Tag: taxes

California Democrats Dumped $73M into Migrant NGOs Opposing ICE

California’s Democrat-controlled state legislature has pushed tens of millions of tax dollars into the hands of non-governmental organizations that work to thwart deportation and out ICE agents, according to a report.

Five of these far-left, pro-illegal alien organizations have received $73.6 million in state tax dollars since 2023, according to a report by budget watchdog group Open The Books.

According to the review of state spending, the notorious group Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA) was the biggest recipient of state funds, with handouts of a whopping $35,226,566 during 2023 and 2024.

CHIRLA has reportedly been at the center of efforts to track where ICE agents are working in Los Angeles so that activists can be dispatched to the area, often followed by rioters and agitators. The group has set up a tip line for members of the public to out ICE agent activity, as well.

“Aside from their current activities fomenting unrest in L.A., CHIRLA runs many different campaigns and programs as a part of their regular operations, including the ‘Wise Up!’ program to teach high schoolers how to become activists,” Open The Books reported. “The CHIRLA website states this program is an ‘initiative to organize high school students—both undocumented and allies—around immigrant rights, and full access to educational opportunities.’ The website further states WiseUp! ‘activates students’ by ‘engaging them civically to fight in the legislative arena and the public square for measures that ease their access to education and citizenship.’”

Keep reading

Critics Call for End to US Aid to Israel After Iran Attacks

Progressive U.S. lawmakers and human rights defenders demanded an end to unconditional American armed and diplomatic support for Israel after it launched a series of attacks on Iran early Friday, reportedly killing senior military officials and civilians including nuclear scientists, women, and children in a dramatic escalation that Iranian leaders vowed to avenge.

Iran, later on Friday, reportedly fired hundreds of ballistic missiles toward Israel, and smoke was seen rising from the city of Tel Aviv as Tehran began its retaliation for the large-scale attack that Israel’s military committed just hours earlier.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) wrote on social media that “all of Israel is under fire.” Minutes later, the IDF said that the “Iranian attack is ongoing,” noting that “dozens of additional missiles were launched toward Israel.”

The Israeli military instructed residents across the country to “remain close to protected spaces” and minimize “movement in public areas” until an all-clear is given. There were no immediate reports of casualties.

Unnamed U.S. officials told the Associated Press that American military assets were being used to help the Israelis intercept incoming missiles from Iran, though the sources, according to the AP, “did not say how the U.S. provided assistance.”

Iran’s retaliation followed at least five waves of Israeli airstrikes targeting not only Iran’s nuclear facilities but also its military leadership and capabilities, Al Jazeera reported. In addition to airstrikes, Israeli and international media reported that operatives from Mossad, Israel’s foreign spy agency, also conducted assassination and sabotage attacks in Iran.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) claimed that Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Commander-in-Chief Major Gen. Hossein Salami and Iranian Armed Forces Chief of Staff Major Gen. Mohammad Bagheri were assassinated, as were numerous Iranian nuclear scientists [and key nuclear negotiator Ali Shamkhani.]

Israeli attacks targeted cities including the capital Tehran, Natanz, Isfahan, Arak, Tabriz and Kermanshah. Iranian television reports showed bombed-out apartment towers and said that an unknown number of civilians including women and children were killed in the strikes. [The New York Times cites Iran’s Fars news agency’s report of at least 78 deaths and 329 injuries.] 

Keep reading

Hegseth Says DOD Was Spending Tens of Millions Sticking Marbles Inside the Rear Ends of Cats During Jaw-Dropping Senate Testimony

President Donald Trump’s Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, testified before the Senate that the Department of Defense was spending tens of millions of dollars on tests that involved sticking “marbles in the rear ends of cats.”

Hegseth brought up the cruel and wasteful animal research during his testimony before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense on Wednesday.

The exchange began as Democrat Sen. Dick Durbin grilled Hegseth about his administration ending many wasteful research grants.

“Give me an example of a ‘boondoggle’ in medical research and defense health,” Sen. Durbin said, likely unprepared for the response.

“I mean, we’re talking about some stuff I shouldn’t say in public, you know, marbles in the rear ends of cats, tens of millions of dollars,” Hegseth said while pantomiming inserting a marble in a cat’s rectum. “Things that don’t have a connection to what you’re talking about.”

“Is this like three hundred and fifty year old Social Security check that the president told us about?” the senator shot back.

Hegseth replied, “I respect completely the issue that you’re speaking with, and this department couldn’t be more sympathetic to that and ensure that it’s funded. But the Defense Department has been a place where organizations, entities, and companies know they can get money almost unchecked to whether or not it actually applies to things that happen on the battlefield.”

Sen. Rand Paul thanked Hegseth for highlighting the spending that he worked with White Coat Waste, an organization dedicated to ending taxpayer-funded animal testing, to expose.

Keep reading

Democrat Governors Are Rolling Back State-Funded Healthcare for Illegal Aliens – Why is the Left Not Protesting Them?

Some liberal Democrat governors are starting to roll back state (taxpayer) funded healthcare for people who are in the country illegally. Why is the left not protesting them? Could it be simply because the left gives Democrats a pass? Do they even know this is happening?

Under Gavin Newsom in California, the state is so broke that they are being forced to do this because there’s simply no money for it and the program came in costing billions of dollars more than people were told.

The same thing is now happening in Minnesota under Tim Walz and Illinois under JB Pritzker, all far left Democrats.

NBC News reports:

Democratic governors seek to roll back state-funded health care for undocumented immigrants

A trio of states with Democratic governors viewed as potential 2028 presidential candidates have taken steps in recent weeks to freeze or cut government-funded health care coverage for undocumented immigrants.

Democratic Govs. Gavin Newsom of California, JB Pritzker of Illinois and Tim Walz of Minnesota have largely attributed the proposals to budget shortfalls stemming from original plans to expand health care to immigrants without legal status.

But the moves also occur against the backdrop of broader debate within the Democratic Party over how to handle immigration, an issue that dragged it down in the last election and that President Donald Trump and the GOP have continued to try to capitalize on…

The latest development came in Minnesota on Tuesday, after both chambers of the Legislature passed a bill to end state-funded health care for undocumented adults…

Newsom’s plan in his 2025-26 budget has called for freezing enrollment for undocumented adults to receive the full scope of the state’s Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal…

Keep reading

Bill Would Stop Giving Federal Handouts To Cities That Obstruct Immigration Law Enforcement

As the leftists running Los Angeles fail to get the leftists destroying Los Angeles under control, two Republican lawmakers aim to hold sanctuary governments accountable for impeding federal law enforcement officials from enforcing immigration law. 

Reps. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, and Sheri Biggs, R-S.C., on Tuesday introduced the Mobilizing Against Sanctuary Cities Act, which “blocks federal financial assistance for one year to any city or state that refuses to honor ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] detainers.” The legislation also prohibits state and local governments restricting communications with the Department of Homeland Security. 

“If any city refuses to comply with the laws of our nation, blatantly works against the Department of Homeland Security, and wastes billions of taxpayer dollars shielding illegal aliens at the risk of American citizens, then they should be cut off from receiving even a penny of federal funding,” Gill said in a joint press release. 

A similar Republican-led bill introduced by Rep. Jeff Duncan of South Carolina died in the last session of Congress. 

Flouting the Law

Sanctuary cities, such as Los Angeles, bar local police from helping ICE and other federal law enforcement officials with immigration-related operations. In November, the Los Angeles City Council unanimously voted to officially designate the nation’s second-largest city a sanctuary city, “prohibiting city resources or personnel from being used to help federal enforcement of immigration laws,” NBC4 Los Angeles reported. The vote came two weeks after President Donald Trump was elected. 

“We have been a pro-immigrant city for a number of years, we know that there is a target on our back from this president-elect, and what we are doing here is we are hardening our defenses,” Councilman Bob Blumenfield said at the time, as reported by NBC4. “We are codifying our good policies on protecting immigrants.”

Keep reading

Tax Comparisons Show ‘Free’ Stuff is Very Expensive

People who want a larger, more active state frequently point to their favorite European country (usually a small Scandinavian nation) and ask why America doesn’t provide lots of “free” services like that alleged utopia. The answer is that it could but that wouldn’t necessarily make people happier. The U.S. is a large and diverse country where people don’t nearly agree with each other on what they want, and it’s difficult for government to provide more services without fueling arguments over what and how much should be provided. Importantly, too, those services aren’t free—they carry a very high price tag.

Paying Half Your Salary for Government Services

“Governments with higher taxes generally tout that they provide more services, and while this is often true, the cost of these services can be more than half of an average worker’s salary, and for most, at least a third of their salary,” Cristina Enache wrote last week for the Tax Foundation. “Belgium has the highest tax burden on labor at 52.6 percent (also the highest of all OECD countries), followed by Germany and France at 47.9 percent and 47.2 percent, respectively. Switzerland had the lowest tax burden at 22.9 percent.”

The U.S. government’s tax bite comes in at 29.9 percent, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The average across the OECD as of 2023 was 34.8 percent.

That cited tax percentage isn’t a formal rate set by any government, but a “tax wedge” created for the purpose of comparisons across diverse tax systems. The OECD defines the tax wedge “as the ratio between the amount of taxes paid by an average single worker (a single person at 100% of average earnings) without children and the corresponding total labour cost for the employer.” It doesn’t account for adjustments such as tax breaks offered to families with children. It also doesn’t allow for wild variations in tax compliance that can turn nominal tax rates into suggestions when you’re discussing the difference between 83 percent compliance in the U.S., 62 percent compliance in Italy, and 70 percent in Belgium, where tax evasion is something of a national sport. But the tax wedge allows us to roughly contrast the cost of government in Belgium with that in Spain or the U.S.

It turns out governments offering lots of “free” stuff to the public, like health care and higher education, charge dearly for such services. You won’t have to pay for that appointment or a degree, but you’ll also never see somewhere between one-third and half of what you should be taking home in pay.

And the price keeps going up.

Keep reading

Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ Would Boost Subsidies for Rich Farmers

It should be clear by now that, despite the assurances from President Donald Trump and his allies in government, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act—which passed the U.S. House of Representatives last month—not only won’t reduce the federal budget deficit but will in fact increase the nation’s debt load by $2.4 trillion over the next decade.

Given that Trump came into office promising to cut federal spending, it’s worth looking at how Trump’s bill does the opposite of what he and other Republicans say it does. And one of the more egregious things it does is boost corporate welfare for wealthy farmers.

“The government provides agricultural subsidies—monetary payments and other types of support—to farmers or agribusinesses,” says the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). “While some subsidies are given to promote specific farming practices, others focus on research and development, conservation practices, disaster aid, marketing, nutrition assistance, risk mitigation, and more.”

“In reality, this support is highly skewed toward the five major ‘program’ commodities of corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, and rice,” according to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), an environmental advocacy organization. “Despite the rhetoric of ‘preserving the family farm,’ the vast majority of farmers do not benefit from federal farm subsidy programs and most of the subsidies go to the largest and most financially secure farm operations.”

The new bill will only make the problem worse: According to an analysis by the American Farm Bureau Federation, the bill “would increase agriculture-facing programs spending by $56.6 billion over the next decade,” of which “$52.3 billion is tied to enhancements in the farm safety net.”

That “farm safety net” comprises most agricultural subsidy spending in any given year. It includes price and revenue guarantees for certain crops, ensuring farmers earn a set minimum on staples like corn and soybeans, as well as crop insurance assistance, covering up to 60 percent of farmers’ insurance premiums in the event of price declines or poor harvests.

The programs are a bad deal for taxpayers—indeed, for anybody but the very wealthiest agribusinesses. “Just in the last 10 years, crop insurance agents and the 14 companies the USDA allows to sell and service crop insurance policies…received almost $33.3 billion from the federal Crop Insurance Program,” EWG Midwest director Anne Schechinger wrote in 2023. “In some years, up to one-third of crop insurance payments are made to companies and agents, not farmers.”

Keep reading

Marijuana Companies Are Blocked From COVID-Era Employee Retention Tax Credits Under 280E Penalty, Federal Court Says

In yet another wrinkle stemming from the ongoing federal prohibition on marijuana, a U.S. district court has ruled that an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax rule prevents state-legal cannabis companies from being eligible for refunds of employee retention credits (ERCs), which helped businesses continue to pay workers during early COVID-era shutdowns.

In the decision, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington ruled that “nothing in the plain text of [IRS code] Section 280E limits its application to income tax credits,” rejecting arguments from plaintiffs.

The government, meanwhile, contended that the Section 280E prohibits any and all tax credits, including refunds of the COVID-era ERCs, which are typically refundable for other businesses.

On May 9, the court granted the government’s motion to dismiss the the case, Solstice Holdings v. U.S.

Section 280E disallows standard tax deductions and tax credits for businesses that traffic in Schedule I or II substances. It applies even in cases where businesses are operating in compliance with state law.

The law firm Holland & Hart said in a post about the new ruling that it appears to be “the first case where a court has addressed the application of IRC § 280E to ERC.”

Another law firm, GreenspoonMarder, noted in post about the district court opinion that many cannabis businesses applied for the ERC during the pandemic—and many received it.

“Some were deemed ‘essential’ and had to stay open during the pandemic despite the higher costs associated with continued operations during the pandemic and various restrictions that rendered it much more difficult to visit their stores,” attorneys Nick Richards and Sabrina Strand wrote recently.

“When the ERC first came out, there was a question as to whether it was available to cannabis companies because it creates a tax credit that Section 280E may disallow,” the post points out. “There was also an argument that it didn’t apply to the ERC, because Section 280E is part of Section A of the [Internal Revenue Code], which concerns income rather than employment taxes. At least one court now disagrees.”

Both law firms suggest the case out of Washington State creates a standard across all states within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. GreenspoonMarder, for example, says the ruling “technically only applies to companies located in the 9th Circuit.”

“That said, as the only opinion on this subject,” lawyers wrote, “the IRS may look to it as authority regardless of whether taxpayers are in one of the nine states located in the Circuit.”

Keep reading

Trump’s Federal Budget Cuts Could Boost Marijuana Legalization Efforts As States Seek New Revenue, Congresswoman Says

A Democratic congresswoman says the Trump administration’s push to make states pay a larger share for public services such as food assistance and health care amid his efforts to cut federal spending might ultimately “push them in the direction of legalizing marijuana” so they can offset those costs with cannabis tax revenue.

In an interview on the National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA) Voice of Cannabis podcast that was released on Thursday, Congressional Cannabis Caucus co-chair Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV) commented on a wide range of marijuana policy issues—including bipartisan legalization legislation, stalled action on federal reform and the destigmatization of cannabis use in her state after enacting an adult-use marijuana market.

One of the “only good things that comes out of the policy of the White House is that they are pushing more things to the states to pay for—like [Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)] and like Medicaid—and so states may be looking for additional sources of revenue,” Titus said. “That may push them in the direction of legalizing marijuana, to some extent, so they can get that tax revenue generated.”

Titus said the lawmakers who back reform were initially “optimistic” about the prospects of a federal policy change under President Donald Trump because of comments he made on the campaign trail in favor of rescheduling, industry banking access and a Florida adult-use legalization ballot initiative left the impression “he was going to be supportive.”

“Now we’ve seen that kind of stall, and we have this crazy secretary of [the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)] that I think is on drugs,” the congresswoman said, referencing Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “I don’t know where he’s coming from, and so it’s hard to read what the administration is going to do and if they’re going to make it a priority and if they’re going to weigh in. So that’s another element of the politics that we have to keep in mind.”

Keep reading

State Department Weighing $500 Million Grant to Controversial Gaza Aid Group: Report

According to The New Arab, the State Department is considering a massive distribution to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). The new Israeli and US-backed agency has been accused by human rights groups of being a tool of Tel Aviv to complete the ethnic cleansing of Gaza rather than an organization attempting to feed the starving people of the Strip.

Citing two current and two former officials, the outlet reported that the State Department is considering a $500 million transfer to the GHF. The money would fund the organization for about six months.

Responding to an inquiry by the Libertarian Institute, the State Department press office declined to confirm the report, only stating that the GHF is “an independent organization” that “currently does not receive [US government] funding.” It directed further questions to the organization itself, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Some US officials have opposed the large grant, raising concerns related to incidents when Israeli forces killed scores of Palestinians near GHF aid sites.

The GHF has met intense criticism for being unprepared to provide food and other desperately needed supplies in Gaza. UN and other aid agencies previously used established distribution networks to feed the millions of people languishing under the Israeli blockade. However, since the GHF was established in February, Israel has refused to allow UN and international agencies to bring aid into Gaza in favor of the new organization.

In the first weeks of the GHF operations in Gaza, Israeli forces killed scores of Palestinians attempting to get food, prompting top officials and firms to cut ties with the agency. GHF’s previous executive director, Jake Wood, resigned just hours before the organization began operating in the Strip, arguing the group’s plans were not in line with “humanitarian principles.”

Reverend Johnnie Moore, an American evangelical Christian leader and staunch Zionist, took over Wood’s role last week.

Keep reading