Democrats are playing with fire in trying to reclaim tax cuts from Republicans
Senator Chris Van Hollen and other Democratic lawmakers are embracing a policy that hardly benefits the middle classSoul-searching within the Democratic party is to be expected after its loss in the 2024 election,Donald Trump’s edge over Kamala Harris in voters’ perceptions of economic competence (perplexing though it now appears following a year of erratic policymaking) was bound to inspire a call to rethink the party platform,Yet the second-guessing is steering the Democrats down a dangerous path to embracing a tax-cutting strategy that risks defeating the project to enable a healthier, more equitable society,The most prominent proposal bouncing around Democratic circles comes in a bill from Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland senator,In a nutshell, it proposes cutting taxes for Americans earning up to $80,500 ($161,000 for married couples) and funding the $1.
6tn dollar hole this would leave in the budget over a decade with a new surtax on Americans making more than $1m.It is politically smart – a deft response to the tax cuts, on tips, overtime, car loans and social security, that Trump offered up last year in his One Big Beautiful Bill Act.Middle-class Americans, in the 40th to 80th percentile of the income scale, would save, on average, about $1,500 in taxes in 2026 under Van Hollen’s proposal – paid for mainly by the very rich in the top 0.1% of the distribution, who would see their taxes go up by an average of $1.2m, according to the Penn-Wharton budget model.
The proposal, which has the support of Vermont’s Bernie Sanders – icon of the party’s progressive left – is also a clever way to chip away at Republicans’ longstanding ownership of tax cuts.Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act reserved much of its goodies for the richest taxpayers.A tax cut aimed at middle-income families would be nice for a change.But Van Hollen et al are playing with fire.The strategy endangers the prospect that the United States might ever build a social contract based on a promise of shared prosperity.
It furthers the case for depriving the state of the resources it needs to mitigate ballooning inequities and help build a social contract based on shared prosperity.Among the 38 nations in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), only six countries raise less in taxes than the United States, as a share of the economy.US tax revenues amount to roughly the same share of gross domestic product (GDP) as in the 1960s.But the US is a different country: spending on social security and Medicare grew by six points of GDP from 1967 to 2025.Interest payments on the federal debt grew by two points.
Resources available for everything else the government does declined from 22% to 14,5% of GDP over the period,Improving the progressivity of the tax schedule – as Van Hollen’s idea would do – is not, in fact, particularly effective at mitigating inequality,Mitigating inequality requires government resources to fund cash transfers or services to improve the lives of ordinary families and individuals (known in the jargon as government transfers),For instance, economists from the World Bank and the Paris School of Economics evaluated the impact of redistribution via taxes and transfers since 1980.
Transfers, they concluded, account for 90% of the reduction in inequality.Taxes account for merely 10%.The US’s poor track record at mitigating depths of inequality unseen in other industrialized nations, is largely a story of a state impoverished by half-a-century worth of tax cuts.To put it in concrete terms: middle-class taxpayers would get an extra $1,500 a year or so from Van Hollen’s proposal.And they would pay roughly that much out of pocket for health services, nearly the most in the OECD.
Or they would skip seeing the doctor.It’s hard to see this as a path to shared prosperity.This is no time for Democrats to throw in the towel.Van Hollen’s tax proposal would not further defund the American state.But it would require a massive investment of political capital to get not much of anything.
The political moment, with Trump’s polling on the economy underwater by 31%, offers an opportunity for something more ambitious,What’s more, there is the economic imperative: American social democracy simply needs more money,It can be done,Consider Sweden, where tax revenue amounts to 42% of GDP, 16 percentage points more than in the US,But it gets there with a tax structure that is less progressive than the US.
Its personal income tax is flatter – the gap between the highest and the lowest rate is smaller.It gets a large share of revenue from value-added taxes – which hit lower-income taxpayers harder because they consume more of what they earn.Still, redistribution by the Swedish state does a lot more than the US’s to build an equitable society.Sweden’s poverty rate of only 8%, by the OECD’s definition, owes a great deal to taxes and transfers that boost lower-income families’ disposable income.Based on market income, before such government intervention, the poverty rate would be 24%.
Government redistribution reduces poverty in the US by much less: from 27% to 18%.Another way to look at this is through the Gini index, which measures the concentration of income on a scale from zero – which means perfect equality – to a maximum of one – in which one person hogs all the income and everybody else has nothing.Government redistribution reduces Sweden’s Gini index by a third, to 0.289.By contrast, it trims inequality in the US by less than a quarter, to 0.
394.This is by no means a call to leave the rich alone.In the United States, the very rich pay almost nothing in taxes.They make most of their money not via wages or other taxable income but through capital gains.Because they rarely sell their assets – they borrow against them to pay for yachts and stuff, continuously rolling loans over – these “unrealized” gains multiply over time tax-free.
When the oligarchs die, clever loopholes allow them to bequeath the pile untouched by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), cleansed of capital gains achieved during their lifetime,They must be taxed much more,Tackling that monster will not be easy, though,It will require a lot of political capital to perform major surgery on a tax structure that has been pared back over the last 50 years to let the plutocracy off the hook,For the sake of a more equitable US, Democrats should not just give the money back to everyday working families – everyday working families deserve more.
GameStop’s $55.5bn bid for eBay rejected as ‘neither credible nor attractive’
The board of eBay has rejected the US video games retailer GameStop’s surprise $55.5bn bid (£41bn) for the online marketplace, describing the proposal as “neither credible nor attractive”.Earlier this month, GameStop made an unsolicited bid for eBay, publishing a letter on its website outlining a half-cash, half-stock proposal.This was despite the US games company – which became a global household name during the meme stock craze of 2021 – being worth far less than its takeover target. GameStop had a market valuation of roughly $12bn before its bid, almost a quarter of eBay’s $46bn valuation
Molière Ex Machina: AI used to create ‘new work’ by beloved French playwright
Molière is to the French what Shakespeare is to the English: the last word in historical literature, drama, wit and satire.Now, more than 350 years after his death, the 17th-century dramatist has been revived after scholars at the Sorbonne University in Paris used artificial intelligence to help write an experimental play in his style.L’Astrologue ou les Faux Présages (The Astrologer, or False Omens), a three-act comedy, made its debut at the Royal Opera at the Château de Versailles last week.The two-hour play tells the story of a wealthy bourgeois Parisian who, under the instruction of a charlatan astrologer called Pseudoramus, insists his daughter Lucile marry a debt-ridden and elderly wigmaker.While the theme could well have been dreamed up by Molière, the dialogue, music, costumes and scenery were all created with the help of a French AI tool called Le Chat (The Cat)
Who is Louis Mosley, the man tasked with defending Palantir against its critics?
The hall was packed with rightwing radicals when Louis Mosley heralded a coming revolution. Just as Oliver Cromwell – that “crusader for Christ and liberty” – routed King Charles I’s royalists, “a similar revolution is brewing today”, said the UK and Europe boss of Palantir. Globalism’s “twilight” was upon us, he said in a speech dotted with admiring mentions of the podcaster Joe Rogan and “Elon’s Doge”.It was not a typical peroration for a big UK government contractor with more than £600m in deals with the NHS, the Ministry of Defence and police. But Palantir, the world’s most controversial tech company, is no typical contractor
Europe’s AI translation industry told it risks reputation by partnering with US firms
AI companies in Europe risk losing their world-leading status in the field of machine translation, industry figures have said, after the decision by one of the continent’s leading startups to partner with Amazon’s cloud computing division provoked alarm.While businesses in the EU have generally lagged behind the US and China in AI adoption, a small group of European companies have cornered the global market for high-quality machine translations for professional use.The biggest success story is Cologne-headquartered DeepL, an online translator that regularly outperforms Google Translate in accuracy assessments. Used by governments, courts and half of the Fortune 500 list of highest-earning US companies, last year it was reported to have recorded revenues of $185.2m
Shivon Zilis, mother of four of Elon Musk’s children, testifies in OpenAI trial
Shivon Zilis, a Neuralink executive and the mother of four of Elon Musk’s children, took the stand on Wednesday as one of the most highly anticipated witnesses in Musk’s case against OpenAI. The ChatGPT maker has argued that, while Zilis worked with OpenAI from 2016 to 2023, she was also involved in a secret relationship with Musk, acting as an informant for him.Musk’s case against OpenAI alleges that the company’s CEO, Sam Altman, and president, Greg Brockman, co-founders of the company with Musk, broke a founding agreement when they restructured it from a non-profit to a for-profit enterprise. The Tesla CEO accuses Altman and Brockman of unjustly enriching themselves and wants both removed from their positions at the startup, one of the most valuable in the world. He is also seeking the undoing of the for-profit restructuring and $134bn in damages to be redistributed to OpenAI’s non-profit arm
TikTok’s algorithm favored Republican content in 2024 US elections, study finds
A study published Wednesday in the journal Nature finds that TikTok’s algorithm systematically prioritized pro-Republican content in three states leading up to the 2024 US elections.Researchers created hundreds of dummy accounts and conditioned them to mimic real users’ behavior by watching a set of videos either aligned with the US Democratic or Republican parties. Then, they tracked the videos TikTok recommended on these accounts’ For You pages, TikTok’s main feed.“We found a consistent imbalance,” they wrote in Nature.About 42% of US social media users say that these platforms are important for getting involved with political and social issues, according to Pew Research, but it’s not often clear how recommendation algorithms shape what appears in feeds
Stephen Colbert on Trump’s 22ft gold statue at his golf club: ‘recreational idolatry’
One in seven in UK prefer consulting AI chatbots to seeing doctor, study finds
US Senate confirms Kevin Warsh as Federal Reserve chair, replacing Jerome Powell
Sam Altman defends OpenAI in courtroom showdown with Elon Musk
Florida students boo graduation speaker who called AI ‘next Industrial Revolution’
Jim Furyk tells US players they need to make Ryder Cup more of a priority