ReportWire

Tag: taxation

  • Intuit braces for negative FTC ruling on free tax prep advertising, vows appeal

    Intuit braces for negative FTC ruling on free tax prep advertising, vows appeal

    [ad_1]

    More than a year ago, the Federal Trade Commission sued Intuit Inc., the maker of TurboTax, for allegedly tricking people into thinking they could file their income taxes for free with the tax-preparation giant.

    Now, an administrative judge inside the agency has ruled against Intuit — and the company said in a Friday afternoon SEC filing that it’s going to keep fighting the case, even if that means incurring “significant costs.”

    “We expect to appeal this decision to the FTC Commissioners and, if necessary, then to a federal court of appeals. We intend to continue to defend our position on the merits of this case,” the company said in its 10-K filing.

    “There is no monetary penalty, and Intuit expects no significant impact to its business,” Intuit spokesman Rick Heineman said in a statement. The company will appeal “this groundless and seemingly predetermined decision by the FTC to rule in its own favor,” he said.

    Intuit already reached a $141 million settlement with state attorneys general about the allegations of deceptive advertising. The company says it has been clear and upfront with customers about costs. It did not admit liability in the settlement.

    The FTC could not be immediately reached for comment Friday afternoon.

    In March 2022, the regulator sued Intuit in federal court to immediately stop commercials that repeated “free” over and over. Intuit pulled some of the advertising and after filing season ended, a San Francisco federal judge said the FTC bid for emergency halts didn’t need to happen under the circumstances.

    FTC lawyers also lodged an internal administrative complaint. “Intuit widely disseminated ads on television, on the radio, and online that gave consumers the impression that they could use TurboTax for free, even though two-thirds of taxpayers don’t qualify for Intuit’s free TurboTax offerings,” they wrote in administrative complaint proceedings.

    The ongoing legal fight is happening while the broader fight over of free tax preparation is heating up. The Internal Revenue Service is planning to test its own pilot program in the upcoming filing season where taxpayers can file their taxes directly with the IRS instead of through tax preparation companies or individual preparers.

    TurboTax and the tax software industry oppose the proposed IRS direct file system. So do Congressional Republicans.

    One sticking point in the looming government shutdown is how much money the IRS should be getting in its budget. The House appropriations bill would forbid the IRS from using any money to build the direct file system.

    Intuit Inc.
    INTU,
    +1.44%

    shares closed 1.4% higher Friday, at $549.60, and the disclosure didn’t seem to be having much effect on the shares in after-hours trading. Shares are up 41% year to date, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average
    DJIA
    is up 5% and the S&P 500
    SPX
    is up 17.6%.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Workshop on taxation organised at CBD Punjab Complex – Business & Finance – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    Workshop on taxation organised at CBD Punjab Complex – Business & Finance – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    [ad_1]

    LAHORE: In a bid to foster financial literacy and raise awareness about tax implications among its employees, Punjab Central Business District Development Authority (PCBDDA), organized a tax workshop at CBD Punjab Complex.

    The workshop organized by the Authority’s Finance Department was aimed to provide insight into tax laws and amendments done in Finance Act 2023.

    The workshop addressed a wide spectrum of tax-related subjects, including income tax implications on salaries, commissions, property transactions, rentals, sales, goods, services, General sales tax (GST) and Punjab Sales Tax (PST). The workshop was a proactive effort to empower participants with knowledge of taxation laws aiding them in making informed financial decisions.

    Executive Director Finance CBD Punjab, Syed Habban Subhani, while expressing his thoughts said, “Financial awareness is essential for sustainable economic growth. Our workshop serves as a platform to empower individuals with knowledge about tax regulations, enabling them to navigate the financial landscape more effectively.”

    USDA Certified Organic Tinctures and salves

    Copyright Business Recorder, 2023

    Original Author Link click here to read complete story..

    [ad_2]

    MMP News Author

    Source link

  • U.S. stocks would be much lower if it wasn’t for ‘excessive’ government spending, Morgan Stanley’s Mike Wilson says

    U.S. stocks would be much lower if it wasn’t for ‘excessive’ government spending, Morgan Stanley’s Mike Wilson says

    [ad_1]

    U.S. stocks would be in much worse shape in 2023 if it wasn’t for “excessive” fiscal policy from the government and explosive money-supply growth in recent years.

    That’s the latest take from Morgan Stanley’s Mike Wilson, the bank’s chief investment strategist who, as MarketWatch’s Steve Goldstein pointed out earlier, seems to never miss an opportunity to recall how wrong his market calls have been this year.

    In his latest note, Wilson told clients and the financial press that excessive government spending has helped prop up the U.S. economy and markets to a degree that Wilson and his team failed to anticipate.

    “Part of the reason we’ve found ourselves offside this year is that the fiscal impulse returned with a vengeance and remained quite strong in 2023 — something we didn’t factor into our forecasts,” Wilson said in the note.

    In an accompanying chart, Wilson noted that fiscal spending looks particularly excessive when compared with the U.S. unemployment rate, which fell to 3.5% in July, according to data from the Department of Labor released on Friday.


    MORGAN STANLEY

    To be sure, Wilson was one of a select few on Wall Street to correctly anticipating last year’s inflation-driven selloff.

    But heading into the New Year, he expected stocks would tumble to new lows during the first half of 2023.

    And after hanging on to his bearish view for months in spite of a powerful rally in equities driven by the artificial intelligence craze and a surprisingly resilient U.S. economy, he’s recently taken the opportunity to reflect on why he got it wrong, while acknowledging the possibility that the rally could continue.

    See: Morgan Stanley’s Mike Wilson admits ‘we were wrong’ about 2023 stock-market rally, but refuses to throw in the towel

    See: Morgan Stanley’s Mike Wilson is warming to the U.S. stock-market rally. Here’s what would make him turn bullish.

    It’s possible, even likely, that the government’s excessive spending could continue, at least until it comes time to raise the debt ceiling again in 2025.

    Fitch Ratings last week cited projections for ballooning budget deficits for helping to inspire its decision to strip the U.S. of its AAA credit rating.

    “The main takeaway for the equity market this year is that fiscal policy has allowed
    the economy to grow faster than forecast, giving rise to the consensus view that the
    risk of a recession has faded considerably. Furthermore, with the recent lifting of the debt ceiling until 2025, this aggressive fiscal spending could continue,” Wilson said.

    The biggest problem with spending so much during good economic times, however, is that it limits Congress’s ability to act when another recession inevitably arrives.

    That could create problems for corporate earnings and, by extension, stocks, down the road, Wilson said.

    “If fiscal policy is showing such little constraint in good times, what happens to the deficit when the next recession arrives?”

    U.S. stocks were trading higher early Monday after the S&P 500
    SPX
    logged its fourth straight day in the red on Friday, capping off the worst week for stocks since March. The index was up 0.5% in recent trade near 4,500, while the Nasdaq Composite
    COMP
    was 0.2% lower at 13,881.

    The Dow Jones Industrial Average
    DJIA,
    which has surged higher over the past month as traders have favored some of this year’s market laggards, was up 300 points, or 0.9%, at 35,362.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Rising Treasury yields spooked the stock market. Now, a key test lies ahead.

    Rising Treasury yields spooked the stock market. Now, a key test lies ahead.

    [ad_1]

    A worsening U.S. fiscal situation caught stock and bond investors off guard in the past week and now a round of approaching government auctions is about to provide a crucial test for Treasurys.

    The question in the days ahead is whether risks to the demand for U.S. government debt are growing. If so, that could put upward pressure on Treasury yields, which would undermine the performance of stocks. However, if investors end up caring less about the fiscal situation than they do about the possibility of slowing economic growth and decelerating inflation, government debt’s safe-haven appeal could be reinforced, putting a limit on how high yields might go.

    Concern about the deteriorating fiscal outlook was a factor behind the past week’s rise in long-term Treasury yields. Ten-
    BX:TMUBMUSD10Y
    and 30-year yields
    BX:TMUBMUSD30Y
    respectively jumped to 4.188% and 4.304% on Thursday, the highest levels since early November, as investors sold off long-term government debt — which took the shine off U.S. stocks. By Friday, though, a moderating pace of U.S. job creation for July sent yields into reverse, giving equities a temporary lift during the final trading session of the week.

    At issue is the extent to which potential buyers of Treasurys may be deterred by Fitch Ratings’ Aug. 1 decision to cut the U.S. government’s top AAA rating, at a time when the government is about to unleash what Barclays rates strategists describe as a “tsunami” of supply. A total of $103 billion in 3-, 10-and 30-year Treasurys come up for sale between Tuesday and Thursday. In addition, a spate of Treasury bills are scheduled to be auctioned starting on Monday.

    Gene Tannuzzo, global head of fixed income at Boston-based Columbia Threadneedle Investments, said that while he and his team still have room to add T-bills to the government money-market funds they oversee during the week ahead, they haven’t made up their minds about whether to buy more longer-dated maturities for their bond funds.

    “While we are comfortable that the Fed is at or near the end of its rate hikes, there are a lot more questions about the durability of the economic recovery, the degree that inflation will remain low, and the risk premium that needs to be put in at the long end,” Tannuzzo said via phone.

    Treasury’s $1 trillion third-quarter borrowing plans, along with some technical issues and the Bank of Japan’s decision to switch to a more flexible yield-curve control approach, might reduce demand for U.S. government debt, he said. Columbia Threadneedle managed $617 billion as of June.

    “One can’t ignore the risk of an unruly rise in yields, but our view is that this is a low risk and what the Treasury auctions may produce instead is ‘indigestion,’ driven by poor technicals and low liquidity, Fitch’s downgrade, and the Bank of Japan action — and by the end of August, we should be past much of this,” he told MarketWatch.

    Key Words: Warren Buffett dismisses Fitch downgrade: ‘There are some things people shouldn’t worry about’

    Risks to the demand for Treasurys may become obvious soon, given Tuesday-Thursday’s $103 billion in total sales of 3-, 10- and 30-year securities, according to analyst John Canavan of U.K.-based Oxford Economics. The main “question mark” for the market’s ability to absorb the increased Treasury issuance will be whether or not domestic investment funds continue to show interest, Canavan wrote in a note distributed on Friday.


    Source: Oxford Economics.

    ‘My suspicion is that with higher rates comes equally solid demand’ at upcoming auctions.


    — John Flahive, head of fixed income at BNY Mellon Wealth Management

    Market players have had little difficulty absorbing Treasury coupon issuances in recent years because of flight-to-safety trades made after the U.S. onset of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. Now, however, increased auction sizes are being accompanied by still-elevated inflation, better-than-expected economic growth, and the possibility of more rate hikes by the Federal Reserve — which is likely to complicate the market’s ability to absorb the increased supply “without hiccups,” Canavan said.

    Read: Who is buying all the Treasury auctions? Domestic funds got a record share, but another deluge is coming.

    On the flip side of the debate is John Flahive, head of fixed income at BNY Mellon Wealth Management in Boston, which managed $286 billion in assets as of June. He said equity markets will continue to be much more focused on economic developments and earnings. And as long as the latter of the two remains robust, stocks “can grind higher in a low-volatility environment,” Flahive said via phone.

    Saying he does not expect his team to be a major participant in the Treasury auctions, Flahive said that the bond market’s reaction in the past week was “a little overdone” and “we always felt that there was a limited to how much yields could go up to reflect more government debt.”

    “My suspicion is that with higher rates comes equally solid demand” at upcoming auctions, he said. “I’m still optimistic about rates going back down over time as the result of a slowing economy and decelerating inflation. We continue to like the bond market and see a better-than-even chance that yields go down as the economy continues to weaken in the quarters ahead.”

    Friday’s reaction to July’s official jobs report, which showed the U.S. added a modest 187,000 new jobs, provided a breather from the past week’s run-up in Treasury yields.

    On Friday, the 30-year Treasury yield fell 9 basis points to 4.214%, yet still ended with its biggest weekly gain since early February. The 10-year rate, which dropped 12.8 basis points to 4.06%, finished with a third straight week of advances.

    Stocks fell Friday, leaving major indexes with weekly declines. The Dow Jones Industrial Average
    DJIA
    posted a 1.1% weekly fall, while the S&P 500
    SPX
    shed 2.3% and the Nasdaq Composite
    COMP
    retreated 2.9%. The soft start to August comes after a run of sharp gains for equities. The S&P 500 remains up 16.6% for the year to date.

    The economic calendar for the week ahead includes U.S. inflation updates.

    On Monday, June consumer-credit data is set to be released. Tuesday brings the NFIB’s small business optimism index, plus data on the U.S. trade balance and wholesale inventories. Then on Thursday, weekly initial jobless claims and the July consumer-price index are released. That’s followed on Friday by the producer-price index for last month and an August consumer-sentiment reading.

    Meanwhile, portfolio manager and fixed-income analyst John Luke Tyner at Alabama-based Aptus Capital Advisors, which manages roughly $5 billion in assets, said he plans to follow the Treasury auctions, but doesn’t usually participate in them.

    “One of the biggest trends we’ve seen is the continued increase in the issuance amounts from Treasury. Whatever we are budgeting for is never enough, which justifies the Fitch downgrade,” Tyner said via phone. “It’s tough to say people aren’t going to buy U.S. debt, but you’ve got to entice them to buy duration and take the risk.

    “The U.S. is not an emerging market, but ultimately we are going to see the market rate that participants require be higher, with a notable uptick in term premia,” he said. “What we could see in the face of all this issuance is a grind up in yields on an auction-by-auction basis. If I look at the technicals, a 4.9%-5% yield on the 10-year note seems in the cards,” and “it will be difficult for stocks to hold or expand from full valuations as rates run up.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Am I being tricked into overtipping when I eat out? Should I tip before or after sales tax is added?

    Am I being tricked into overtipping when I eat out? Should I tip before or after sales tax is added?

    [ad_1]

    Dear Quentin,

    I’ve read your previous responses to letters on tipping, and my thoughts are simple: Tipping is dependent on the service given. I won’t tip at a deli counter, but I will tip more in a diner. I see no reason to tip a deli counter person on a regular basis. The person who rings up my groceries isn’t allowed to accept tips, and they do a lot more than put a sandwich in a bag.

    As far as restaurants go, 15% is the starting point and I will go up from that as warranted. I do tend to tip a high percentage in diners. The waitstaff there are generally fabulous, deal with lower price points and a varied clientele. I feel they also suffer from customer bias where some people seem to think it’s only a diner not a fancy restaurant.

    ‘Helping others is not always through money. I volunteer my time with several charities and donate blood.’

    The job is the same whether my meal is $10 or $100. I try to pay in cash to ensure the waitstaff is promptly getting their tip, and to ensure that the money does indeed go to the wait staff. Are we expected to tip on a total that includes credit-card charges? What’s more, helping others is not always through money. I volunteer my time with several charities and donate blood.

    What troubles me is that throughout the New York City metro area, tipping recommendations in restaurants are based on faulty calculations. My friends and I all agree that tips are supposed to be based on the price of the meal — that is the subtotal or pre-tax figure. Restaurants frequently encourage people to tip on the final amount. 

    A Fair Tipper

    Related: I’m sick and tired of tipping 20% every time I eat out. Is it ever OK to tip less? Or am I a cheapskate? 

    Dear Fair,

    Yes, yes, yes, and yes. 

    Yes, wait staff in diners work as hard as any restaurant worker, and they deserve whatever your optimum tip — 15% or 20% — and as much as you would tip in a white-tablecloth restaurant. Yes, consumers should not be expected to tip in a deli — unless you have a good relationship with the staff, and you tip occasionally for goodwill. If you choose to “skip” the charity donation in a pharmacy, that’s OK too. Yes, donations and tips are increasingly being conflated, and that’s not always a good thing. We should be comfortable with the charity and 100% sure that the donation is going to the charity in question. 

    And your main point: Yes, tipping on the subtotal before tax and before credit-card charges is absolutely fair, although a lot of people — especially when calculating the tip among friends — tip on the after-tax total. Why? Perhaps we don’t want to be seen splitting hairs over the tax among friends and/or in front of a service worker who has given us exemplary service. Calculating tips is often done under pressure, and no one likes to be seen as a cheapskate. I almost always tip on the total amount, knowing that the sales tax is included, primarily because I figure that extra $1 or more is going to the person who served my table.

    My colleague, MarketWatch news editor Nicole Pesce, put together a guide for how much you should tip everyone, and who you should NOT tip. She also cited three reasons why tipping has become such a note of contention, and why it appears we are tipping more: people tipped staff more during the pandemic (they were, after all, putting their health and lives at risk with their jobs); 40-year high inflation over the last 12 months has increased the cost of everything and, as such our tips rose in tandem with prices; and, finally, digital tipping appears to be ubiquitous, and people have been suffering from tipping fatigue. 

    ‘You’re not the only one: Americans are souring on tipping.’

    You’re not the only one with tipping fatigue, though: Americans are generally souring on tipping. A large majority (66%) of U.S. adults have a negative view about tipping, according to a poll released by the personal-finance site Bankrate last month. The bottom line: consumers feel they are being forced to compensate employees for low pay (41%) and they don’t appreciate all that digital guilt tipping (32%) and, as a result, they believe that tipping culture has gotten out of control (30%). Respondents also said they were confused about how much to tip (15%), but a small minority (a paltry 16%) said they would be willing to pay higher prices in lieu of tipping.

    People appear to be less generous with their tipping amounts, and they also appear to be tipping less often. What’s perhaps most surprising from Bankrate’s research is that only 65% of diners actually tip when they eat out (that’s down from 73% last year). After restaurants, people are most likely to tip barbers/hairdressers (53% of those polled) and food-delivery workers (50%). From thereon, only a minority of people say they tip taxi or rideshare drivers (New York City cabs, which give tipping options upon payment, may be an outlier here), hotel housekeepers, baristas and food-delivery workers.

    It’s important that we have this conversation about tipping because expectations and digital tipping methods are evolving all the time. On the one hand, people are facing higher prices and they are understandably feeling under pressure to tip. On the other hand, this conversation naturally overlaps with the working conditions and pay of service workers. Americans are tipping less than they did during the worst days of the pandemic. Service workers — along with medical personnel, bus and train drivers and first responders — were among the heroes of the pandemic. That is something I hope we never forget.

    “The person who rings up my groceries isn’t allowed to accept tips, and they do a lot more than put a sandwich in a bag,” the letter writer says.


    MarketWatch illustration

    Also read:

    ‘I respect every profession equally, but I feel like so many people look down on me for being a waitress’: Americans are tipping less. Should we step up to the plate? 

    ‘We’re very upset!’ We gave a friend $400 concert tickets and $2,000 Rangers seats, but weren’t invited to his wedding. Do we speak up?

    ‘All of these tips add up’: If a restaurant adds a 20% tip, am I obliged to pay? Should tipping not be optional? 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Construction spending inches up, showing signs of a recovery in housing

    Construction spending inches up, showing signs of a recovery in housing

    [ad_1]

    The construction industry posted a slight gain in May as companies and the government increased spending on projects across the U.S.

    Spending on construction projects rose 0.9% in May to $1.93 trillion, the Commerce Department reported Monday. 

    Wall Street was expecting construction spending to rise 0.5% in April.

    Construction spending reveals how much the government and private companies spend on projects, from housing to highways. The more the U.S. spends on construction, the higher the level of economic activity. 

    The government revised spending on construction in April to 0.4% from an initial read of a 1.2% increase.

    Over the past year, construction spending was up 2.4%. 

    In terms of residential real estate, private residential construction fell 11.6% in May as compared to the previous year. It was up 2.2% as compared to April.

    Single-family construction rose on a month-over-month basis in May by 1.7%, but fell sharply by 25% from last year.

    Multifamily construction fell by 0.1% in May, but increased by 20.4% from last year.

    Spending on public residential construction rose by 0.1% from last month, and 12.3% from last year. The U.S. increased spending on public residential construction by 1.1% from last month, and 8.3% over the last year.

    The increase in spending May overall was “strong,” Stephen Stanley, chief U.S. economist at Santander U.S. Capital Markets, wrote in a note.

    “In particular, new residential activity jumped by 2.2%, reversing the cumulative declines recorded over the three prior months,” he added. “This lines up with the big increase in housing starts in May and adds to the growing body of evidence that the housing sector is bottoming out.”

    Stocks
    DJIA,
    +0.11%

    SPX,
    +0.04%

    were down in early trading on Monday. The 10-year Treasury note
    TMUBMUSD10Y,
    3.844%

    was around 3.8%.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Supreme Court knocks down Biden’s student-debt forgiveness plan

    Supreme Court knocks down Biden’s student-debt forgiveness plan

    [ad_1]

    The Supreme Court knocked down the Biden administration’s plan to cancel up to $20,000 in student debt for a wide swath of borrowers, the court announced Friday. 

    The decision means that the White House won’t move forward with the plan for now, though it’s possible officials could try to launch a new version of the debt-forgiveness initiative using a different legal authority. Roughly 26 million borrowers applied for or were automatically eligible for debt relief under the Biden administration’s plan, which canceled up to $10,000 in student debt for borrowers earning less than $125,000 and up to $20,000 in federal loans for borrowers who met that criteria and also used a Pell grant in college. 

    Americans owe $1.7 trillion of student loans and the White House had estimated that more than 40 million borrowers would benefit from the initiative. But almost as soon as the Biden administration announced the debt-forgiveness plan last year, opponents looked for ways to challenge it legally. Ultimately, two cases made it to the high court. 

    In one case, two student-loan borrowers sued over the debt-relief plan in part because the Department of Education didn’t submit it for public comment. That, they said, resulted in an initiative that arbitrarily left out or limited the amount of relief available to some student loan borrowers, like themselves. The suit filed by the borrowers was backed by the Job Creators Network, a conservative advocacy organization co-founded by Bernard Marcus, the co-founder of Home Depot, who also supported former President Donald Trump. 

    Six Republican-led states brought the other case on the basis that canceling debt could harm their state coffers. 

    The court considered two issues in these cases. The first is whether the plaintiffs had standing, or the ability to bring a lawsuit because they’ve been directly harmed by the policy. The second is whether the Biden administration overstepped in its executive authority when issuing the policy. In order for the justices to reach the second issue, or the merits of the case, they had to find that the plaintiffs had standing to sue. 

    Legal experts, including some who believed the Biden administration didn’t have the authority to authorize the debt-relief plan, were skeptical of the notion that the parties bringing the cases had standing to sue. During oral arguments in February, the court’s three liberal justices also questioned whether the parties who challenged debt forgiveness were actually injured by the policy. 

    In addition, one of the members of the court’s conservative wing, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, asked pointed questions about the six states’ argument that they had standing to sue in part because the debt-relief plan would injure the state of Missouri. That claim surrounded the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority, or MOHELA, a state-affiliated organization that services federal student loans. The states had argued if MOHELA lost accounts due to the debt-relief plan, its revenue would decline and that loss would hurt Missouri because of MOHELA’s ties to the state. 

    Despite these questions, Barrett agreed with the court’s five other conservative judges and found that the states have standing to sue. The three liberal justices dissented.

    “MOHELA is, by law and function, an instrumentality of Missouri,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “It was created by the State, is supervised by the State, and serves a public function. The harm to MOHELA in the performance of its public function is necessarily a direct injury to Missouri itself.”

    The court’s decision in the states’ suit allowed the justices to get to the merits of the case. The parties challenging the debt-relief plan argued that the Department of Education went beyond the authority Congress delegated it in discharging student debt. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued to the justices that in canceling student debt, the Secretary of Education acted “within the heartland” of the authority Congress provided to him under the HEROES Act, a 2003 law that aims to ensure student-loan borrowers aren’t left worse off by a national emergency. 

    The court’s conservative majority sided with the states, with a 6-3 decision, striking down the debt-relief plan in its current form. 

    “The HEROES Act allows the Secretary to ‘waive or modify’ existing statutory or regulatory provisions applicable to financial assistance programs under the Education Act, but does not allow the Secretary to rewrite that statute to the extent of canceling $430 billion of student loan principal,” Roberts wrote.

    In the months leading up to the court’s decision, White House officials said there was no backup plan for if the Supreme Court knocked down the debt-forgiveness initiative. Advocates and activists have said that student-loan repayments shouldn’t resume until the Biden administration fulfills its promise to cancel some student debt.

    The bill President Joe Biden signed in June to raise the nation’s debt limit requires that the Department of Education end the pause on federal student loan, interest payments and collections 60 days after June 30, 2023. Interest on federal student loans will resume starting September 1 and payments will start to come due in October, according to the Department’s website.

    Advocates and activists have said for years that the Higher Education Act provides the Secretary of Education with the authority to discharge student loans. In ruling that the HEROES Act didn’t authorize the Biden administration’s debt-relief plan, the court left the option open for the Biden administration to create a loan-forgiveness program authorized under the HEA. 

    The court’s decision marks the latest development in a more-than-decade-long push to get the government to cancel student debt en masse. The idea, which has its origins in the Occupy Wall Street movement, made it to the presidential campaign stage during the 2020 cycle and was adopted by the White House last year.    

    Proponents of student debt cancellation and the Biden administration, have expressed concern that without some kind of relief a large swath of borrowers could slip into delinquency and default with the return of student loan payments later this year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Global Minimum Tax: Swiss voters pave the way for implementation in 2024 – Banking blog

    Global Minimum Tax: Swiss voters pave the way for implementation in 2024 – Banking blog

    [ad_1]

    In the popular vote on 18 June 2023, Swiss voters approved the most extensive change to the Swiss corporate tax system in over a century with a wide majority. With the amendment of the Swiss constitution the Swiss voters have paved the way for the Swiss legislator to introduce the global minimum tax (also referred to as “Pillar II”) in Switzerland.

    Pillar II introduces an additional layer of taxation (tax law) to Swiss constituent entities of multinational enterprises in scope of the rules and introduces a corporate group taxation system in Switzerland with a mandatory tax of 15% that is determined under a new tax basis (“GloBE”).

    The magnitude of change is significant and will redefine the Swiss corporate tax environment in the years to come.

    Global Minimum Tax?
    The vote greenlights the implementation of the GloBE Rules in Switzerland, a set of international tax rules designed to enforce a minimum floor of taxation of 15% with regard to MNE Groups in scope, i.e. large multinational enterprises with consolidated revenues above EUR 750 m per year and cross-border operations (through subsidiaries or permanent establishments – “Constituent Entities”).

    GloBE Rules incorporate a harmonized determination of a tax base (“GloBE Income”) and definition of covered taxes (“Adjusted Covered Taxes”) to test the 15% minimum floor of taxation per jurisdiction. The GloBE Rules allow for three mechanisms to guarantee this minimum level of taxation is adhered to, a domestic top-up tax regime (“QDMTT”), income inclusion rules (“IIR”) and undertaxed profit rules (“UTPR”).

    The road to the implementation of the Global Minimum Tax in Switzerland
    The approved amendment to the Swiss constitution does not contain an enforceable implementation law but paves the way to transpose the Global Minimum Tax into legally enforceable Swiss domestic federal law as of 1 January 2024.

    Hence, the Swiss Federal Council is vested with the ability to enact and implement the reform by way of an ordinance with effect as of 1 January 2024. Considering the consultation period of the respective ordinance runs until 24 September 2023, we would not expect the Swiss Global Minimum Tax to be substantially enacted before 30 September 2023 and disclosure requirements under IFRS or US GAAP will likely be triggered in Q4/2023 only. Note that the reach of enacted GloBE Rules in other jurisdictions may trigger earlier disclosure requirements!

    According to the intention of the Swiss Federal Council, the rules to enforce the Global Minimum Tax in Switzerland are to be implemented as following:

    • The Swiss domestic minimum tax regime (Swiss “QDMTT”) will apply to all Swiss constituent entities of an MNE Group in scope with regard to business years starting on or after 1 January 2024 and FY2024 could be the first year.
    • The Swiss Income Inclusion Rules (Swiss “IIR”) will apply to all foreign subsidiaries of a Swiss resident ultimate parent entity, qualifying intermediary holding company or a Swiss partially owned parent entity with regard to business years starting on or after 1 January 2024.
    • Depending on the global discussion with regard to the UTPR-Rules, the Swiss Federal Council is expected to implement the UTPR only in 2025.
    • The Swiss Federal Parliament will need to draft final legislation to implement the Global Minimal Tax within 6 years in a federal law.

    How will the implementation law look like?
    The draft Swiss ordinance is “short” compared to the GloBE Rules. The limited content is owed to a direct reference to the GloBE Rules, the GloBE Commentary and the Administrative Guidance for the interpretation of both the Swiss QDMTT and the IIR (respectively the UTPR, should it be introduced) and the application of the GloBE Safe Harbour.

    As a consequence the implementation in Switzerland is expected to be fully aligned with the OECD GloBE Rules and no deviations are expected for the time being. The further elements of the consultation draft of the ordinance deal with “administrative” guidance and the “introduction” of a “one-stop-shop” concept for MNE in scope of the rules, meaning:

    • Irrespective of the number of Constituent Entities in Switzerland and their geographical location, only one Constituent Entity will be subject to the Swiss QDMTT and the IIR, the Constituent Entity subject to QDMTT and IIR will be liable for the respective taxes on behalf of all entities in scope. Hence, only one canton will be in charge to assess the QDMTT and IIR or UTPR of all Swiss Constituent Entities:
                o The canton in charge is either the canton of residence of the ultimate
                   parent entity; or
                o The canton of residence of the most important Swiss Constituent Entity,
                   derived from:
                      – Highest average profit (excluding net-participation-income) of the last three
                         years.
                      – Highest average equity in case no entity had a taxable profit.

    • In order to organize the “one-stop-shop”, the cantonal tax administrations will introduce a new electronic information system and MNE Groups in scope of the GloBE Rules will need to register with the Swiss Federal Tax Administration within the filing deadline and all filings will be electronic.
    • The Swiss QDMTT Regime will be aligned with the GloBE Rules and the Swiss Federal Council intends to not opt for deviation towards the GloBE Rules for the time being.
    • There will be three assessments issued to an MNE Group in scope:
              o One Assessment with regard to the top-up taxes under Swiss QDMTT
              o One Assessment with regard to the top-up taxes under IIR
              o One Assessment with regard to the top-up taxes under UTPR
    • All administrative procedures and appeals with regard to the top-up taxes could be guided towards the Swiss Federal Administrative Court in St. Gallen directly and subsequently to the Swiss Supreme Court (i.e. no cantonal courts will be involved in the appeal procedures and it would be possible that no appeal procedure is required at cantonal level). In addition to the taxpayer, the cantonal authority and the Swiss Federal Tax Administration will be able to appeal.
    • Failing to comply with the obligations would result in penalties:
              o Of CHF 1’000 respectively up to CHF 10’000 for failing to comply with the filing obligations.
              o Of a penalty between 1/3 up to three times of the top-up taxes due in case the assessment of top-up taxes was hindered by the taxpayer.
              o In case of negligent failures, the penalties could be waived or reduced for tax periods up to and including FY2026.

    Swiss Tax Reform with Global Impact
    Today’s vote of the Swiss people provides legal certainty that the most impactful Swiss tax reform of the last decade is moving forward. With this vote of commitment, the Swiss follow the European Union’s intention to progress the Global Minimum Tax.

    This change presents the most significant change to the global tax environment and legal certainty ahead of taking effect in 2024 is welcome.

    Time to navigate the Global Minimum Tax
    There is no doubt that the Global Minimum Tax presents a significant new administrative burden to multinationals in scope. Considering the limited timeframe to the implementation and the reach and effect of transition rules, tax departments need to prepare for the additional compliance and reporting obligations.

    If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

    Key contacts

    DSC00945-110

    Ilan Rom – Partner, Financial Services Tax & Legal

    heads Deloitte’s Insurance Financial Services Tax practice in Switzerland and is a Tax Partner with 20 years of experience as a corporate tax specialist. Prior to joining Deloitte, Ilan served as tax director of one of Switzerland largest companies in this sector. Ilan has a wealth of experience in the insurance and re-insurance industries and is a tax expert with deep knowledge in the area of Insurance/ Reinsurance, Treasury, Asset Management, Corporate Restructuring, M&A, VAT, Transfer Pricing and Tax Reporting.

    Email

    Brani

    Brandi Caruso – Partner, Tax Accounting

    Brandi heads Deloitte’s Tax Accounting team in Switzerland. She is responsible for clients across a range of industries with significant operations globally, including teams, project deliverables, related proposals, and overall stakeholder management. Brandi is the Lead Tax Audit Partner for both Swiss and globally led audit engagements. Brandi has extensive expertise in advising the Swiss financial services industry on the implementation of US and international transparency regimes. Brandi is a US Certified Public Accountant and has more than 20 years of experience with Deloitte and has worked in London and San Diego.

    Email

    Ferdiando Mercuri_110

    Ferdinando Mercuri – Partner, Corporate Tax

    Ferdinando has over 22 years of professional experience in providing tax advice to Swiss and international individuals and businesses. Ferdinando advises individuals on wealth and estate planning, and entrepreneurs operating independently or via companies and legal entities on restructuring, mergers, acquisitions, and Swiss and international tax planning. In recent years, he has had a particular focus on consulting in relation to shareholding plans for private equity and major acquisitions and sales of companies and, more generally, on providing comprehensive tax advice to Swiss and international companies. He teaches tax law in French-speaking Switzerland, is responsible for the international tax module at Swiss Expert and is an expert in tax examinations. He regularly hosts conferences on topical tax issues (notably at the Ordre Romand des Experts fiscaux (Order of certified tax experts of Western Switzerland) and the Tax Law Day in Geneva).

    Email

    Jacques Kistler

    Jacques Kistler – Partner, International Tax

    Jacques is the Lead Partner of our Corporate Tax service line in the French Speaking part of Switzerland, covering international tax and M&A. He has been a full time International Corporate Tax specialist for over 30 years.

    Email 

    Manuel Angehrn110x110

    Manuel Angehrn – Senior Manager, Global Minimum Tax  

    Manuel is a Senior Manager with over 10 years of experience in International Tax. He is a Deloitte Switzerland’s Global Minimum Tax subject matter expert. He follows domestic and global tax developments and assesses the impact to Swiss multinationals.

    Email

    Ryan-Peluso-DSCF3268 (002)_110

    Ryan Peluso – Manager, Global Minimum Tax

    Ryan is a Manager with over 7 years of experience in International Tax. He supports in modelling the impact of Pillar II as well as developing and executing processes for its implementation. He is specialised in helping clients access, visualise and analyse their data for international tax reporting, compliance and planning processes.

    Email

    [ad_2]

    Lena Woodward

    Source link

  • Biden signs debt ceiling bill that pulls U.S. back from brink of unprecedented default

    Biden signs debt ceiling bill that pulls U.S. back from brink of unprecedented default

    [ad_1]

    With just two days to spare, President Joe Biden signed legislation on Saturday that lifts the nation’s debt ceiling, averting an unprecedented default on the federal government’s debt.

    The Treasury Department had warned that the country would start running short of cash to pay all of its bills on Monday, which would have sent shockwaves through the U.S. and global economies.

    Republicans refused to raise the country’s borrowing limit unless Democrats agreed to cut spending, leading to a standoff that was not resolved until weeks of intense negotiations between the White House and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.

    The final agreement, which was passed by the House on Wednesday and the Senate on Thursday, suspends the debt limit until 2025 — after the next presidential election — and restricts government spending.

    Raising the nation’s debt limit, now at $31.4 trillion, will ensure that the government can borrow to pay debts already incurred.

    “Passing this budget agreement was critical. The stakes could not have been higher,” Biden said from the Oval Office on Friday evening. “Nothing would have been more catastrophic,” he said, than defaulting on the country’s debt.

    See also: ‘We averted an economic crisis’: Biden hails debt-ceiling deal in Oval Office address

    The agreement was hashed out by Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, giving Republicans some of their demanded federal spending cuts but holding the line on major Democratic priorities.

    It raises the debt limit until 2025 — after the 2024 presidential election — and gives legislators budget targets for the next two years in hopes of assuring fiscal stability as the political season heats up.

    “No one got everything they wanted but the American people got what they needed,” Biden said, highlighting the “compromise and consensus” in the deal. “We averted an economic crisis and an economic collapse.”

    Biden used the opportunity to itemize the achievements of his first term as he runs for reelection, including support for high-tech manufacturing, infrastructure investments and financial incentives for fighting climate change.

    He also highlighted ways he blunted Republican efforts to roll back his agenda and achieve deeper cuts.

    “We’re cutting spending and bringing deficits down at the same time,” Biden said. “We’re protecting important priorities from Social Security to Medicare to Medicaid to veterans to our transformational investments in infrastructure and clean energy.”

    Even as he pledged to continue working with Republicans, Biden also drew contrasts with the opposing party, particularly when it comes to raising taxes on the wealthy, something the Democratic president has sought.

    It’s something he suggested may need to wait until a second term.

    “I’m going to be coming back,” he said. “With your help, I’m going to win.”

    Biden’s remarks were the most detailed comments from the Democratic president on the compromise he and his staff negotiated. He largely remained quiet publicly during the high-stakes talks, a decision that frustrated some members of his party but was intended to give space for both sides to reach a deal and for lawmakers to vote it to his desk.

    Biden praised McCarthy and his negotiators for operating in good faith, and all congressional leaders for ensuring swift passage of the legislation. “They acted responsibly, and put the good of the country ahead of politics,” he said.

    Overall, the 99-page bill restricts spending for the next two years and changes some policies, including imposing new work requirements for older Americans receiving food aid and greenlighting an Appalachian natural gas pipeline that many Democrats oppose.

    Some environmental rules were modified to help streamline approvals for infrastructure and energy projects — a move long sought by moderates in Congress.

    The Congressional Budget Office estimates it could actually expand total eligibility for federal food assistance, with the elimination of work requirements for veterans, homeless people and young people leaving foster care.

    The legislation also bolsters funds for defense and veterans, cuts back some new money for the Internal Revenue Service and rejects Biden’s call to roll back Trump-era tax breaks on corporations and the wealthy to help cover the nation’s deficits. But the White House said the IRS’ plans to step up enforcement of tax laws for high-income earners and corporations would continue.

    The agreement imposes an automatic overall 1% cut to spending programs if Congress fails to approve its annual spending bills — a measure designed to pressure lawmakers of both parties to reach consensus before the end of the fiscal year in September.

    See also: With debt-ceiling deal, student-loan borrowers will start resuming payments in 3 months — here’s how to prepare

    In both chambers, more Democrats backed the legislation than Republicans, but both parties were critical to its passage. In the Senate the tally was 63-36 including 46 Democrats and independents and 17 Republicans in favor, 31 Republicans along with four Democrats and one independent who caucuses with the Democrats opposed.

    The vote in the House was 314-117.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The debt ceiling deal: This clause is bad for Social Security

    The debt ceiling deal: This clause is bad for Social Security

    [ad_1]

    If there were no tax cheats in America, there would be no Social Security crisis. Benefits could be paid, and payroll taxes kept the same, for the next 75 years.

    That’s not me talking. That’s math. It comes from the number crunchers at the Social Security Administration and the Internal Revenue Service.

    And it explains why those of us who support Social Security should be pounding the table in outrage over one clause of the Biden-McCarthy debt ceiling deal: The part where the president has to retreat from his crackdown on tax cheats just so McCarthy and the House Republicans would agree to prevent America defaulting on its debts.

    It’s just two years since the administration got into law an extra $80 billion for the IRS to beef up enforcement. That was supposed to include hiring an estimated 87,000 IRS agents. 

    OK, so nobody likes paying taxes and nobody likes the IRS. Cue the inevitable critiques of an IRS tax “army,” and so on. But this isn’t about whether taxes should be higher or lower. It’s about whether everyone should pay the taxes that they owe.

    After all, if we’re going to cut taxes, shouldn’t they apply to those of us who obey the laws as well as those who don’t? Or do we just support the “Tax Cuts for Criminals” Act?

    Why would any voter rally around a platform of “I stand with tax cheats?”

    The Congressional Budget Office calculated that the extra funding for the IRS would have reduced the deficit, because it would more than pay for itself. But it’s now been cut by an estimated $21 billion out of $80 billion.

    If this seems abstract, consider the context and how it affects you and your retirement — and the retirements of everyone you know.

    Social Security is now running at an $80 billion annual deficit. That’s the amount benefits are expected to exceed payroll taxes this year. (So say the Social Security Administration’s trustees.)

    Next year, that deficit is expected to top $150 billion. By 2026, we’re looking at $200 billion and rising. The trust fund will run out of cash by 2034, and without extra payroll taxes will have to slash benefits by a fifth or more.

    Over the next 75 years, says the Congressional Budget Office, the entire funding gap for the program will average about 1.7% of gross domestic product per year.

    Meanwhile, how much are tax cheats stealing from the rest of us? A multiple of that.

    According to the most recent estimates from the IRS, tax cheats steal about $470 billion a year. And that figure is four years out of date, relating to 2019. That’s the figure after enforcement measures.

    Oh, and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration says that’s a lowball number.

    But it still worked out at around 12% of all the taxes people were supposed to pay (including payroll taxes). And around 2.3% of GDP.

    Over the next 10 years, based on similar ratios to GDP, that would come to another $3.3 billion. 

    Sure, Social Security’s trust fund is theoretically separate from the rest of Uncle Sam’s finances. But that’s an accounting issue: A distinction without a difference.

    Social Security is America’s retirement plan. Few could retire in dignity without it. Yet it is facing a fiscal crisis. By 2034, without changes, the program will be forced to cut benefits — drastically.

    Some people want to cut benefits. Others want to raise the retirement age, which also means cutting benefits. Others want to raise taxes on benefits — which also means cutting benefits. Others want to hike payroll taxes, either on all of us or (initially) only on very high earners.

    At last — just 40 or so years out of date — some are starting to talk about investing some of the trust fund like nearly every other pension plan in the world, in high-returning stocks instead of just low-returning Treasury bonds. 

    (It is hard for me to believe that it’s now almost 16 years since I first wrote about this ridiculously obvious fix And, yes, I’ve been boring readers on the subject ever since, including here and most recently here, and, no, I have no plans to stop.)

    But if investing some of the trust fund in stocks is a no-brainer, so, too, is insisting everyone obey the law and pay the taxes they actually owe each year. I mean, shouldn’t we do that before we think about raising taxes even further on those who abide by the law?

    How could anyone object? Any party that believes in law and order would support enforcing, er, law and order on tax evasion. And any party of fiscal conservatism would support measures, like tax enforcement, to narrow the deficit.

    And, actually, any party that truly supported lower taxes for all would be tough on tax evasion: It is precisely this $500 billion in evasion by a small, scofflaw minority that forces the rest of us to pay more. We have, quite literally, a tax on obeying the law.

    One of the many arguments in favor of taxing assets or wealth, instead of just income, is that enforcement would be easier and evasion much harder

    Washington, D.C., seems to be a place where people come up with complex proposals just so they can avoid the simple, fair ones.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Debt-ceiling deal reached in principle by Biden and McCarthy, vote could come early next week

    Debt-ceiling deal reached in principle by Biden and McCarthy, vote could come early next week

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy reached an “agreement in principle” to raise the nation’s legal debt ceiling late Saturday as they raced to strike a deal to limit federal spending and avert a potentially disastrous U.S. default.

    However, the agreement risks angering both Democratic and Republican sides with the concessions made to reach it. Negotiators agreed to some Republican demands for increased work requirements for recipients of food stamps that had sparked an uproar from House Democrats as a nonstarter.

    Support from both parties will be needed to win congressional approval next week before a June 5 deadline.

    The Democratic president and Republican speaker reached the agreement after the two spoke earlier Saturday evening by phone, said McCarthy. The country and the world have been watching and waiting for a resolution to a political standoff that threatened the U.S. and global economies.

    “The agreement represents a compromise, which means not everyone gets what they want,” Biden said in a statement late Saturday night. “That’s the responsibility of governing,” he said.

    Biden called the agreement “good news for the American people, because it prevents what could have been a catastrophic default and would have led to an economic recession, retirement accounts devastated, and millions of jobs lost.”

    McCarthy in brief remarks at the Capitol, said that “we still have a lot of work to do.”

    But the Republican speaker said: “I believe this is an agreement in principle that’s worthy of the American people.”

    With the outlines of a deal in place, the legislative package could be drafted and shared with lawmakers in time for votes early next week in the House and later in the Senate.

    Central to the package is a two-year budget deal that would hold spending flat for 2024 and impose limits for 2025 in exchange for raising the debt limit for two years, pushing the volatile political issue past the next presidential election.

    The agreement would limit food stamp eligibility for able-bodied adults up to age 54, but Biden was able to secure waivers for veterans and the homeless.

    The two sides had also reached for an ambitious overhaul of federal permitting to ease development of energy projects and transmission lines. Instead, the agreement puts in place changes in the the National Environmental Policy Act that will designate “a single lead agency” to develop economic reviews, in hopes of streamlining the process.

    The deal came together after Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen told Congress that the United States could default on its debt obligations by June 5 — four days later than previously estimated — if lawmakers did not act in time to raise the federal debt ceiling. The extended “X-date” gave the two sides a bit of extra time as they scrambled for a deal.

    Biden also spoke earlier in the day with Democratic leaders in Congress to discuss the status of the talks.

    The Republican House speaker had gathered top allies behind closed doors at the Capitol as negotiators pushed for a deal that would avoid a first-ever government default while also making spending cuts that House Republicans are demanding.

    But as another day dragged on with financial disaster looming closer, it had appeared some of the problems over policy issues that dogged talks all week remained unresolved.

    Both sides have suggested one of the main holdups was a GOP effort to expand work requirements for recipients of food stamps and other federal aid programs, a longtime Republican goal that Democrats have strenuously opposed. The White House said the Republican proposals were “cruel and senseless.”

    Biden has said the work requirements for Medicaid would be a nonstarter. He seemed potentially open to negotiating minor changes on food stamps, now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, despite objections from rank-and-file Democrats.

    McCarthy, who dashed out before the lunch hour Saturday and arrived back at the Capitol with a big box of takeout, declined to elaborate on those discussions. One of his negotiators, Louisiana Rep. Garret Graves, said there was “not a chance” that Republicans might relent on the work requirements issue.

    Americans and the world were uneasily watching the negotiating brinkmanship that could throw the U.S. economy into chaos and sap world confidence in the nation’s leadership.

    Anxious retirees and others were already making contingency plans for missed checks, with the next Social Security payments due next week.

    Yellen said failure to act by the new date would “cause severe hardship to American families, harm our global leadership position and raise questions about our ability to defend our national security interests.”

    The president, spending part of the weekend at Camp David, continued to talk with his negotiating team multiple times a day, signing off on offers and counteroffers.

    Any deal would need to be a political compromise in a divided Congress. Many of the hard-right Trump-aligned Republicans in Congress have long been skeptical of the Treasury’s projections, and they are pressing McCarthy to hold out.

    Lawmakers are not expected to return to work from the Memorial Day weekend before Tuesday, at the earliest, and McCarthy has promised lawmakers he will abide by the rule to post any bill for 72 hours before voting.

    The Democratic-held Senate has largely stayed out of the negotiations, leaving the talks to Biden and McCarthy. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York has pledged to move quickly to send a compromise package to Biden’s desk.

    Weeks of talks have failed to produce a deal in part because the Biden administration resisted for months on negotiating with McCarthy, arguing that the country’s full faith and credit should not be used as leverage to extract other partisan priorities.

    But House Republicans united behind a plan to cut spending, narrowly passing legislation in late April that would raise the debt ceiling in exchange for the spending reductions.

    With the outlines of a deal in place, the legislative package could be drafted and shared with lawmakers in time for votes early next week in the House and later in the Senate.

    Central to the package is a two-year budget deal that would hold spending flat for 2024 and impose limits for 2025 in exchange for raising the debt limit for two years, pushing the volatile political issue past the next presidential election.

    Background: What’s in the emerging debt-ceiling deal? A cut to IRS funding, among other items.

    Negotiators agreed to some Republican demands for enhanced work requirements on recipients of food stamps that had sparked an uproar from House Democrats as a nonstarter.

    Biden also spoke earlier in the day with Democratic leaders in Congress to discuss the status of the talks, according to three people familiar with the situation, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

    The Republican House speaker had gathered top allies behind closed doors at the Capitol as negotiators pushed for a deal that would raise the nation’s borrowing limit and avoid a first-ever default on the federal debt, while also making spending cuts that House Republicans are demanding.

    As he arrived at the Capitol early in the day, McCarthy said that Republican negotiators were “closer to an agreement.”

    McCarthy’s comments had echoed the latest public assessment from Biden, who said Friday evening that bargainers were “very close.” Biden and McCarthy last met face-to-face on the matter Monday.

    Their new discussion Saturday by phone came after Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen told Congress that the United States could default on its debt obligations by June 5 — four days later than previously estimated — if lawmakers do not act in time to raise the federal debt ceiling. The extended “X-date” gives the two sides a bit of extra time as they scramble for a deal.

    Americans and the world were uneasily watching the negotiating brinkmanship that could throw the U.S. economy into chaos and sap world confidence in the nation’s leadership. House negotiators left the Capitol at 2 a.m. the night before, only to return hours later.

    Failure to lift the borrowing limit, now $31 trillion, to pay the nation’s incurred bills, would send shockwaves through the U.S. and global economy. Yellen said failure to act by the new date would “cause severe hardship to American families, harm our global leadership position and raise questions about our ability to defend our national security interests.”

    Anxious retirees and others were already making contingency plans for missed checks, with the next Social Security payments due next week.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Most Americans aren’t happy with how much income tax they paid this year

    Most Americans aren’t happy with how much income tax they paid this year

    [ad_1]

    Americans’ discontent with the size of their federal income-tax bill is at a two-decade high, according to a new poll — even though Congress hasn’t passed any direct income-tax increases in recent years.

    One month after the 2023 tax season’s conclusion, 51% of respondents in a newly released Gallup poll said their income taxes were not fair. That’s up from 44% last year and marks a record high since 1997, when Gallup’s pollsters started asking how people felt about their income-tax bills.

    Meanwhile, 46% of people said they were paying a fair amount of income tax. That basically matched the dim mood over two decades ago, in in 1999, when 45% said that they were paying a fair amount.

    Six in 10 poll participants said their federal income taxes were “too high,” pollsters said. 2001 was the last time that share of people felt the same way, Gallup said.

    Feeling the squeeze: Grocery prices are rising more slowly, but food insecurity is surging among low-income Americans

    Gallup pollsters spoke with more than 1,000 people, doing their field work through most of April.

    The poll comes during a fierce debate about whether the wealthiest taxpayers, as well as corporations, are paying enough in taxes. The Biden administration has been pressing for higher tax rates on high earners. A Democratic-controlled Congress last year passed a law with an $80 billion funding infusion for the IRS over a 10-year span in part to launch more audits of rich individuals and corporations.

    Many Americans walked away from tax season with income-tax refunds that were smaller than a year ago. That’s due, at least in part, to the end of pandemic-era boosts to certain credits, tax experts have previously told MarketWatch.

    Both backdrops might be at play in the public mood on taxes, observers noted, and political affiliation could have something to do with these changes, Gallup said. Only one-third of Republicans said their income taxes this year were fair, for example — that’s down from 63% in 2020, the last full year of the Trump administration.

    The change in Republican sentiment could be why there was a heavy swing since 2020, when 59% said their taxes represented a fair number. In 2020, 56% of political independents said their taxes were fair, and that percentage fell to 45% a few years later. Among Democrats, meanwhile, the 63% saying their taxes were fair was virtually unchanged over that span.

    Republicans “are certainly more frustrated now with Biden in office,” said Jeff Jones, senior editor of the Gallup poll. “But they are even more frustrated than they were when Obama was in office.”

    Democrat Joe Biden campaigned in 2020 on pledges to raise taxes on corporations and households earning over $400,000 a year and not on those making less than that. So far, the president has not been able to turn proposals like a billionaire’s minimum tax or a higher top tax rate into law.

    The real tax-policy fight brewing in the background is the 2025 expiration of Trump-era tax cuts, experts have said.

    In the sweeping 2017 tax-code overhaul, Congress reduced five of seven income-tax brackets and boosted commonly used features of the tax code, including payouts for the child tax credit and the standard deduction. But some of those tax cuts were scheduled to sunset, while others were permanent.

    Another potential shaping the mood on taxes is the broader economy and recent tax season, Jones said. One possibility, he noted, is that some people are getting pushed to higher tax brackets with pay raises meant to keep up with inflation. (Tax brackets are adjusted annually to account for inflation.)

    While inflation is still pinching wallets, tax refunds are lower than they were a year ago.

    Refunds averaged just over $2,800, and that’s down more than 7% from a year earlier, according to IRS data through May 12.

    So you know: What happens if you can’t pay your taxes? IRS has a payment plan — but read this before you sign up.

    For his part, Lawrence Zelenak, who teaches tax law at Duke University, thinks the current darkening public mood “is largely a response to the disappearance of all the temporary pandemic-related tax relief,” he said.

    In 2020 an estimated 60% of households ended up with no federal income-tax liability because they were making less and bringing in more through direct cash assistance from the federal government, according to Tax Policy Center estimates.

    By 2022, an estimated 40% of households wouldn’t face any federal income tax, according to the nonpartisan think tank — which is more in line with levels seen before the pandemic.

    Keep in mind: IRS will launch free tax-filing pilot in 2024. TurboTax, H&R Block and Republicans are opposed.

    Refunds during 2022 got a kick from extragenerous payouts including the child tax credit, the child- and dependent-care credit and the earned-income tax credit.

    Most taxpayers also got a chance to shave their tax bill with a temporary change that let them take the standard deduction and also write off a portion of their charitable donations. But the credits reverted to their prepandemic size, and the deduction on cash donations subsequently went away.

    “With the end of the pandemic tax relief, many people have seen their income-tax liabilities go up, and it’s not surprising they see that as unfair,” Zelenak said. “So it may be the change more than the absolute level of tax.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Debt-ceiling talks are at a ‘pause,’ says McCarthy deputy

    Debt-ceiling talks are at a ‘pause,’ says McCarthy deputy

    [ad_1]

    Debt-ceiling negotiations are at a “pause” on Friday, said Republican Rep. Garret Graves of Louisiana, a deputy for House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

    “We’ve decided to press pause, because it’s just not productive,” Graves said.

    It wasn’t immediately clear how long the pause would last.

    Graves also suggested the Biden White House’s representatives in the talks were being “unreasonable.”

    “Until people are willing to have reasonable conversations about how you can actually move forward and do the right thing, then we’re not going to sit here and talk to ourselves,” the congressman told reporters.

    When asked if negotiators would be meeting in person over the weekend, Graves said, “I’m not sure right now.”

    “We’re not there,” Graves also said, in a remark that indicated a deal wasn’t imminent.

    U.S. stocks
    DJIA,
    -0.28%

    sold off after his remarks to reporters, and the S&P 500
    SPX,
    -0.16%

    was recently trading lower.

    “There are real differences between the parties on budget issues and talks will be difficult,” a White House official said. “The president’s team is working hard towards a reasonable bipartisan solution that can pass the House and the Senate.”

    Traders also were assessing remarks from Federal Reserve chief Jerome Powell as well as a report that Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen had said more bank mergers may be necessary.

    Separately, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, said Friday that it is “past time” for President Joe Biden to get serious about the negotiations.

    Stocks advanced Wednesday and Thursday, with credit for the gains going in part to upbeat comments from Biden and McCarthy on the debt-limit standoff, but some analysts have warned that markets may have turned too optimistic.

    “While we agree that recent developments represent a meaningful positive shift relative to a week or two ago, we caution investors not to overestimate how quick or smooth the path to the finish line will be,” said Tobin Marcus, senior U.S. policy and politics strategist at Evercore ISI, in a note.

    Marcus added that “the expectations being set on timing are slightly unrealistic, which could lead to market concern over setbacks next week.”

    Terry Haines, founder of Pangea Policy, described Friday’s pause as a “predictable bump in the winding negotiation road,” adding that “what it means for markets is that there’s very little hope of a deal by the end of Sunday, and that negotiations will go into next week.”

    Now read: Debt-ceiling standoff: Here’s what could go into a bipartisan deal

    And see: ‘Doomsday machine’: Here’s what could happen if the debt ceiling is breached

    MarketWatch’s Robert Schroeder contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • U.S. could run out of cash ‘at some point in the first two weeks of June,’ CBO says

    U.S. could run out of cash ‘at some point in the first two weeks of June,’ CBO says

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. government faces a significant risk that it will no longer be able to pay all of its obligations “at some point in the first two weeks of June” if Congress doesn’t raise the federal borrowing limit, the Congressional Budget Office said Friday.

    The nonpartisan agency’s projection falls in line with a forecast that Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen made on May 1, as she said her department’s best estimate is that it could become unable to continue to satisfy all obligations “by early June, and potentially as early as June 1.”

    It also fits with an estimate released on Tuesday by a think tank, the Bipartisan Policy Center, which said the government is likely to have insufficient cash to meet all of its financial obligations as soon as early June.

    “The extent to which the Treasury will be able to fund the government’s ongoing operations will remain uncertain throughout May, even if the Treasury ultimately runs out of funds in early June,” the CBO said. “That uncertainty exists because the timing and amount of revenue collections and outlays over the intervening weeks could differ from CBO’s projections.”

    While a breakthrough hasn’t happened yet in Washington’s debt-ceiling standoff, there is increasing chatter about what could go into a bipartisan deal that ends the stalemate and avoids a market-shaking default.

    See: Debt-ceiling standoff: Here’s what could go into a bipartisan deal

    President Joe Biden and the four top U.S. lawmakers had planned to hold another meeting Friday on the debt limit after a parley on Tuesday, but it was postponed. A source familiar with the meetings called the delay a “positive” development, as staff work is continuing and Friday wasn’t yet the right time to re-convene Biden and the congressional leaders.

    The CBO also said Friday that the government could end up staying solvent through the end of July without a debt-limit hike.

    “If the Treasury’s cash and extraordinary measures are sufficient to finance the government until June 15, expected quarterly tax receipts and additional extraordinary measures will probably allow the government to continue financing operations through at least the end of July,” the agency said.

    But it warned that if the debt limit is not raised or suspended “before the Treasury’s cash and extraordinary measures are exhausted, the government will have to delay making payments for some activities, default on its debt obligations, or both.”

    “Those actions could result in distress in credit markets, disruptions in economic activity, and rapid increases in borrowing rates for the Treasury,” the agency said.

    U.S. stocks
    SPX,
    -0.16%

    DJIA,
    -0.03%

    were trading lower Friday.

    In addition, the CBO updated a budget forecast on Friday, saying its “current projections show a federal budget deficit of $1.5 trillion for 2023 — which is $0.1 trillion more than the agency estimated in February.”

    “The project cumulative deficit over the 2024–2033 period — $20.2 trillion — is about the same as the shortfall CBO projected in February,” the agency said.

    “Measured in relation to the size of the economy, deficits grow from 6.0 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) next year to 6.9 percent in 2033 — well above their 50-year average of 3.6 percent of GDP.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Here’s What Treasury, Fed Might Do in a Debt Ceiling Crisis

    Here’s What Treasury, Fed Might Do in a Debt Ceiling Crisis

    [ad_1]

    Here’s What Treasury, Fed Might Do in a Debt Ceiling Crisis

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Worried the IRS is going to audit your tax return? If you earn less than $400,000, you can probably relax.

    Worried the IRS is going to audit your tax return? If you earn less than $400,000, you can probably relax.

    [ad_1]

    Some clarity is emerging regarding statements from Biden administration officials that no one making less than $400,000 will see higher audit rates by the Internal Revenue Service, which is about to step up its scrutiny of wealthy taxpayers.

    The Inflation Reduction Act — the tax and climate package enacted last summer — earmarked $80 billion for the IRS over the next decade and a half. The money is intended in part to facilitate more audits of corporations and wealthier individuals.

    Ahead of the bill’s passage, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen pledged that there would be no increase in the audit rate for households and small businesses with annual incomes below $400,000 “relative to historical levels.

    But Republican critics and other observers have asked what “historical levels” might actually mean.

    The audit rate on returns for tax year 2018 is the reference point to keep in mind, IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel told senators on Wednesday. He emphasized that “there’s no surge coming for workers, retirees and others.”

    The IRS audited fewer than 1% of 2018 returns with total positive incomes — the sum of all positive amounts shown for various sources of income reported on an individual income-tax return, which excludes losses — of between $1 and $500,000, according to statistics that the tax agency released last week.

    The agency has three years to start an audit from the time it receives a return.

    Also read: The IRS wants more people working in tax enforcement. Now it has to find them.

    The numbers show that 0.4% of returns for taxpayers earning up to $25,000 were audited. That figure was 0.3% for returns between $200,000 and $500,000 and more than 9% for returns over $10 million, the IRS data show. Six years earlier, more than 13% of returns over $10 million were scrutinized, according to the IRS.

    “Help us with understanding what the words ‘historic level’ means,” Sen. James Lankford, a Republican from Oklahoma, asked Werfel during a Wednesday budget hearing.

    “We will take the most recent final audit rate, and it’s historically low … and we allow that to be the marker for least several years, and then we’re revisit it,” Werfel said. The 2018 audit rates were the newest final rates, he added.

    “So the 2018 number is what it’s going to be?” Lankford asked.

    “Yes,” Werfel replied.

    “Werfel’s explanation that 2018 audit levels will be the reference point is the most detail I’ve heard so far,” Erica York, s senior economist at the Tax Foundation, told MarketWatch. “He did seem to leave open the possibility of revisiting the reference year for ‘historical’ in the future,” she added.

    Another open question has been how the $400,000 income threshold will be determined. Months after the Inflation Reduction Act passed, IRS and Treasury officials still hadn’t finalized what counted as $400,000 in income, according to a January Treasury Department watchdog report.

    “How are you arriving at this number?” asked Sen. Marsha Blackburn, a Republican from Tennessee. Blackburn’s state has many self-employed entrepreneurs who might appear richer on paper than they actually are, she said. “While they may have a higher gross, their net is very low,” she added.

    “We’re going to look at total positive income as our metric,” Werfel said. He later added that “there would be no increased likelihood of an audit if they have less than $400,000 in total positive income.”

    The IRS description of total positive income as “the sum of all positive amounts shown for the various sources of income reported on an individual income tax return and, thus, excludes losses” represents, effectively, a tally of income before taxpayers subtract their losses.

    Total positive income is a metric the IRS usually applies to categorize audits, the Tax Foundation’s York noted. But one challenge of strict thresholds for more audits, she said, “is that it creates incentives for underreporting income” to stay under the line.

    Compared with recent years, there are now more specifics about how the IRS will implement additional audits of higher-income taxpayers, said Janet Holtzblatt, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.

    “But still there are questions,” she noted, about how the agency will treat situations when taxpayers don’t provide full picture of their income.

    Read on: Make sure the tax breaks you’re taking now won’t hammer you in retirement

    Also: ‘This was a test’: IRS has handled more than 100 million returns already — Tax Day by the numbers

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How will the IRS spend $80 billion in new funding? The Treasury Department is dropping hints.

    How will the IRS spend $80 billion in new funding? The Treasury Department is dropping hints.

    [ad_1]

    Details about the Internal Revenue Service’s spending plans for a major cash influx are about to come to light, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said Tuesday.

    More than half a year after Congress authorized $80 billion in new funding for the tax-collection agency over the next decade, Yellen said details are coming this week on how the IRS will put the money to use in improving customer service, upgrading internal technology and making sure the richest taxpayers are paying their fair share.

    The $80 billion infusion is part of the Inflation Reduction Act, which passed Congress last summer without Republican support and plenty of GOP skepticism that the additional funding would be used appropriately, depicting it instead as engendering a sort of tax-collection police state in which middle-income individuals could find themselves targeted by armed IRS agents.

    From the archives (August 2022): Fact check: No, the IRS is not hiring an 87,000-strong military force with funds from the Inflation Reduction Act

    Yellen spoke Tuesday at the swearing-in ceremony for Danny Werfel, the newly confirmed IRS commissioner. Werfel “will lead the IRS through an important transition” after a period during which the agency “suffered from chronic underinvestment,” Yellen said in prepared remarks.

    During Werfel’s confirmation hearing in February, senators from both parties pressed him about how he would oversee the new money’s use.

    The U. S. House of Representatives is under Republican control, and observers expect lawmakers to give hard looks at the funding of the IRS. The House, in fact, voted in January to repeal the $80 billion. The measure isn’t expected to go further, with Democrats retaining control in the Senate and President Joe Biden, a Democrat, in the White House.

    Some of the money will go toward modernizing the taxation experience. Within the first five years of the decade-long plan, taxpayers should be able to file all of their tax documents and respond to all IRS notices online, according to a Treasury official.

    There are a handful of IRS notices for which taxpayers currently have that capacity. By the end of fiscal 2024, another 72 notices, which include Spanish-language notices, will add online capacity, the official said.

    By the end of fiscal 2025, taxpayers, along with accountants and other professional tax preparers, should be able to peruse their accounts and view and download information, including payments and notices, the official said.

    The IRS has already been hiring more staff, including 5,000 customer-service representatives to improve phone service, which has fallen off during the pandemic.

    Tax Day is weeks away, on April 18. As of late March, income-tax refunds are 11% lower than they were last year. They are averaging $2,903 versus $3,263 at the same point last year. It’s an outcome many tax-code watchers predicted after pandemic-era boosts to certain tax credits went away.

    The same day Yellen spoke, a new watchdog report said the IRS still has plenty of work to do processing the backlog of tax returns that built up during the pandemic.

    During last year’s tax-filing season, the IRS hired 9,000 employees and shifted more than 2,400 workers from other areas to cut the backlog, according to Treasury’s inspector general for tax administration.

    By last July the IRS had transcribed all tax-year 2020 paper returns but still had 9.5 million unprocessed 2021 paper returns. “The inability to timely process tax returns and address tax account work continues to have a significant impact on the associated taxpayers,” the report said.

    At this point, the IRS says it has processed all paper and electronically filed returns that it received before this January. The agency said it still has 2.17 million unprocessed tax returns from the 2022 tax year and 2021 returns that needed fixes and corrections.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Lucid Offers $7,500 ‘EV Credit’ and the Stock Drops. It’s No Longer Beating Tesla Shares.

    Lucid Offers $7,500 ‘EV Credit’ and the Stock Drops. It’s No Longer Beating Tesla Shares.

    [ad_1]

    Electric vehicle maker


    Lucid


    was shut out of the government’s new purchase tax credits for consumers buying an EV. The company decided to do something about that.

    Investors aren’t so sure they like it. They are taking some profits after a run that had


    Lucid


    (ticker:LCID) stock outperforming


    Tesla


    (TSLA) shares.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden to Urge Quadrupling New 1% Tax on Stock Buybacks

    Biden to Urge Quadrupling New 1% Tax on Stock Buybacks

    [ad_1]

    Biden to Urge Quadrupling New 1% Tax on Stock Buybacks

    [ad_2]

    Source link