Tag: taxes

Trump Proposes $2,000 Check to Americans From Tariff Revenues

President Donald Trump announced on Nov. 9 plans to offer Americans outside of “high income” brackets $2,000 each out of his administration’s tariff revenues.

“We are taking in Trillions of Dollars and will soon begin paying down our ENORMOUS DEBT, $37 Trillion,” Trump wrote on social media. “Record Investment in the USA, plants and factories going up all over the place. A dividend of at least $2000 a person (not including high income people!) will be paid to everyone.”

The proposal would likely need the support of Congress to pass. In July, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) introduced the American Worker Rebate Act, which aimed to use tariff revenue for tax rebates of at least $600 per adult and child, determined by income level.

Trump had also first floated the idea of giving Americans a $2,000 “dividend” funded by tariff revenue while speaking with One America News Network in early October, when he said the federal government could use some of the revenue to issue rebate checks.

The president’s announcement on Nov. 9 came just days after the Supreme Court heard arguments over the legality of his global tariff agenda imposed earlier this year. Justices probed Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which allows presidents to regulate imports in response to emergencies. Congress, through Article 1 of the Constitution, has the authority to impose tariffs.

Some justices seemed skeptical of Trump’s use of that law to impose tariffs, while others were more difficult to read, casting uncertainty over the eventual ruling and what it will mean for the president’s tariff agenda.

Keep reading

Trump team is secretly handing out massive tax breaks to wealthy American corporations: report

The Trump administration has been giving additional massive tax breaks to uber-wealthy corporations through under-the-radar notices, according to a report.

Through proposed regulations, the Treasury Department has offered tax relief to private equity firms, crypto companies, foreign real estate investors, and other large corporations, the New York Times first reported.

For example, in October, the IRS issued new proposed regulations that would provide breaks to foreign investors in U.S. real estate. In August, the IRS proposed a rollback of rules to prevent multinational corporations from dodging taxes by claiming duplicate losses in multiple countries.

The notices have not made headlines, but have been flagged by accounting and consulting firms.

“Treasury has clearly been enacting unlegislated tax cuts,” Kyle Pomerleau, a senior fellow at the think-tank American Enterprise Institute, told the Times. “Congress determines tax law. Treasury undermines this constitutional principle when it asserts more authority over the structure of the tax code than Congress provides it.”

The recent IRS tax notices tack on to the tax relief laid out in President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” Act, which included the extension of the so-called “Trump tax cuts” from 2017 that the Congressional Budget Office estimated would reduce tax revenue by $4 trillion in the next decade.

The Independent has contacted the Treasury Department for comment.

Keep reading

Deal Reached To End The Government Shutdown

After more than a month of gridlock, the U.S. Senate has reached a bipartisan deal to reopen the federal government. The agreement, struck after days of tense negotiations, appears to have the backing of both Senate Democrats and Republicans, paving the way for the shutdown to finally end.

The deal was spearheaded by Senators Angus King (I-Maine), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), and Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), working alongside several GOP colleagues. According to sources familiar with the talks who spoke to Politico, the agreement has “more than enough” Democratic support to advance through the Senate. Lawmakers are expected to vote Sunday night to advance the House-passed stopgap measure, which will serve as the vehicle for the broader funding package.

The new agreement would fund several key areas of government for the rest of the fiscal year, including the Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs, military construction projects, and congressional operations. All remaining agencies would be funded through January 30 under a continuing resolution released Sunday evening.

As part of the compromise, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has agreed to give Democrats a vote in December on extending Affordable Care Act subsidies set to expire at the end of the year. Importantly, Democrats will be able to determine which version of that extension receives consideration. The deal also ensures that federal workers who were furloughed or laid off during the shutdown will be rehired and receive back pay once the government reopens.

The announcement follows growing pressure on lawmakers as the shutdown entered its sixth week, disrupting pay for hundreds of thousands of federal employees, halting nonessential services, and straining public patience. The political standoff, which began over disagreements surrounding Obamacare subsidies and long-term spending levels, had become a major test for both parties.

President Donald Trump, who has publicly backed Senate Republicans throughout the negotiations, reportedly supports the agreement. Conservative commentators praised the outcome, arguing that the deal heavily favors the GOP’s negotiating position.

“President Trump successfully gave Senate Republicans unbelievable leverage, forcing ‘moderate’ Democrats to cave,” political commentator Eric Daugherty wrote on X. “Funding set to be through Jan. 30th. No Obamacare subsidies. The only main GOP concession? Simply allow an ACA vote next month. No guarantee on passing or supporting it.”

Others hailed the deal as a strategic victory for Trump, pointing out that Democrats failed to secure new spending commitments or long-term extensions of ACA provisions.

Keep reading

Trump administration demands states ‘undo’ full SNAP payouts as states warn of ‘catastrophic impact’

President Donald Trump’s administration is demanding states “undo” full SNAP benefits paid out under judges’ orders last week, now that the U.S. Supreme Court has stayed those rulings, marking the latest swing in a seesawing legal battle over the anti-hunger program used by 42 million Americans.

The demand from the U.S. Department of Agriculture came as more than two dozen states warned of “catastrophic operational disruptions” if the Trump administration does not reimburse them for those SNAP benefits they authorized before the Supreme Court’s stay.

Nonprofits and Democratic attorneys general sued to force the Trump administration to maintain the program in November despite the ongoing government shutdown. They won the favorable rulings last week, leading to the swift release of benefits to millions in several states, and the Trump administration belatedly said the program could continue.

On Friday night, however, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson temporarily paused the two rulings ordering the SNAP disbursement while the nation’s highest court considered the Trump administration’s appeal. That led the Department of Agriculture on Saturday to write state SNAP directors to warn them it now considers payments under the prior orders “unauthorized.”

States could face penalties for paying benefits

“To the extent States sent full SNAP payment files for November 2025, this was unauthorized,” Patrick Penn, deputy undersecretary of Agriculture, wrote to state SNAP directors. “Accordingly, States must immediately undo any steps taken to issue full SNAP benefits for November 2025.”

Penn warned that states could face penalties if they did not comply. It was unclear if the directive applies to states that used their own funds to keep the program alive or to ones relying on federal money entirely. The Department of Agriculture did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In a filing in federal court on Sunday, the agency said states moved too quickly and erroneously released full money SNAP Benefits after last week’s rulings.

U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, a Republican, on Sunday called the directive “shocking” if it applies to states, like hers, that used their own money to prop up the program.

“It’s one thing if the federal government is going to continue its level of appeal through the courts to say, no, this can’t be done,” Murkowski said. “But when you are telling the states that have said this is a significant enough issue in our state, we’re going to find resources, backfill or front load, whatever term you want, to help our people, those states should not be penalized.”

Keep reading

Woman Exposes Massive Medicaid Fraud Scheme in Democrat-Run Minnesota

Medicaid’s collapse into waste and fraud hit home for Erna Hammerschmidt, exposing how career politicians built a system they can no longer control.

After overcoming years of addiction and rebuilding her life, Erna discovered that her name had been used to bill the government for services she never received. 

A company she had never even met was charging taxpayers nearly $200 several times a week, claiming to have provided “mental health services.” 

It is one of countless examples of how America’s welfare bureaucracy—especially under Democrat-led states such as Minnesota—has turned into a money pipeline for fraudsters.

The Minnesota Department of Human Services has been under fire for years for failing to detect and stop widespread Medicaid and housing assistance scams. 

Under failing Governor Tim Walz, the department has wasted millions through weak oversight, political favoritism, and bloated contracts handed to “community care” groups that exist only on paper. 

These programs were meant to help people like Erna, not exploit them. 

But instead of accountability, taxpayers received excuses, “internal reviews,” and bureaucrats promising to “expand data analytics.” That means more consultants, more red tape, and no real results.

Donald Trump warned about this years ago. He is the only national leader with the courage to say what others were afraid to admit—the welfare bureaucracy in America is corrupt from top to bottom. 

It is not a matter of a few “bad actors”; rather, it is a system designed to enrich politically connected insiders. 

While Democrats in Minnesota pretend that fraud is a “racial issue,” as the owner of the company claimed, Trump’s message is clear: every dollar stolen from Medicaid is a dollar stolen from honest taxpayers and families who truly need help.

The Republican establishment deserves no credit either. 

Keep reading

Tariffs, Tobacco, and Policy Whiplash

When politicians talk tough on trade, they usually promise to protect American jobs. But sometimes those gestures do the opposite. The Trump administration’s proposed 100 percent tariff on large cigars imported from Nicaragua is a case in point. According to my latest research, the tariff would shrink US GDP by $1.26 billion, reduce total output by $2.06 billion, eliminate nearly 18,000 jobs, and cost state and local governments $95 million in tax revenue.

There is no domestic industry to protect. The United States produces almost no large cigars, which are rolled by hand from long tobacco leaves and sold through tobacconists, cigar lounges, and small brick-and-mortar shops. Roughly 60 percent of all 430 million cigars imported each year come from Nicaragua. Doubling landed import costs would devastate the 3,500 retailers and 50,000 workers whose livelihoods depend on that trade.

Worse, this tariff reverses one of the administration’s genuine policy successes—its early effort to limit the Food and Drug Administration’s overreach into small-batch cigars and other low-risk nicotine products. It also repeats the same arbitrary logic behind the FDA’s recent warning letter to NOAT—a Swedish company selling mild, recyclable nicotine pouches already cleared for sale in Europe. In both cases, symbolic toughness trumps scientific and economic sense.

Keep reading

Scotland’s Chief Constable lands taxpayers with £134,000 expenses bill to help pay for her second home

Scotland’s Chief Constable Jo Farrell has landed taxpayers with an eye-watering £134,000 bill to help her buy a second home, the Mail on Sunday can reveal.

The police chief – who earns £270,000-a-year – has bought a £595,000 second home in an upmarket Edinburgh suburb while keeping on her £1 million five-bedroomed family home 100 miles away in Northumberland.

Police Scotland’s annual accounts – due to be published later this month – reveal Ms Farrell received relocation expenses of £69,901 – while oversight body the taxpayer-funded Scottish Police Authority (SPA) paid out additional “tax costs” of £64,525.

It is thought that part of the expenses claim relates to Land and Building Transaction Tax (LBTT) and Additional Dwelling Supplement (ADS) – a controversial extra tax introduced by the SNP government for all second homeowners.

Details of the huge bill come just days after the Chief Constable demanded an extra £140 million from the Scottish government and said Police Scotland was at a ‘crossroads’ financially and it would have to slash officer numbers if ministers short-changed it.

The “benefits in kind” attributed by the SPA to Ms Farrell are the equivalent of four new police recruits’ starting salary of £31,400.

Last night Scottish Conservative leader, Russell Findlay, MSP, hit out at the SPA approved reimbursement and called for a probe into the rules on police relocation expenses.

He said: ‘Struggling frontline officers and the paying public might question whether such huge sums of taxpayers’ cash should be spent on a second home for a chief constable who’s on more than £260,000.

‘This highly generous deal must now be subject to proper scrutiny and a full public explanation from Police Scotland, the SPA and the SNP government. If such largesse is within the rules, then the rules should be looked at.

‘Taxpayers are sick of being relentlessly hammered by SNP ministers who far too often spend their cash with reckless abandon.’

Under ‘Remuneration’ in Police Scotland’s annual accounts it is noted: ‘Jo Farrell received taxable relocation expenses of £69,901 (£134,426 including tax costs paid). These costs are in line with the Chief Officer relocation procedure. The costs facilitate the reimbursement of the incremental accommodation costs upon the recruitment or transfer of Chief Officers.’

The rules on chief officer relocation expenses state the retention of a second home may be considered only in “exceptional circumstances” and that LBTT and ADS may be eligible for reimbursement.

It is understood the Chief Constable, who joined Police Scotland in October 2023, makes frequent trips back to the Northumberland home she bought in May 2023 with her retired police officer husband Peter.

In August 2024, the couple bought a two-bedroom apartment in a well-known property hotspot in central Edinburgh.

The total LBTT and ADS tax due on a property worth £595,000 would total £68,500

Due to strong demand in the capital, similar properties increase in value by an average of 5 per cent annually, meaning the Farrells could benefit from a £150,000 uplift in just five years.

Keep reading

USAID and Clintons behind Bangladesh govt overthrow – ex-minister

The 2024 riots in Bangladesh, which led to the ousting of then Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, were backed by USAID and Hillary Clinton’s family, a former cabinet minister and chief negotiator, Mohibul Hasan Chowdhury, has told RT in an exclusive interview which will be broadcast on Monday.

“Certain actions of some NGOs, especially from the United States – naming a few, I mean USAID, for example, or the International Republican Institute. They were running campaigns against our government for a while, since 2018,” Chowdhury, who served as a minister in Hasina’s cabinet and was at the heart of negotiations during the crisis, has told RT’s Runjun Sharma.

The accusations come more than a year after Hasina’s dramatic fall from power. In August 2024, weeks of student-led protests against job quotas spiraled into nationwide violence, claiming over 700 lives, according to the interim government’s tally.

Hasina, who had led Bangladesh for 15 years at the head of her Awami League party, fled the country as crowds stormed her residence. Nobel Peace Prize laureate Muhammad Yunus became the chief adviser of the interim government.

According to Chowdhury, the unrest was not a spontaneous youth revolt but a “carefully planned” operation bankrolled by Western interests.

“There is a nexus between the Clinton family, and the interim Yunus regime from a very long past,” he alleged. “These activities were going on for a long time. They weren’t very open, but funding of clandestine NGOs was going on. They were hell-bent on changing the government in Bangladesh.”

He zeroed in on the flow of US aid, questioning where millions in USAID dollars had vanished. “IRI was active, USAID’s fundings were going to nowhere. Where had that money gone to? It was destined for regime change activities.”

Keep reading

The Shutdown’s Fallout Spreads Further

The U.S. government shutdown has entered its 39th day, making it the longest funding gap in U.S. history.

The consequences of the standstill are far-reaching, with food benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, having already come to a halt at the weekend. While a judge has ordered the Trump administration to release full funding for November food stamps by the end of today, the administration asked an appeals court to block the ruling. Meanwhile, around 1.4 million federal employees are on unpaid leave or working without pay until funding is restored and 10 percent of flights at 40 major U.S. airports have been cut amid air traffic control safety concerns. Trump has responded to these events by calling for Republicans to abolish the Senate filibuster rule that requires the 60-vote majority for legislation to pass.

As Statista’s Anna Fleck details below, a recent wave of surveys by polling company YouGov illustrates how the number of adults who feel they are personally being affected by the shutdown is growing.

Keep reading

The Climate Cult Fails Europe

The roadmap is already set: in the coming years, the EU and its member states will make both businesses and consumers pay even more for CO2 emissions. BASF CEO Markus Kamieth warns of the enormous destructive potential of this policy.

Truth comes on pigeon feet — Friedrich Nietzsche already knew that. And apparently, the same applies to European climate policy: slowly, but inevitably, the reality of the true costs of the green transformation and its impact on Germany’s industrial foundation is emerging.

On October 29, BASF’s CEO Markus Kamieth faced the press during the quarterly results presentation. What he announced was another cold shower for anyone still hoping for a new economic miracle.

Weak Results in a Stable Environment

The world’s largest chemical company reported a 3% decline in revenue in Q3 2025 compared to last year, while EBITDA fell by 5%. BASF is under massive pressure and has already cut 1,400 jobs to meet growing cost pressures.

BASF’s numbers have to be seen against the backdrop of a slowly recovering global economic cycle. The U.S. economy, growing nearly 4%, is driving strong demand. Economies in China and India continue to expand dynamically, particularly in sectors critical to the chemical industry.

While the global economy gains momentum, BASF — like much of Germany’s chemical sector and the broader industry — continues to lose ground.

The company’s main site in Ludwigshafen is hit hardest, leaving its 33,000 employees facing an uncertain future.

Criticism of the Climate Course

Kamieth was unexpectedly outspoken during the presentation. In addition to criticizing EU trade policy and rising energy costs in Germany, he struck at a rarely openly discussed wound: the EU’s climate policy.

Kamieth didn’t mince words, calling the European CO2 emissions trading system (EU ETS 2) what it is: an attack on Europe’s industrial foundation.

For BASF alone, if the current climate course within CO2 trading remains unchanged, annual additional costs of around €1 billion will arise from 2027 onward, when exemptions are removed — costs borne exclusively by European industry, while the rest of the world simply does not participate.

Kamieth hit a sore spot. EU industry is being financially squeezed by an ideologized CO2 policy. Deindustrialization is — whether unspoken or suppressed — the result of Brussels’ policies and their national enforcers, whose only response to their self-inflicted disaster is ever-new subsidies.

Keep reading