More

Payroll Tax Cut: GOP Resistant To Extending Obama Policy

First Posted: 09/08/11 03:15 PM ET Updated: 11/08/11 05:12 AM ET

WASHINGTON -- Congressional Republicans over the past year have threatened to both shut down the government and default on U.S. debt in order to prevent tax hikes. But in January, without congressional action, payroll taxes are set to increase by 50 percent on millions of American workers. The GOP response? A resounding meh.

When President Obama travels to Congress on Thursday to deliver a major jobs speech, he'll be encountering a species previously considered mythical on Capitol Hill: Republicans who don't support tax cuts.

The one-year payroll tax cut was passed as part of the deal that extended Bush-era tax rates through 2012, and Republicans routinely described the potential expiration of that cut as a "tax hike." While the payroll tax cut applies to no more than the first $106,000 in income, the Bush tax cuts disproportionately benefit the wealthy. But the key difference between the two is the author: The payroll tax cut is Obama's and his alone.

HuffPost approached ten Senate Republicans in the Capitol on Wednesday and only two -- Sens. John McCain (Ariz.) and Scott Brown (Mass.) -- said they'd support an extension of Obama's payroll tax cut. Both said that such an extension, however, should apply to employers as well as workers, a costly addition to the policy that the White House has objected to. McCain and Brown argue that cutting payroll taxes on employers will free up money they can use to hire workers. But employers, in general, aren't hiring because there is not enough demand in the economy (since consumers don't have enough money) -- not because the companies themselves are short on cash.

An employer-side cut would just increase the amount of money companies are holding on the sidelines, economist Dean Baker argued recently, while an employee-side cut injects demand into the economy by increasing the size of workers' paychecks -- or, in the case of extending the payroll tax cut, by not decreasing them. An analysis by Goldman Sachs warned that letting the tax cut expire could “potentially reduce growth by as much as two-thirds of a percentage point in early 2012.” Macroeconomic Advisers estimated that extending the tax cut could "boost real GDP growth half percentage point over the year, and raise employment 400,000 by the fourth quarter.”

Regardless, the other Republicans HuffPost quizzed said they were either undecided about whether to extend the tax cut, or opposed to the idea.

"My personal view is that the debt is already impacting the economy," said Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) "If your debt is this large, I think you've gotta be very careful about adding debt." HuffPost asked whether that view put the GOP in the unusual position of advocating that taxes go up on millions of people in January, when the one-year cut expires.

Sessions nodded yes. "It's a difficult thing ... Our country's in a difficult place," he said, adding a rather macabre silver lining: that at least the millions of unemployed Americans won't see their taxes go up. "We'd like to be able to keep the withholding low, but you don't pay it if you're not working, and so we've got a lot of people not working."

Sessions said that the payroll tax cut was never intended to be permanent. "It was promoted as putting more money in people's pockets so they would spend, that's the whole purpose -- not as a permanent tax cut," Sessions said. "I think it was [Sen.] Judd Gregg who said what tends to happen is people use that money to buy things from China."

GOP senators were equally unenthusiastic about business tax credits that have been floated during ongoing discussions about Obama's jobs package.

"The business tax credits? Now how's that different than the corporate jet industry? You should ask him that," said Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.). Obama has made tax breaks available to the corporate jet industry a mainstay of his rhetorical challenge to Republicans opposed to tax hikes. Blunt is right that the credits could conceivably apply to corporate jet makers, who have protested their treatment by the administration.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), head of the Senate GOP's campaign arm, said tax cuts that aren't permanent won't boost the economy because they'll create "uncertainty."

"The problem is, I'm just not convinced they're going to work. While generally I'm all for keeping taxes low, I'm just not sure that's the best way to get people hiring again. I think what we need is long-term reform of the tax code," he said.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) made a similar point. "I was never a fan of that last time around. I think it's a short term sugar-high today. I think we oughta be looking at policies that create long-term economic growth," he said, echoing rhetoric used by House Republican Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).

"I do think it's one of those things we might get a little economic pop from," Thune added, but said that "pop" wouldn't justify the cut's $125 billion price tag.

Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), in declining to endorse the payroll tax cut extension, managed to question the integrity of the president's word and his ability to speak without a teleprompter in a single sentence. "I've learned until I see something on paper with the president, that it's hard to read on a teleprompter when he's reading and I can't," he said. "I would rather wait to see the whole package and how it works together."

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) said she wanted to "wait and see," while Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said he was undecided. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) declined to answer HuffPost's questions, noting that he'd be holding a press conference later on Wednesday. At that briefing, he said that "we're happy to listen to the president's proposals and take them under consideration."

Even the original Republican sponsor of the payroll tax cut, Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, said he wasn't sure he'd support an extension, though he left the possibility open. "I don't know," he said. "I was the author of the payroll extension last time around, along with [Sen. Charles] Schumer -- Schumer-Hatch -- but I didn't see much payoff."

Hatch, however, suggested that Republicans might ultimately return to their tax-cut-loving ways. "We'll have to see. I'm not so sure that they won't get on board," he said of his colleagues.

This story has been updated to include economic analysis of the effect of extending the tax cut.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- Congressional Republicans over the past year have threatened to both shut down the government and default on U.S. debt in order to prevent tax hikes. But in January, without congressiona...
WASHINGTON -- Congressional Republicans over the past year have threatened to both shut down the government and default on U.S. debt in order to prevent tax hikes. But in January, without congressiona...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 3,720
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (81 total)
  1 of 9  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
DrObvious 05:16 PM on 09/08/2011
The video photo shows CNN with a question on screen ...

" Will the 300 billion jobs plan help Obama?"

That's the wrong question, folks.    The question is, will it help American citizens to get back to work, producing and contributing?      That's what's important.

Politics is not just about the horse race among candidates for the next  Read More...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
olerealist
retired trial attorney; former member of VA abd Wa
12:30 PM on 09/12/2011
“CAPITAL GAINS” TAX RATE SCANDAL

This comment is inspired by 9/12/11 page 1 issue of the Washington Post.

The gist of it is that the wealthiest five percent of our taxpayers make about 4 fifths of their income by capital gains. Currently, they are paying the lowest tax rates on these “gains’ incomes than at any time over the past 50 years.

In addition, they are finding ways, carried forward interest, etc. etc. of disguising ordinary income as “capital gain” with some help from the existing U.S. tax code and reg’s and an army of high paid lobbyists, many of whom are former U.S. congress members.

An example of existing rates: an wage earner would have to make more than $34,000. in a tax year to pay income tax at a higher rate than one earning millions of “gains” .

The theology that attempts to rationalize this scandal is the notion that the wealthy tax payer must be rewarded for having taken a “RISK”. Well how about the risks taken day in and day out by our firefighters and police officers? Do they get a “risk” reward in their income tax. And how about the risks of construction labor and mom and pop shop owners?

It seems clear that much of our recession woes grow out the enormous income gap separating the highest five percent earners from the middle class taxpayers.
07:57 AM on 09/11/2011
hello everyone if you like to order anything you like.
More details, please just browse our website Quality is our Dignity; Service is our
Lift. enjoy yourself. thank you!!====http://www.macyser.com===
06:02 PM on 09/09/2011
The payroll tax is small potatoes. The debate is like arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The payroll tax reduction does not help out Self-Employment taxpayers (thank you very munchkin) regardless of how much or how little they earn.
photo
7dr361
Air Force Flyboy 59 Years ago
01:12 PM on 09/09/2011
GOP want to sink Obama........we can sink and shatter the GOP.......I'm a ( I ) dem we can vote
the party of NO OUT.......don't be mis-led or sell your vote.......
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
chance1946
5 Trillion 3.5 years
01:01 PM on 09/09/2011
The dow is dow 307 pts as we speek , Not much confidence in Obama.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
yougogirl1948
02:44 AM on 09/10/2011
@chance1946:

The plunge was about the European debt crisis, but you probably knew that, didn't you?(with much sarcasm)
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
jwredd
08:50 AM on 09/09/2011
"It was promoted as putting more money in people's pockets so they would spend, that's the whole purpose -- not as a permanent tax cut," Sessions said."

Umm....... so were the Bush tax cuts, remember?
photo
7dr361
Air Force Flyboy 59 Years ago
01:18 PM on 09/09/2011
"Sessions said" another lying repub................
07:02 AM on 09/09/2011
That's because Rs don't support small businesses, they support the US Chamber and that's really BIG businesses.
06:42 AM on 09/09/2011
Obama is playing a high stakes chess game. Looks like he just checked the republicans.
photo
Eris23Skidoo
Dischordian Keynesian
05:59 AM on 09/09/2011
It just goes to show that for republicans it isn't really about tax cuts as an ideological stand. It's about subsidizing particular sectors of society--those who have invested in their campaigns!!
07:16 AM on 09/09/2011
Did you miss the guy on Hardball who just retired after 28 years on the inside of the GOTP? That is exactly what he said. GOTPers work for those who pay them and they planned to discredit Congress through their obstructionism. Somehow, they think that they will come out on top regardless of what happens to the country.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
yougogirl1948
02:55 AM on 09/10/2011
@dewbatty:

I didn't see him (Mike Lofgren) on Hardball, but I read his excellent article on truthout.com today. Everyone should read it to get a good take on what has happened to the Republican of today from the perspective of a long-tme (28 years) Republican congressional staffer. Mr. Lofgren retired in June 2011.
photo
themidnightreview
Moderate blogger - TheMidnightReview.com
12:19 AM on 09/09/2011
How the GOP will get around their hypocrisy - they will argue that this tax cut should not be tied to any new spending...

Not sure the public will buy it but it would require Obama and the dems to slam them on their hypocrisy...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wonmean
University of Michigan Class of 2010
11:46 PM on 09/08/2011
Tax cuts for who?

That's the important part.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FL TallMan
Disabled Vietnam Vet
11:37 PM on 09/08/2011
It is really hard to imagine that these comments from the GOP came from straight-faced, supposedly mature individuals charged with making national policy. These examples are simply childish arguments from people who would do anything to maintain the rich tax cuts and refuse similar treatment for the rest of us.

As was intimated in the story, employers will not hire additional workers regardless of how much money the government puts or leaves in their pockets - until demand for products and services increases. And that will not happen with the middle and working classes continuing to be broke. It is clearly nonsense that handing over more money to corporations will decrease unemployment.

We have been watching and waiting for almost 10-years for those Bush tax cuts to increase hiring. It has not happened yet and will not until the workers have money to spend.

And what about those pledges to Norquist not to raise taxes on anyone ever? Does that apply only to the rich?
photo
Eris23Skidoo
Dischordian Keynesian
06:01 AM on 09/09/2011
It must. Norquist certainly isn't raising any stink that I've heard of.
photo
DavidBlackburn
Recovering Republican since 1995.
11:29 PM on 09/08/2011
Also...Republican spending good. Democratic spending bad.
10:59 PM on 09/08/2011
I like em in dunking position..............I'm running in to lift the lid now :-)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dkrypt
Unencumbered by political correctness
10:49 PM on 09/08/2011
News flash: No matter what one major party does, the other attacks it