Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 4213, Tax Extenders Act Of 2009

Floor Speech

Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 4213, Tax Extenders Act Of 2009

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DOGGETT. I thank the gentleman.

This rule provides for consideration of a $31 billion spending bill, including some worthwhile provisions and some not-so-worthwhile provisions. Approval of this tax extenders package has become something of an annual ritual, regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans are in charge, and the term ``temporary tax break'' has become an oxymoron.

If today's proposal required the government to write more checks to Wall Street and other fortunate Americans, there would be howls of protest; but because this involves tax expenditures, not direct expenditures, there is no protest, and there is no scrutiny of the expenditures. A tax expenditure occurs when this Congress decides to award some interest group, usually those with the most powerful lobbyists, the right to avoid paying taxes on the same basis as the rest of us by writing in some preference, deferral, loophole, or tax break.

The principal alleged virtue of today's bill is that it changes nothing. There is nothing more, there is nothing less than the advantages that Congress has repeatedly extended in the past.

In a modest effort to address the glaring disparity between the sunlight of the appropriations process and the shadows of the Tax Code, today's legislation does include a new requirement that I authored requiring that the Joint Committee on Taxation and the Government Accountability Office thoroughly evaluate and report on a set of criteria, the cost-effectiveness of each of these tax expenditures.

The Center for Tax Justice has been an invaluable partner in securing this provision. A good example of the urgent need for review was provided only yesterday regarding one of the most popular provisions in this bill, the research tax credit, that I have long personally supported. Calling for its permanent extension has become synonymous with being tech friendly and being concerned with economic growth.

But the Government Accountability Office ``identified significant disparities in the incentives provided.'' It determined that ``a substantial portion of credit dollars is a windfall'' for some, while much ``potentially beneficial research'' receives nothing. That is why we should be scrutinizing these tax expenditures, even the most popular, at least as closely as we do direct expenditures.

On the plus side, today's bill does effectively address international tax evasion by individuals. On the minus side, it does nothing to stop an even more egregious abuse by corporations shifting jobs and tax revenues overseas. In fact, while some try to draw a distinction between illegal tax evasion and tax avoidance, the only real difference between individuals illegally hiding their cash overseas and corporations manipulating the Tax Code is that the corporations have better lobbyists to obtain a veneer of legitimacy.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. ARCURI. I yield the gentleman an additional minute.

Mr. DOGGETT. Similarly, the equitable taxation of carried interest in this proposal is belatedly a step forward, but it presents two problems. First, the bill fails to distinguish venture capital, which is so important in spurring new businesses in the most innovative sectors of our economy.

Second, the Senate is most unlikely to accept the financing that we propose here and instead is likely to grab something from our health insurance reform pay-fors and begin taxing employer-provided health insurance as a substitute, something that so many Members of this House have opposed.

Facing a soaring deficit, to me tax justice means before we ask working families to pay any more taxes, we ought to ask why Congress has done so little to crack down on those getting special treatment and to prevent billions of dollars of tax avoidance. Next year, America deserves a little more tax justice and a more level playing field for small businesses that cannot take advantage of all the dodges available to their multinational competitors.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source