Doggett L, Rep

---

OMFG

bill, HR 9495, which would allow a presidentially appointed treasury secretary to unilaterally strip a nonprofit of its status if deemed a “terrorism-supporting” organization, has passed in the US House of Representatives.

The bill passed 219-184, mostly along partisan lines, with Republicans in support and Democrats opposing; 15 Democrats broke with their caucus to vote in favor of the bill.

The measure, formally named the Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act, has raised alarm across the nonprofit sector and US civil society, and a multitude of organizations—from civil rights groups to nonprofit media to advocacy and direct service groups—have mobilized against the bill.

The measure has raised alarm across the nonprofit sector and US civil society.

An earlier version of the bill was introduced with bipartisan support amid widespread campus protests over the war in Gaza, with at least the implication that some groups supporting or organizing those protests were also (or therefore) supporting “terrorism.”

That assumption alone would be enough to spark fears of political retribution by any president, via the secretary of the treasury, against disfavored nonprofit groups.

But the stakes of the bill were raised when Donald J. Trump won reelection this month.

Those mobilizing against the measure fear that Trump, who has publicly broadcast his interest and willingness to punish his perceived political opponents, will use the bill to target and silence any organization he disagrees with.

Those mobilizing against the measure fear that Trump…will use the bill to target and silence any organization he disagrees with.

This September, the ACLU and some 150 organizations cosigned a letter opposing the legislation, expressing “deep concerns about the bill’s potential to grant the executive branch extraordinary power to investigate, harass, and effectively dismantle any nonprofit organization—including news outlets, universities, and civil liberties organizations like ours—by stripping them of their tax-exempt status based on a unilateral accusation of wrongdoing.”

Last week, the Council on Foundations, Independent Sector, National Council of Nonprofits, and United Philanthropy Forum penned another letter, stating:

Subscribe to *NPQ

IFrame Content

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

This legislation would allow the Secretary of the Treasury to designate section 501(c) nonprofits as “terrorist supporting organizations” at the Secretary’s discretion, without requiring the Secretary to share their full evidence or reasoning with accused nonprofits. Furthermore, the legislation runs counter to constitutional due process protections by placing the burden of proof on the accused organization and providing only 90 days for organizations to demonstrate their innocence before revoking their tax-exempt status.

The bill failed an earlier House vote last week, when supporters failed to rally a two-thirds vote required for procedural reasons, with 52 Democrats breaking with their caucus to vote in favor. The House vote today, however, required only a simple majority to pass.

Speaking on the House floor Thursday, Democrat opponents of the bill warned that it could be weaponized by Trump and his administration to target political enemies and perceived opposition to the incoming president’s agenda.

Describing the bill as a “death penalty for nonprofits,” Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) said that rather than protecting Americans, the measure would allow President-elect Donald Trump to “use it as a sword against those he views as his political enemies.…If this bill were to become law we would hand him a bludgeon for a crusade against those he deems the greatest danger to America, what he calls ‘the enemy within’.”

“It is not just Trump imposing a death sentence that should concern us but it is his power to intimidate,” said Doggett. “Clearly the bill would have a chilling effect on any group that has the audacity to challenge his chilling vision.”

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), who chairs the Democratic Progressive Caucus, called the bill “an authoritarian play by Republicans to expand the sweeping powers of the executive branch to go after political enemies and stifle political dissent.”

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) called the measure “a dangerous and unconstitutional bill that would allow unchecked power to target nonprofit organizations as political enemies and shut them down without due process.”

The bill now advances from the Republican-controlled House to the Senate, where its fate is uncertain.

Republican members dismissed such objections. Noting previous bipartisan support for the bill, House Ways and Means Chair Jason Smith (R-MO) blasted his colleagues across the aisle for voting against the measure.

“Despite that consistent bipartisan support,” Smith said, “the majority of our Democrat colleagues voted last week to block passage of this bill. Why?…Because President Trump won the election.”

“They now believe the authorities in this bill might be abused,” said Smith. “But every concern raised by Democrats has been addressed in this bill to ensure due process and to protect legitimate nonprofits.”

The bill now advances from the Republican-controlled House to the Senate, where its fate is uncertain—but where it very well may be defeated by Democratic senators, who still hold a slim majority.

Regardless, groups following the legislation warn that the bill is likely to return, at least in some form, in 2025—under a Republican-controlled Congress and President Donald Trump.

---

odd choice for an enemy within

yikes

9495 off site

house Republicans have revived and are looking to push through legislation this week that would hand President-elect Donald Trump's incoming administration sweeping power to investigate and shut down nonprofit organizations, including news outlets and humanitarian groups.

The bill, H.R. 9495, failed to pass the House last week despite bipartisan support because the Republican leadership attempted to pass the measure using a fast-track procedure that requires a two-thirds majority vote. More than 50 Democrats, including Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and other prominent members, backed the legislation in last week's vote, along with 204 Republicans.

This time, the GOP is attempting to advance the bill through regular order, meaning it can pass with a simple majority. The Republican-controlled House Rules Committee is scheduled to hold a markup hearing for H.R. 9495 on Monday.

After learning of the hearing, advocacy organizations that mobilized against the bill redoubled their warnings about its dire implications for free expression and the right to dissent—particularly in the hands of a would-be authoritarian who has vowed to prosecute his political enemies.

"The bill we defeated days ago is back," the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights wrote on social media over the weekend. "Representatives are trying to ram through H.R. 9495, a repressive bill that could shut down nonprofits & student groups supporting Palestinian rights."

The legislation, if passed, would give the Treasury Department the authority to unilaterally strip nonprofits of their tax-exempt status by designating them supporters of terrorism. As of this writing, Trump has not announced his pick to lead the Treasury Department.

While the bill provides a brief period for an accused nonprofit to defend itself, the ACLU said the provision "is a mere illusion of due process," noting that the federal government would be able to "deny organizations its reasons and evidence against them, leaving the nonprofit unable to rebut allegations."

Abby Maxman, president and CEO of Oxfam America, warned in a statement after Republicans revived the bill that H.R. 9495 "would grant the Trump administration, and any future administration, the ability to silence and censor its critics, curb free speech, target political opponents, and punish crucial organizations that speak truth to power and help people in the United States and around the world."

"This bill would increase the powers of the president at the expense of all of our freedoms, and could impact not only organizations like Oxfam, but other nonprofits, news outlets, or even universities who dare to dissent," said Maxman. "It could put our ability to respond to some of the worst humanitarian crises at risk and prevent us from delivering lifesaving aid to some of the world's most marginalized people."

"This bill follows the same playbook Oxfam has seen other governments around the world use to crush dissent. Now we are seeing it here at home," Maxman added. "We urge the House of Representatives to reject this dangerous bill and to protect our freedom of speech and our right to dissent."

It's not clear whether the U.S. Senate, narrowly controlled by Democrats, would bring H.R. 9495 to the floor for a vote if it passes the House this week, or whether President Joe Biden would sign it into law. But Republicans will gain full control of Congress and the White House starting in January, giving them the ability to push the legislation through at a later date.

"Their rush to reconsider this bill is solely to offer Trump more and more power, while Trump's nominees for key national security posts this week indicate how he will be using it," Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), a leading opponent of the measure, toldThe Intercept on Friday.

===

https://www.alternet.org/2019/10/another-betrayal-trump-promised-to-bring-offshore-profits-home-but-hes-doing-the-opposite/

an 1019

'Another betrayal’: Trump promised to bring offshore profits home — but he’s doing the opposite

Igor Derysh / Salon

The Trump administration is considering a rule change that would make it easier for American companies to stash money offshore to avoid U.S. taxes, despite the president’s repeated campaign promises…

no lnx

‘Another betrayal’: Trump promised to bring offshore profits home — but he’s doing the opposite

Written by Igor Derysh / Salon October 11, 2019

The Treasury Department is looking to weaken or eliminate Obama-era regulations aimed at preventing companies from moving their income to their overseas branches to lower their U.S. tax bill, Bloomberg reports. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, a former Goldman Sachs executive, instead wants to replace the existing rules with “something more business friendly.”

The move would be a boon to large corporations, who already saw their taxes permanently slashed by the Republicans’ 2017 tax cuts, which overwhelmingly benefited companies at the expense of individual taxpayers.

Prior to the 2016 rule, companies were able to move money to their offshore branches that they could then lend to their American branches, while deducting the interest from the tax bill. The Obama-era rule allowed the IRS to consider these inter-company loans as equity, which eliminated a key incentive for companies to move profits overseas.

Democrats slammed the administration for trying to weaken rules that allow tax avoidance when it should be creating tougher ones.

“One of the Trump administration’s top priorities has been making it as easy as possible for the wealthiest Americans and corporations to cheat and avoid taxes,” Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a statement. “Rules preventing the offshoring of corporate profits should be strengthened — not weakened.”

Critics of the rule say it is no longer necessary because the tax cuts made these inter-company loans less attractive, according to Bloomberg.

Mark Mazur, Obama’s former assistant secretary for tax policy at Treasury when the rule was created, disputed that claim.

“On the face, they do slightly different things and so it’s hard to believe that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act took care of every one of those dimensions,“ he told Bloomberg.

On its face, Republican criticism of the rule simply doesn’t align with reality.Trump had earlier claimed that the 2017 tax cuts would bring back $4 trillion in offshore profits that had been stashed overseas. Through the end of 2018, his claim fell about $3.3 trillion short, Bloomberg reported earlier this year.

The tax law slashed the rate on repatriated profits from 35 percent to a onetime 15.5 percent tax rate on cash and an 8 percent tax on non-cash assets. Trump claimed that the change would bring back $4 trillion in offshore profits, even though banks estimated that only about $1.5 trillion to $2.5 trillion was held offshore by U.S. companies. Corporations brought back less than $670 billion from the time the tax law was enacted until the end of 2018.

Researchers also rejected Trump’s claim that the repatriated profits would boost investment in the U.S.

“Policy changes have a relatively small impact on hiring and investment decisions if firms have relatively easy access to credit markets,” said a 2018 report from researchers at the University of Richmond and Claremont McKenna College.

Instead, companies have been using their tax savings for stock buybacks, in which companies buy back their own stock to return more money to shareholders.

A report from Citigroup found that companies in the S&P 500 spent more than $800 billion on stock buybacks in 2018, far more than the total amount spent on investing in new equipment or the total amount of repatriated cash.

Last year, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., and Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, introduced a bill that would close loopholes in the tax law to equalize tax rates on domestic and foreign profits.

“President Trump promised the American people he’d end the march of jobs and profits overseas,” Whitehouse said in a statement at the time. “Instead, he’s doled out massive new tax breaks that reward offshoring.”

Democrats again called out Trump for trying to help major corporations rather than workers.

“Another betrayal by President Trump — choosing corporations over American workers,” wrote Sen.Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio. “Shameful.”