construction by 12/31/09 will be amended into the existing FFY 2008 PPLs.
- Projects for funding will be selected based on their readiness to start construction by 12/31/09, priority ranking, and availability of stimulus funding.
- Non-Disadvantaged Communities undertaking wastewater and drinking water projects will be eligible for up to 100 percent of project cost as low interest rate loan funding.
- Disadvantaged Communities undertaking wastewater and drinking water projects will be eligible to receive up to 100 percent of project cost as grant funding.
- All Applicants undertaking non-point source, green infrastructure, water or energy efficiency, and environmentally innovative projects will be eligible to receive up to 100 percent of project cost as grant funding.
Disadvantaged Community Criteria
The Disadvantaged Community Criteria for stimulus funding is defined as:
- Any community with Median Household Income (MHI) is less than $47,810 (70% of the State MHI), or
- Any community with average water or sewer user rate per year per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) exceeding 1% of MHI
For Applicants receiving loans for projects that start construction and/or enter into a loan agreement with the Maryland Water Quality Financing Administration by 12/31/09.
Interest Rate/yr:Non-Disadvantaged Community Rate = 1%
Disadvantaged Community Rate = 0%
Loan Terms:Up to 20-years (up to 30 years for Drinking Water Disadvantaged Communities)
Loan Fee:5% of Loan debt service collected annually (Applicable only to Non-Disadvantaged Communities)
Other Program Requirements
As a condition of receiving stimulus grant or loan funding, the Applicant will need to comply with several requirements (e.g., Federal wage rates, minority/women business participation, etc.) MDE will provide additional information and guidance to Applicants that are selected for stimulus funding.
Republicans and Clinton neo-liberals have these few decades had an IRS that removed the emphasis that was on corporations and the rich----and directed that emphasis on small business and individuals. Under the guise of austerity to pay for all the Federal revenue lost to corporate fraud and corporate tax evasion-----comes what is a dismantling of our IRS and the ability to assure oversight and accountability and Uniformity and Discrimination tax laws. Once you gut and deregulate your Federal tax structure----then a global corporate tribunal under global pols can do anything they want with taxation----that has been the goal of global Wall Street Clinton/Obama neo-liberals and Bush/Hopkins neo-cons. It is why Baltimore is starved of revenue-----
All the while Republican Congressional pols are posing conservative in telling their voters this is all about getting rid of taxation on business and individuals----when it only INCREASES taxation on 95% of people----removing 5% from any taxation.
‘Draconian’ cut to IRS budget advances
By Eric Yoder June 11, 2015
A House subcommittee on Thursday voted to reduce IRS funding by about 8 percent despite objections from several Democrats who called the move penny-wise and pound-foolish.
The financial services-general government appropriations bill would set the agency’s 2016 budget at $10.1 billion, which Democrats said is below the level of a decade ago even though the agency’s workload has grown substantially. The amount is $838 million below the fiscal year 2015 level and $2.8 billion below the White House’s request.
Subcommittee chairman Rep. Ander Crenshaw (R-Fla.) said the lower level would force the IRS to improve its self-management, saying the agency has a “recent history of inappropriate behavior” and wasteful spending. NO, THAT'S NOT IT!
Despite changes in leadership, “the IRS continues to make embarrassing management mistakes at the cost of customer service,” he said, noting that the bill does boost funding for customer service despite the overall cut.
[House plan would cut IRS budget]
The measure imposes new reporting requirements on spending, bars payment of awards to employees unless their conduct and tax compliance are taken into consideration, and requires a report on use of on-the-clock time by agency employees on union duties.
Ranking Democrat Rep. Jose Serrano of New York called the funding level an attempt by Republicans to punish the agency NO---THAT'S NOT IT! for its handling of applications for tax-exempt status and to block implementation of the Affordable Care Act’s individual coverage mandate.
“Last year, these efforts to harm the IRS ultimately hurt the taxpayer by increasing the deficit and reducing taxpayer services,” Serrano said. “For every dollar the majority cut last year, the estimates are that our nation lost six dollars owed to it that should have been collected. If this year’s cuts become law, we can expect more of the same.”
In addition, the recent computer hack of the personal information of more than 100,000 taxpayers “highlights the need for additional investment in cybersecurity” yet the bill reduces available funds in the pertinent accounts, he said.
[IRS failed to address computer security weaknesses, making attack on 104,000 taxpayers more likely, watchdog says]
Said Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.), “Imposing draconian cuts on the IRS is no recipe for improved service, greater tax compliance and certainly does not send the right message to those people who are cheating our government by failing to pay their taxes.” THAT'S IT!
“It’s not the most politically wise thing to do to defend the Internal Revenue Service but it doesn’t seem to make any sense to me to complain about the work of the IRS and then slash its budget,” he said. “We all know that severe budget cuts have led to fewer audits, longer appeals, delayed refunds and poorer service by the IRS. It also has led to billions and billions of dollars in lost tax revenue.”
In addition to the IRS, the bill funds financial regulatory agencies and the central management and federal employee appeals agencies.
The measure also typically serves as the annual vehicle for setting a federal pay raise but it does not address that issue, nor did any members address it during the meeting. That silence could pave the way for President Obama’s recommended 1.3 percent increase for January 2016 to take effect by default. The bill does specify that political appointees and political senior executives would not receive any raise that is paid, however.
The measure was approved on a voice vote after uniformly positive comments from Republicans and uniformly negative comments from Democrats. It now moves to the full Appropriations Committee. The Senate has not yet produced a counterpart.