Congress lawmakers get month to save tax breaks
WASHINGTON — The Senate's chief tax writers want to scrap the entire code and start from scratch in their push for tax reform, and on Thursday they gave lawmakers a month to make a case for preserving some of the $1.3 trillion in breaks on the books.
In a letter sent to all 98 of their colleagues, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., and his Republican counterpart, Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, said they would take a “blank slate” approach to the tax code that assumes the removal of thousands of popular perks, including such sacrosanct policies as the deduction for mortgage interest, the child credit, and the lower tax rate for dividends and capital gains.
“This blank slate is not, of course, the end product, nor the end of the discussion,” Baucus and Hatch wrote. “Some of the special provisions serve important objectives. Indeed, we both believe that some existing tax expenditures should be preserved in some form.”
However, the letter states, “the tax code is also littered with preferences for special interests. We plan to operate from an assumption that all special provisions are out unless there is clear evidence that they: (1) help grow the economy, (2) make the tax code fairer, or (3) effectively promote other important policy objectives.”
The announcement puts Senate tax writers on the same page as House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., and clears the way for substantive work to begin on the first comprehensive rewrite of the tax code in nearly three decades.
“Today's announcement by Chairman Baucus and Sen. Hatch is welcome news for Americans who deserve a simpler, flatter, fairer tax code that leads to more jobs and higher wages,” Camp said in response to the letter.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Ohio dairy farmers cashing in on gas well boom
- Letter that inspired Beat poet Kerouac discovered
- Under pressure, Hagel steps down as Pentagon chief
- Ferguson, Mo., grand jury to meet Monday, decide on possible indictment of police officer
- Police code of conduct aims to curb unlawful seizures from motorists
- Boy with fake gun shot by officer dies
- Report: College judicial boards work secretively
- Tufts center study: It costs $2.6B to get drug to market
- Nevada speaker-elect steps down amid criticism
- ‘Sex purchasers’ publicly shamed
- 3-mile buffer suggested for grouse breeding, oil and gas drilling