Sens. Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders and Edward Markey released a proposal to provide a monthly payment of $2,000 for each member of a household (including up to three dependents), with benefits phased out at income levels starting at $200,000 for married couples. The proposal is partly a response to concerns that one-time cash payments under the CARES Act, which amount to $1,200 ($2,400 for married couples) and $500 for each child under age 17, are not sufficient to help families make ends meet or boost the economy.
Publication Search Results
-
report May 8, 2020 Harris-Sanders-Markey Cash Payment Proposal Would Dwarf Checks Sent Under the CARES Act
-
report April 15, 2020 State Options to Shore up Revenues and Improve Tax Codes amid Pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic is an extraordinarily challenging time, as we see harm and struggle affecting the vast majority of our families, businesses, public services, and economic sectors. No one will be unaffected by the crisis, and everyone has a stake in the recovery and faces tough decisions. In the world of state fiscal policy, where revenue shortfalls are likely to be far bigger than can be filled by the initial $150 billion in federal aid or absorbed through funding cuts without causing major harm, tax increases must be among those decisions. Even with more federal support, states will need home-grown revenue solutions in the short, medium, and long terms as the crisis and its fiscal fallout intensify, subside, and eventually give way to a new normal. States must balance their budgets, and research shows that they harm their economies when they choose deep funding cuts to vital public investments over increasing tax contributions from those who can afford them.
-
report March 25, 2020 Tax Rebates in the Federal CARES Act
Data available for download Congress passed and the president signed a $2 trillion plan that includes $150 billion in fiscal aid to states, $150 billion in health care spending, large… -
report March 13, 2020 Trump’s Proposed Payroll Tax Elimination
President Trump has proposed to eliminate payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare through the end of the year. ITEP estimates that this would cost $843 billion and 65 percent of the benefits would go to the richest 20 percent of taxpayers, as illustrated in the table below.
-
March 11, 2020 ITEP Testimony on the Illinois Earned Income Credit
Read as PDF Testimony of Lisa Christensen Gee, Director of Special Initiatives, Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy Submitted to: Illinois House Revenue Committee Chairman Zalewski, committee members—thank you for… -
March 4, 2020 ITEP Testimony Regarding Connecticut Senate Bill 16, An Act Concerning the Adult Use of Cannabis
This testimony explains the advantages of the cannabis tax structure proposed in Connecticut’s Senate Bill 16 and offers additional background information as well as ideas for potential changes to the bill.
-
report February 18, 2020 Expanding State EITCs: Age Enhancements and a Credit Increase for Workers without Children in the Home
For 45 years, the federal Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) has benefited low- and moderate-income workers. Yet, throughout its history, the EITC has provided little or no benefit to workers without children in the home—a group that includes noncustodial parents whose children live the majority of the year with another parent.
-
February 12, 2020 ITEP Testimony In Support of H.B. 222 Income Tax Rates – Capital Gains Income & H.B. 256 Maryland Estate Tax – Unified Credit
Read as PDF Testimony of Kamolika Das, State Policy Analyst, Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy Submitted to: Ways and Means Committee, Maryland General Assembly Thank you for this opportunity… -
report February 5, 2020 State Itemized Deductions: Surveying the Landscape, Exploring Reforms
State itemized deductions are generally patterned after federal law, though nearly every state makes significant changes to the menu of deductions available or the extent to which those deductions are allowed. This report summarizes the key details of each state’s itemized deduction policies and discusses various options for reforming those deductions with a focus on lessening their regressive impact and reducing their cost to state budgets.
-
January 29, 2020 ITEP Comments and Recommendations on REG-107431-19
Comments regarding the possibility that owners of passthrough businesses may be able to circumvent the $10,000 SALT deduction cap of section 164(b)(6) by recharacterizing the nondeductible portion of their state and local income tax payments as deductible expenses associated with carrying on a trade or business.