Trump’s Chief Economic Adviser Floats Raising Gas Taxes To Pay For Infrastructure

Submitted by Joseph Jankowski of PlanetFreeWill

President Donald Trump’s chief economic adviser, Gary Cohn, has floated the idea of raising the current federal gasoline tax next year to fund the administrations $1 trillion dollar infrastructure plan aimed at improving U.S. roads, bridges, and other public work. The idea was proposed during a meeting with a bipartisan group of lawmakers dubbed the Problem Solvers Caucus on Wednesday, reports Bloomberg.

While proposals to raise the gasoline tax have surfaced over the years, the tax has not been raised since 1993. Revenue from the federal per-gallon taxes of 18.4 cents on gasoline and 24.4 cents on diesel has declined due to inflationary mugging of purchasing power and a market-driven desire for better fuel mileage of passenger vehicles, which has increased 12 percent, Bloomberg points out.

President Trump had also floated the idea of raising the federal gas tax earlier this year but it received a rather cold reaction from House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady who said that he would rule out raising the tax.

When confronted with the idea on Wednesday, Brady said his focus was elsewhere. “Hm. I’m going to stay focused on tax reform right now,” he said.

The tax hike has sparked the interest of Mike Simpson, a Republican from Idaho, who said that he would support the effort to tweak up the price of gasoline.

“It’s a user fee,” Simpson said. “We’ve got to convince people that the money goes to roads and bridges and not all the other bull.”

In August, President Trump rolled out an executive order aimed at speeding up approvals for infrastructure projects that decreased the environmental permitting process for “complex” highway projects and ensured that a single agency would serve as the point of contact for each project’s paperwork. The order also axed Obama-era flood standard that would have required federally funded projects to be built to withstand the stronger storms that the former administration said would come with a warming planet.

“My administration is working every day to deliver the world-class infrastructure that our people deserve and, frankly, that our country deserves,” the president said in August.

The Trump administration has said that it’s pursuit of an infrastructure overhaul would come after ongoing efforts to overhaul the U.S. tax code are resolved.

The House is set to cast a critical budget vote on Thursday that will set the parameters of any tax bill and pave the way for Republicans to pass it without Democratic support.

One of the largest hurdles the tax effort currently faces is the proposal to eliminate state-and-local-tax deductions, also known as “SALT,” that some Republicans say is important to middle-class households living in high-taxed states.

Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky has spoken out against the current path of tax cuts, accusing the current plan of running the risk of raising middle-class taxes if the SALT deductions are eliminated.

“The only sticking point I’ve had is a detail, but it’s an important detail: if you keep the middle rate at 25% and you get rid of two big deductions, how do we prevent the middle class from having a tax increase on this?,” Paul asked on Fox News last week.

Another daunting aspect to the current tax cut effort is that it is set to tack on $1.5 trillion to the already out of control debt problem Washington has cooked up.

While this has raised concern with some Republicans who express the slightest bit of actual conservative values, such as Senator Rand Paul, it seems the passage of the tax bill for political granstandiong will go ahead despite the increase in debt.

“We’ve got to get something major done,” said Rep. Mark Meadows told the WaPo. “Had we repealed and replaced Obamacare, there may not have been as much flexibility or pressure,” he added about passing the tax cuts.

“Am I feeling the pressure to get this done? Yes. Have I been willing to negotiate a little bit more generously because of that pressure? Yeah. That’s just shooting straight with you,” Meadows said.

In typical Washington fashion, more debt will be placed on top of the taxpayers head for sake of saying that the party ‘got something done’. And as the cuts in taxes are a major focus, the idea of raising taxes on a commodity (gasoline) everyone needs is being floated. To summarize, it is looking like any tax plan to pass will be a political front which will create more debt and let big-government continue to run wild.


skbull44 AlphaSeraph Thu, 10/26/2017 - 18:05 Permalink

And I’m sure ALL the gas tax will go only towards infrastructure improvements/maintenance because government is so great with their fiduciary responsibilities. 
/* Style Definitions */
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;

In reply to by AlphaSeraph

Archibald Buttle OpTwoMistic Fri, 10/27/2017 - 02:52 Permalink

“It’s a user fee,” Simpson said. “We’ve got to convince people that the money goes to roads and bridges and not all the other bull.” this will turn into a backdoor subsidy for musk. his favorite kind. note that "we've got to convince people," not actually follow through on what we say and actually spend the fucking money on infrastructure. there will be spin.

In reply to by OpTwoMistic

historian40 JLee2027 Thu, 10/26/2017 - 19:27 Permalink

Pilate wasn't a "jew" either, but they used their influence, gathered a mob, and threatened the authorities.  They got what they wanted, and to this day blame the Romans for killing Jesus.  These "jews" today follow the same Pharisaism(judaism) as those "children of the devil" back then.  They use the same old devices in their superiority tradition that they will gain control of the world.As for the claim that there have been no "jewish" presidents, you should probably go research that claim a little more.  Also keep in mind, that the label "jewish" is identifying a link to Pharisaism(judaism) through families.  It's a tradition/religion.  It's like someone saying they're Catholic, because their grandma was, or his mom and dad were.  It's more indocrinated into the "jews" though, as they have always caused extreme situations, even if it seemed to harm "jews" because it would scare them futher into the embrace of the "Pharisees".Then they have millions of proselytes who are zionists, deceived into setting the "jews" upon a pedestal, judged differently, allowed to do whatever they please, because they are "chosen".  They have deified "the jews", and have been indoctrinated into the dogmas of the "holy-cost", and told of the "Passion of the Jews", and assured if they don't "bless" those people, they will be cursed and can't know God.And of course, you'll know them by their fruits.  Look at the behavior of the US in foreign policy, politics, laws, etc.  George H.W. Bush even publicly claimed, and it has been entered into public record, that the US and the civilized world are founded on the Noahide Laws.  Those are a part of the Talmud.  The written tradition of Pharisaism(judaism).  Antichrist.

In reply to by JLee2027

The Wizard AlphaSeraph Thu, 10/26/2017 - 18:56 Permalink

How is a "consumption tax" an impost, duty, tariff, or excise? These are the types of taxes that are Constitutionally acceptable.Have you ever wondered how they apply an "income tax" to your private labor? Study the law and pandora's box will open.Hey Cohn, great idea going for the lower and middle classes who have to drive to work everyday to pay for bozos in DC.How about taxing the manufactured fiat derivative paper about 90%.Remember when Clinton moved the excise taxes collected on fuel to the general fund. Stop sending those excise fuel taxes to the general fund to cover an increase in spending. I assume they are still doing it.

In reply to by AlphaSeraph

Hugh Mann Thu, 10/26/2017 - 18:07 Permalink

What the hell have they been doing with fuel-tax money they're already getting? They sure as fuck haven't been maintaining anything! Based upon history, the government never uses allocated money for it's intended purpose. If it did, it wouldn't be broke.

krampus. Thu, 10/26/2017 - 18:15 Permalink

I would pay higher gas taxes if I knew that the tax was only going to roads and bridges. But the way I think is I don't look at what the current admin is going to do. I look at what is 10-15 years down the road and what the next admin or the one after that will do. Most likely they will put the money in the general fund and we will be in worse shape than we are now. Then someone will again propose "hey let raise the gas tax" and we promise we will spend it on the roads. All the while we have been paying for the roads all along but not getting anything for it. So unless they put it as a constitusional amendment I say no. Georgia did that with the lottery and guess what? Most of the money to, wait for it, education. NC did not. Guess where it goes? WAIT for it. The general fund. That's your government at work.