Tag: taxes

Michelle Obama’s Ex-Chief of Staff Hired Illegal CRIMINAL to Run A School District

In 2023, the Des Moines School Board appointed Ian Andre Roberts as Superintendent of Schools, handing him one of the most lucrative contracts in Iowa public education. 

His base salary started at $270,000. That alone should raise eyebrows in a state where teachers regularly earn less than $50,000 a year. 

But what makes this case even more alarming is the fact that Roberts was an illegal immigrant with a criminal record when he was hired.

Roberts entered the United States legally but overstayed his visa. 

By May 2024, he had received a final deportation order, yet he remained in charge of the entire Des Moines Public School District. 

Worse still, when the board voted to hire him, they were already aware that Roberts had faced a weapons charge in 2020. 

Despite these red flags, the school board proceeded with the appointment, prioritizing political connections and appearances over community safety and integrity.

The arrangement was not only reckless—it was expensive. According to the Des Moines Register, Roberts’ contract went far beyond a six-figure base salary. 

Taxpayers were also on the hook for a payment to a “tax-sheltered annuity” equal to 14% of his annual pay. That comes out to nearly $38,000 per year. 

Keep reading

European Neo-Feudalism: How Exit Taxes Chain Citizens To A Failing System

More and more people are turning their backs on the European Union. With them, the states are also losing economic substance. Exit taxes are being used in an attempt to counter this.

The states of the European Union are experiencing a veritable exodus. About 1.4 million EU citizens left their home countries in 2023, among them 265,000 Germans. Among the favored destinations are, alongside Switzerland and the United States, booming regions such as Qatar or Dubai.

Good Reasons

The list of destination countries carries political dynamite, because it says much about the background of this flight movement. A growing number of high performers are trying to escape what is in many places almost predatory levels of taxation. In addition, academics, researchers, freelancers such as the so-called “digital nomads,” and entrepreneurs simply find better economic prospects elsewhere than in economically sedated Europe.

EU citizens are not infrequently being drained by a tax burden of 45 percent. We know this from Germany: it is not even necessary to count among the absolute top earners in order to have to surrender nearly half of one’s income to the tax authorities. Basically, it is a scandal—one about which there is no longer any open discussion.

In Dubai, for example, there is no income tax at all. In the United States, the state burdens its citizens with around 27 percent. Anyone who can calculate, who is well educated and mobile, draws the consequences. Alongside the tax burden, social crises increasingly come into play: uncontrolled migration, the decay of major cities, and the visibly hostile climate of ever-expanding bureaucracies. For many ambitious people, life in the EU’s Europe is simply too expensive, and the essence of bureaucracy too overbearing.

Expensive Emigration

Every emigrant leaves behind an economic gap in his homeland. When a German with a high income leaves the country, the state does not only lose a taxpayer—it loses his capital and know-how. Over the lifetime of an academic, around €1.5 million in taxes and social contributions escape the treasury. In addition, there is the enormous loss of capital. Estimates assume that the median wealth of Germans per person is €106,000. With the emigration of 265,000 Germans and the return of 191,000 persons—where for simplicity we assume the same level of wealth—about €7.8 billion in capital flows abroad.

The economist Bernd Raffelhüschen calculates the annual fiscal loss through emigration by discounting the difference between future tax and social contribution payments and state transfers of an average academic to its present value. He arrives at a loss of about €30,000 for each emigrated academic.

The flight of high performers works like economic erosion in real time. Highly qualified people leave the country. People who, with higher probability, would have moved venture capital and founded companies are tearing open a fiscal gap. About 56 percent of income tax revenue is provided by the top ten percent of taxpayers—the political class would be well advised to roll out the red carpet for these people instead of harnessing them to the cart of their ambitious social projects.

Feudalism as the Answer

The answer of EU Europe to the flight of the economically ambitious and wealthy is neo-feudal in character. Through punitive taxes, the costs of fleeing the tax collector and the increasingly invasive state are to be raised so high that the impulse to emigrate is suffocated. Somewhat exaggeratedly formulated, this policy recalls the old feudal European conditions which once led to the mass migration of Europeans to North America.

Alongside France, Spain, Italy, and the Netherlands, the Federal Republic of Germany has also deployed an exit tax.

Anyone who, as an entrepreneur, holds at least 1 percent of a corporation (this includes stock capital) and turns his back on Germany triggers exit taxation—even if no sales proceeds have been realized. In this case, the state assumes a fictitious sale of the shares and taxes the theoretical capital gain. What is decisive is the difference between the original purchase price and the current market value. Sixty percent of this gain is added to taxable income and taxed at up to 45 percent, depending on the income tax rate. In addition comes the solidarity surcharge and a possible church tax levy.

This regulation applies if the person concerned was subject to unlimited taxation in Germany for at least seven of the past twelve years—and it applies equally in the case of emigration to third countries or relocation within the EU. Since 2022, moves within the EU are no longer automatically privileged for tax purposes: whoever wants to leave must pay—unless he applies for a deferral over seven years and provides collateral. The frequently mentioned €150,000 threshold is not a tax-free allowance, but only a guideline for assessment.

In sum, this amounts to state access to future gains, binding entrepreneurs to their homeland and making departure more difficult through a fiscal hurdle.

Keep reading

School District Superintendent Raked in MILLIONS Before ICE Arrest

Immigration and Customs Enforcement has arrested Des Moines Public Schools Superintendent Ian Roberts after allegedly fleeing when agents arrived to enforce a deportation order. 

Roberts, originally from Guyana, has been under a final deportation order since May 2024. Despite that order, he continued to lead Iowa’s largest school district until his arrest this week.

What makes this case even more alarming is not only that Roberts remained in office unlawfully, but that he was paid handsomely for doing so. 

His current base salary exceeded $180,000 per year, and district officials were preparing to raise his base pay to $270,000. Over the course of his tenure, that means Roberts could have earned millions of dollars in taxpayer money while residing in the country illegally.

The district released a short statement claiming they had “no information” about the circumstances of his arrest. That explanation does not change the facts. 

Federal records make clear that Roberts was under orders of removal. Yet the school board allowed him to remain in charge, responsible for nearly 30,000 students and one of the state’s largest budgets.

This is not the first controversy involving Roberts. He was previously detained in connection with carrying a firearm, though authorities never provided full details. That earlier incident was first noted in reports months ago, but new information about his contract and salary has raised the level of concern. 

Parents and taxpayers now have to ask: how was an individual under deportation orders allowed not only to keep his job but to receive a six-figure salary funded by public money?

The political response has been predictable. Protests are already being organized to defend Roberts, portraying him as the victim rather than the perpetrator. That narrative ignores a basic truth. 

A superintendent facing deportation should not be rewarded with a salary approaching $200,000, nor should a school board prepare to give him an even larger raise.

Families deserve better than a system that treats lawbreaking as a minor administrative detail.

Keep reading

Mamdani pledges to spend $100 million more for free lawyers for migrants facing deportation

Taxpayers will pick up an additional $100 million tab for illegal migrants facing deportation, Democratic Mayoral Candidate Zohran Mamdani pledges, calling it a “cornerstone” of his campaign.

“Four hundred thousand of our residents are right now in urgent risk of deportation,” the socialist lamented on MSNBC “The Weekend,” adding fewer than 200 of them received access to free lawyers last year.

The city’s 2026 budget, passed in June, already includes $54.5 million to fight deportation orders in court on the taxpayer’s dime – “more than any other major city in America,” Mayor Eric Adams has said.

Mamdani aims to blow that amount out of the water, reiterating a promise buried in his campaign platform, under his “Trump-Proofing NYC” tenet.

“A cornerstone of our campaign is to increase funding for those very legal defense services by more than $100 million so that we can ensure we’re taking every step we can to keep New Yorkers safe, to keep New Yorkers together, and to show the world that they are welcome in this city,” he said.

To do that, Mamdani vowed to beef up headcount in the city’s Law Department by 200, without providing more specifics.

Keep reading

Atlanta forfeits $37.5M in airport funds after refusing to agree to Trump’s DEI ban

Atlanta’s airport has forfeited at least $37.5 million because city leaders have refused to disavow diversity, equity and inclusion programs as mandated by President Donald Trump’s administration.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, the world’s busiest airport by passenger traffic, declined on July 29 to agree to terms set out by the Federal Aviation Administration. Those terms certify that the airport doesn’t “operate any programs promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws.”

That language mirrors a January executive order signed by Trump banning DEI programs operated by anyone doing business with or receiving money from the federal government.

The FAA told the Atlanta airport, owned and controlled by the city government, that it was holding back $57 million, The Journal-Constitution reports. But federal authorities said $19 million of that money would be available to Atlanta in the next federal budget year if it agrees to the language then.

The money would have gone to repave taxiways and renovate public restrooms, among other projects.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Rules That Trump Can Withhold $4 Billion in Foreign Aid

The US Supreme Court on Friday ruled 6-3 that President Trump can withhold $4 billion in foreign aid approved by Congress.

The three liberal justices, Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson, dissented.

Earlier this month, US District Judge Amir Ali, a Biden appointee, blocked President Trump from cutting billions of dollars in USAID and foreign aid that Congress authorized.

Judge Ali ordered Trump to spend the money by the end of the month. Trump immediately appealed.

According to CNBC, the Supreme Court said, “the asserted harms to the Executive’s conduct of foreign affairs appear to outweigh the potential harm.”

CNN reported:

The Supreme Court on Friday allowed President Donald Trump to freeze $4 billion in foreign aid payments, handing the White House a significant victory in its months-long quest to claw back spending that was approved by Congress last year.

At issue is $4 billion in foreign aid, including for global health and HIV programs, that was allocated by Congress, but that Trump deemed wasteful and has been fighting on two fronts. In addition to defending the aid cuts in federal court, his administration is also seeking to “rescind” the money through Congress.

Keep reading

Michigan Lawmakers Pass Marijuana Tax Increase That’s Projected To Bring In $420 Million In New Revenue Every Year

A plan to raise money for road repairs by increasing marijuana taxes quickly advanced through the Michigan House late Thursday as part of what officials called a larger framework for a state budget deal.

The proposed Comprehensive Road Funding Tax Act would impose a 24 percent tax on the wholesale price of marijuana sold or transferred to a retail shop, beginning in January.

That would generate an estimated $420 million a year, according to the nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency. Most of the funding from the proposed Comprehensive Road Funding Tax Act would go into a new Neighborhood Road Fund for local roads and bridges.

The pot tax proposal passed the Republican-led House with bipartisan support in a 78-21 vote just hours after it was unveiled, with opposition from 10 Republicans and 11 Democrats. It now goes to the Democratic-led Senate for further consideration.

A separate bill approved Thursday—and tied to the pot tax proposal—would extend new federal income tax exemptions on tips and overtime pay to state filers for three years. That would benefit qualifying workers but cost the state more than $150 million annually between 2026 and 2028, according to the fiscal agency.

The votes came shortly before Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Senate Democratic Leader Winnie Brinks and Republican House Speaker Matt Hall announced a framework agreement to pass the budget before a potential government shutdown next week.

That will include a road funding plan totaling between $1.5 billion and $1.8 billion in annual funding, according to Hall, R-Richland Township.

Keep reading

Trump’s HHS Overhauls Welfare Program with Focus on Accountability

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, through the Administration for Children and Families, selected Arizona, Iowa, Nebraska, Ohio, and Virginia to participate in the redesigned Temporary Assistance for Needy Families pilot.

This pilot will test innovative approaches to promote employment, reduce government dependency, and strengthen family outcomes. 

Authorized under the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, the six-year pilot will replace the Work Participation Rate and instead measure state success using new, outcome-based metrics that aim to deliver real results for families and taxpayers. 

For example, states will now be held accountable for improving employment outcomes, supporting earnings growth, and reducing reliance on cash assistance, Medicaid, and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits.

“The Trump Administration is returning to the original promise of welfare reform—ensuring our programs are laser-focused on helping families achieve lasting self-sufficiency while delivering results for taxpayers,” said ACF Acting Assistant Secretary Andrew Gradison. “This pilot marks the beginning of a new era where states are empowered to test new strategies, achieve real outcomes, and build an evidence base for innovations that drive upward mobility in America.”

The federal agency posted on social media:

“ACF is launching the redesigned TANF pilot with newly selected states: AZ, IA, NE, OH, & VA. The 6-year pilot will test new ways to: Promote work Strengthen family stability Reduce dependency.”

Keep reading

SNAP Fraud Has Doubled Since Last Year. Here’s Why.

Criminals are looting public safety net programs using digital tools, according to a new report released by LexisNexis Risk Solutions. 

The report analyzed reported fraud in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Integrated Eligibility Systems. Fraud in the SNAP program has doubled, the report said. 

The 54-page report reveals that the cost and volume of SNAP fraud have risen sharply over the past year, driven by the accelerated shift to digital channels, increasingly sophisticated Electronic Benefits Transfer theft schemes, and complex multi-program eligibility systems. 

The findings of this year’s report are especially significant given the administrative and programmatic changes introduced to SNAP agencies across the country by House Resolution 1. 

According to the 2025 study, the average monthly rate of fraudulent SNAP applications and post-issuance cases has doubled since 2024. For every $1 in SNAP benefits lost to fraud, agencies now incur $4.14 in total costs, up from $3.93 a year ago.

“SNAP is a lifeline for millions of families, and these findings highlight how increasingly sophisticated criminals are targeting this critical benefit program,” said Amanda D’ Amico, Senior Director at LexisNexis Risk Solutions. “Digital channels and expanded eligibility systems improve access but also expand the attack surface. Agencies that leverage real-time data, identity verification, and digital authentication solutions to detect fraud and increase cross-program collaboration can turn the tide against fraud while ensuring timely benefits for those in need.”

Keep reading

Trump’s Tariffs Have Already Hurt the Economy—and the Pain Is Only Beginning

The U.S. economy is already feeling the effects of Trump’s tariffs, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) projects that things could get worse.

The OECD’s biannual interim economic outlook, published on Tuesday, forecasts U.S. growth will fall by a full percentage point from its 2024 rate. While this might not sound like much, this will translate to Americans missing out on trillions of dollars of goods and services by 2035 if this decrease in growth persists.

From 2010 to 2019, American gross domestic product (GDP) grew by an average of 2.4 percent per year. In 2024, it grew by 2.8 percent. Now, the OECD projects that the economy will grow by only 1.8 percent in 2025 and 1.5 percent in 2026, “owing to higher tariff rates [and] moderating net immigration,” among other factors. Assuming that yearly GDP growth neither rebounds nor falls further but persists at 1.8 percent, the U.S. economy will be $2.2 trillion smaller in 2035 than it would be had President Donald Trump not adopted his protectionist policies and growth remained at 2.4 percent.

Even though the OECD’s growth projections show the long-run macroeconomic damage of Trump’s tariffs, the American economy has remained relatively strong since he took office. The stock market is at an all-time high while inflation has been about the same as that experienced during the last year of the Biden administration: The average monthly inflation from January 2024 to August 2024, as measured by the consumer price index (CPI), was 0.2 percent. From January 2025 to August 2025, monthly CPI growth was not much higher: 0.225 percent. Meanwhile, the average monthly increase in the producer price index (PPI), which measures changes in expenses borne by American businesses, was 36 percent lower compared to the same time last year.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) explains that “imports are excluded from PPI.” The experimental BLS index, which incorporates imports, tells a story similar to regular PPI: this index experienced 38 percent lower inflation from January 2025 to July 2025 than it did during the same period a year ago.

Relatively stable consumer price inflation and lower producer price inflation—excluding and including imports—under Trump are surprising. After all, the president has more than tripled the average effective tariff rate to 11.6 percent on approximately $2.2 trillion worth of imports, according to the Tax Foundation. Therefore, all things being equal, CPI and PPI should be elevated. So, why aren’t they? The answer lies in the delayed implementation of Trump’s tariffs: Although “Liberation Day” was April 2, the “reciprocal tariffs” announced then were postponed for months, finally taking effect on August 7, meaning “the full effects of tariff increases have yet to be felt,” as the OECD explains.

Keep reading