The proposal’s goal is a good one: how do policymakers make it easier for families to pay the rent, put food on the table, afford child care, & see a doctor? A vigorous debate that goes beyond tax cuts will help us find workable solutions.

Senator Van Hollen is a long-time supporter of expanding the CTC & EITC, but just stacking those proposals on top of this one would be very expensive. Better to develop a unified approach to affordability that focuses revenues where it is needed most

We need to prioritize using $ to help families w/ the largest affordability challenges, e.g. families hard hit by Admin’s tariffs, health & food cuts, & left out of recent CTC expansion

The tax cut is paid for w/ an excellent revenue-raiser: a surtax on millionaires, who got huge Bush/Trump tax cuts, that raises $1.5T over 10 yrs. A key issue here is opportunity cost - is this the best use of revenue from this offset?

While it uses the MIT Living Wage Calculator, which shows the income needed for different fam sizes, the proposal itself doesn’t seem to make adjustments for # of kids.

Problem 2: Since it relies on the standard deduction, the proposal likely gives more to many ppl w/out kids than to families w/ kids, even though raising kids is expensive.

Problem 1: Ppl w/ larger affordability challenges will likely get less (or nothing): For example, a low paid worker making well below the $46,000 affordability threshold will get far less than the person w/ income at the threshold (who faces less challenging affordability issues)

How it would work: it seems to effectively triple the standard deduction to levels tied to the MIT calculator - $46,000 for singles and $92,000 for married couples compared to current $16,100/$32,200. (The boost may be phased out at high incomes.)

The proposal keys off of the MIT Living Wage Calculator, with the goal of helping people get closer to affording a basic budget, e.g. rent, food, doctor etc. paid for w/ millionaire surtax. Good goal! But the approach misses the mark for some families even while it costs a lot.

Democrat’s plan would eliminate federal income taxes for half of U.S. workers Sen. Chris Van Hollen’s tax relief plan could benefit tens of millions of middle-class workers, with a focus on those making at or below a living wage.

The latest Democratic affordability proposal–this one from Senator Van Hollen– was previewed in the Washington Post by @jeffstein.bsky.social this morning. While we don’t have all the details, it seems like a case of good intentions but some problematic results www.washingtonpost.com/business/202...

Americans' confidence in the U.S. economy falls sharply in January to lowest level since 2014 U.S. consumer confidence declined sharply in January, hitting the lowest level since 2014 as Americans grow increasingly concerned about their financial prospects.

And, Trump has just dug the hole deeper across-the-board which was evident yesterday morning with reports from the Conference Board of the collapse of consumer confidence in January. We’ll see what happens.
apnews.com/article/cons...

Grim Polls For The GOP Budget Bill Tax historian Joseph J. Thorndike examines the results of several polls on voter support for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Moreover, the Trump megabill is already deeply unpopular with the public. This piece from last summer when the bill passed summed up the public’s early take: www.forbes.com/sites/taxnot...

Plus, this time around people also have to deal with economy-wide Trump tariffs which – yikes – are twice as big in the wrong direction than the tax changes compared to last year:

The original 2017 Trump tax cut – tilted to the rich like this one – was not popular and subsequent tax filing seasons did nothing to change that. Now consider that the new tax changes people are going to see on average are less than half of 2017 changes:

Peoples’ excitement regarding their tax refunds might be less positive than some Republicans expect or hope, and for good reason. The tax change will be smaller than the 2017 Trump tax cuts and will only make up for about half the tariff hit for many.

These IRS cuts are unfair to honest taxpayers - making it harder for them to file their returns and easier for dishonest people to cheat.

Making the debate over how much to cut is exactly the opposite of what needs to happen -- the debate needs to be about how much to increase the IRS's budget as part of a much needed rebuild.

Now, House Republicans, in particular, are targeting the base budget of IRS with Senate Democrats - and Senate Republicans to a degree seemingly - trying to blunt the damage

Republicans first targeted the mandatory funding -- going after enforcement in particular, despite the deep cuts in audits they had caused

The Republicans spent a decade gutting the IRS. During the Biden Admin., a rebuild plan was enacted which envisioned two key pillars: robust base funding combined with supplemental mandatory funding

Congress agreed over the weekend to cut the IRS's base budget by a reported $1 billion. This would be a serious policy mistake at a time when the IRS remains severely depleted. Honest taxpayers deserve better.

Administration’s Proposed Cuts to Non-Defense R&D Pose Long-Term Risk to Rising Living Standards | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities New, high-quality research quantifying the powerful impact of federal non-defense research and development shows why the dramatic cuts to non-defense R&D funding proposed by the Trump Administration w...

The Trump Administration is doing the exact opposite, instead proposing deep cuts in nondefense R & – it’s hard to overstate how important it is for the Congress to reject this effort
www.cbpp.org/research/fed...

An underlying theme of the research is that the US should be investing more in nondefense R & D to boost future living standards.

CBO has now weighed in with a stunning analysis that highlights the economic power of investments in non-defense R & D:
www.cbo.gov/system/files...

While this connection has long been recognized, it has been difficult to quantify. Recent exciting research from @A_Fieldhouse, Karel Mertens, @ArnaudDyèvre, & others take a key step forward in connecting the investments to productivity growth, eg:
www.dallasfed.org/~/media/docu...

50 inventions you might not know were funded by the US government Stacker compiled information on 50 inventions funded by the United States government using government and scientific reports, and news articles.

Investments in non-defense R & D have long been a critical component of the govt-university-private sector US innovation machine
stacker.com/stories/busi...

Administration’s Proposed Cuts to Non-Defense R&D Pose Long-Term Risk to Rising Living Standards | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities New, high-quality research quantifying the powerful impact of federal non-defense research and development shows why the dramatic cuts to non-defense R&D funding proposed by the Trump Administration w...

New Paper:
CBO finds $1 invested in federal non-defense R & D yields $11.50 over 30 yrs, i.e. wow
Meanwhile, the Trump Admin proposes a 21% cut in non-defense R & D funding– while targeting top universities– posing a threat to future living standards
www.cbpp.org/research/fed...

Bessent Picks Social Security Chief Frank Bisignano as IRS CEO The Social Security head will do double duty at the tax agency while Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent retains his formal title as acting IRS commissioner.

Alarming news this morning that Social Security head Frank Bisignano has been named “CEO” of IRS, a move that raises 3 major concerns:

www.wsj.com/politics/pol...

Exclusive | Trump Administration Cancels Annual Hunger Survey The government has been measuring food insecurity since the mid-1990s but now says the report has become “overly politicized.”

The Administration acknowledged that it will stop the survey that measures food insecurity, just as tariffs push up food prices and the deep cuts to food assistance enacted in July start to take effect. Congress must intervene to save these vital data. www.wsj.com/economy/trum...