Conflict Swirls as US House Nears Vote on Permanent RD Tax Break

Email Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe The problem with permanence: paying for it. Fiscal conservatives from both parties have long demanded that backers of making the credit permanent find a source of revenue, or identify budget cuts, to make up for the lost cash. Budget analysts estimate that the government would forgo $156 billion in revenue over the next decade under the proposal before the House today (H.R. 4438), which provides no mechanism for recovering that money.That’s why the Obama administration, which has its own proposal for making the tax credit permanent, “strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 4438,” the White House’s Office of Management and Budget said in a statement released yesterday. And it chided the House’s Republican leaders for promoting legislation that bucks their own party’s commitment to reducing—and not adding to—spending deficits.“Last month,” the statement notes, “House Republicans themselves passed a budget resolution that required offsetting any tax extenders that were made permanent with other revenue measures. … [M]aking traditional tax extenders permanent without offsets represents the wrong approach.”The White House’s veto threat hasn’t gone over well with many business groups. Some argue that Congress shouldn’t worry about offsets, predicting the tax break will more than pay for itself by generating new economic activity. Others suggest the government should get on with making the tax break permanent to provide companies with some certainty as they make long-term investment decisions, and then figure out how to pay for it.Think tanks that support a permanent R&D tax break are also unhappy. “Given that the Obama Administration has publically supported increasing the R&D credit and making it permanent, it is troubling that they are now threatening to veto this pro-growth measure,” said Robert Atkinson, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, in a statement today.In Congress, fault lines have appeared in both parties. Not all Democrats are lining up with the White House against the bill—and not all Republicans are expected to support it. Nine of the bill’s 23 co-sponsors are Democrats. But the legislation received just a single Democratic vote—from Representative Earl Blumenauer (OR)—in a 22 to 12 committee vote to send it to the full House. Another Democratic co-sponsor, Representative John Larson (CT), told the Bloomberg BNA news service that he is thinking about voting for the bill on the floor (after voting against it in committee). Some Republican spending hawks, meanwhile, may vote against the measure because it would add to deficits.In part, the split reflects the varying nature of the industrial bases in different House districts. Many lawmakers backing the bill come from districts with a strong concentration of high-tech, pharmaceutical, and other businesses that invest heavily in research. In contrast, lawmakers from rural, agricultural districts may feel less pressure to back the measure—and get complaints from antideficit voters if they do.Whether the bill’s backers can tack together enough votes to get it through the House should be known soon: A vote on H.R. 4438 could come as early as Wednesday evening.The Senate, meanwhile, is working on its own bill, which would extend the R&D tax break for just 2 years. The U.S. House of Representatives is nearing a vote on a bill that would make a popular tax break for corporate research spending a permanent part of the tax code. But although the House bill has bipartisan support, the White House is threatening a veto. The Senate, meanwhile, is working on a less sweeping proposal. The legislative flurry highlights the complicated politics surrounding efforts to renew the so-called R&D tax credit, which Congress last year let expire for the sixth time in 21 years.The credit, created in 1981, “is probably one of the least controversial provisions of the tax code,” said Representative Tom Cole (R-OK) today in a statement on the House floor. It allows companies to write off about one-fifth of their spending on research and was worth some $7 billion to U.S. firms last year. Both Democrats and Republicans have long endorsed making it permanent in an effort to spur innovation and job creation. This year, lawmakers in both the House and Senate have introduced legislation to do just that.In practice, however, Congress has traditionally extended the R&D credit for just one year, or a few, at a time. Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Country Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *