Taxation

Subterms

    Latest story

    150 Shares92 Views

    Mamdani’s Win Has Put Buses in the Spotlight. Should They Be Free?

    by

    The lowly New York City bus is getting new attention thanks to Zohran Mamdani’s vow to make the service free for all. But can free also mean fast?New York City buses are slow, often crowded and overshadowed by the subway. But thanks to a surprise role in the mayoral election campaign, the humble bus is suddenly in the spotlight.Zohran Mamdani, the Queens assemblyman who in the Democratic primary last week roundly defeated a crowded field that included former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, has vowed to make the city’s bus service — a network of 348 routes that carries 1.4 million passengers a day — free for all.The promise marks an unlikely star turn for a branch of the transit system that generally serves passengers who are older and poorer than those riding the subway. At Mr. Mamdani’s rallies about the high cost of rent and child care, the bus fare has become a symbol of the city’s affordability crisis, especially for residents of neighborhoods with limited access to trains.Nearly one in five New Yorkers said they struggled to pay for subway and bus fare in 2023, according to a report by Community Service Society of New York, an anti-poverty group. And the fare, currently $2.90 for both buses and subways, is expected to increase to around $3 early next year.Mr. Mamdani is now among the most high-profile supporters of the idea, popular among some left-leaning transit advocates, that the bus system should be treated as a tax-funded service like public schools and law enforcement.But the plan has split transit supporters who disagree on whether subsidizing the bus system is worth forgoing more than $800 million a year in fare revenue from bus riders, at a time when federal funds for New York State could prove unreliable. And for passengers who have stood in a packed bus, the concern is simpler still: Can free also mean fast?We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 175 Shares93 Views

      in Elections

      Trump May Get His ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ but the G.O.P. Will Pay a Price

      by

      And so will many voters.There will be many short- and long-term consequences if Republicans succeed in passing President Trump’s signature policy bill, as they aim to do before the July 4 holiday, David Leonhardt, the director of the Times editorial board, tells the national politics writer Michelle Cottle in this episode of “The Opinions.”Trump May Get His ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ but the G.O.P. Will Pay a PriceAnd so will many voters.Below is a transcript of an episode of “The Opinions.” We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on the NYT Audio App, Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts.The transcript has been lightly edited for length and clarity.Michelle Cottle: I’m Michelle Cottle and I cover national politics for Times Opinion. So with the July 4 weekend looming, I thought we’d talk about a different kind of fireworks: that is, President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” and as always, I hope the air quotes there are audible for everybody.But that bill looks like it is on track for passage. From Medicaid cuts to tax breaks for the rich, it is a lot. Thankfully with me to talk about this is David Leonhardt, the fearless director of the New York Times editorial board, who has some very pointed thoughts on the matter. So let’s just get to it. David, welcome.David Leonhardt: Thank you, Michelle. It’s great to be talking with you.Cottle: I’m so excited, but warning to all: We are recording on Monday midday and even as we speak, the Senate is brawling its way through to a final vote. So the situation is fluid and could change the details by the time you all hear this.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares105 Views

      in Elections

      We Shouldn’t Have Billionaires, Mamdani Says

      by

      Appearing on “Meet the Press” days after the mayoral primary, Zohran Mamdani defended his proposals to make New York City more affordable and to increase taxes on the wealthy.Zohran Mamdani, who campaigned for mayor on the theme of making New York City more affordable, said in a major national television interview that during a time of rising inequality, “I don’t think we should have billionaires.”Mr. Mamdani, the likely winner of the Democratic primary for mayor of New York, said in an appearance on “Meet the Press” on Sunday that more equality is needed across the city, state and country, and that he looked forward to working “with everyone, including billionaires, to make a city that is fairer for all of them.”At the same time, Mr. Mamdani, a democratic socialist, asserted that he is not a communist, a response to an attack from President Trump. “I have already had to start to get used to the fact that the president will talk about how I look, how I sound, where I’m from, who I am — ultimately because he wants to distract from what I’m fighting for,” Mr. Mamdani said.But one question he continued to sidestep was whether he would denounce the phrase “globalize the intifada,” after he declined to condemn it during a podcast interview before the primary.The slogan is a rallying cry for liberation among Palestinians and their supporters, but many Jews consider it a call to violence invoking resistance movements of the 1980s and 2000s.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 175 Shares72 Views

      in Elections

      Free Buses and Child Care. A Rent Freeze. Can Zohran Mamdani Achieve His Plans?

      by

      The Democratic mayoral hopeful promises free child care, a $30 minimum wage and a massive tax hike on the city’s corporations. But much is not within a mayor’s control.Zohran Mamdani’s rapid rise from upstart mayoral hopeful to likely winner of the Democratic primary for mayor of New York City was propelled by the simple message that the city was too expensive — and that he had plans that would fix it.Mr. Mamdani’s singular focus on the city’s affordability crisis resonated, especially with young voters. They embraced his populist promises to make bus service free, freeze rents on stabilized apartments, build city-owned grocery stores and offer free early child care.But whether his campaign promises can become reality is an open question — and important parts of Mr. Mamdani’s platform are not solely in a mayor’s control.While some of his left-leaning policy ideas are not entirely new — rents have been frozen before, for example — others would represent a dramatic reimagining of city government.And much of Mr. Mamdani’s agenda relies in large measure on increasing revenue through taxes on businesses and the wealthy — part of an overarching vision to rethink how the city funds expanded social programs. Along with raising income taxes, he has pledged to shift the property tax burden “from the outer boroughs to more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods,” according to his campaign website.Already, Mr. Mamdani’s plans, in line with his democratic socialist political affiliation, have prompted intense backlash from business leaders who say he poses a danger to New York’s economy. In private meetings, power brokers are discussing how to mount a strong challenge to Mr. Mamdani in the November general election.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares95 Views

      in Elections

      Eric Adams Meets With Business Leaders Desperate to Stop Mamdani’s Rise

      by

      Daniel Loeb, the hedge fund manager, and some other New York City business leaders are aghast at Zohran Mamdani’s success in the Democratic mayoral primary and are considering backing Mr. Adams in the general election.In a conference room in Manhattan on Wednesday night, Mayor Eric Adams and Daniel S. Loeb, the hedge fund manager, met with other business leaders and political brokers to discuss how to stop the rise of Zohran Mamdani and possibly bolster Mr. Adams’s re-election campaign.The business leaders were impressed that Mr. Adams was already staging a public fight against Mr. Mamdani, several people familiar with the meeting said. Earlier in the day, during an interview on “Fox & Friends,” Mr. Adams called Mr. Mamdani a “snake-oil salesman.”Mr. Mamdani, a democratic socialist state assemblyman from Queens, on Tuesday shocked the New York political establishment by outperforming Andrew M. Cuomo, the former New York governor, in the Democratic primary for mayor. Mr. Cuomo is now considering whether to run as an independent in the general election, or end his campaign altogether.Should Mr. Cuomo withdraw, Mr. Mamdani is poised to face off against Mr. Adams, who is running as an independent; Curtis Sliwa, the Republican founder of the Guardian Angels; and Jim Walden, a lawyer also running as an independent.The prospect of Mr. Mamdani’s campaigning as the Democratic standard-bearer in a city where Democrats outnumber Republicans by six to one has sent shivers down the spines of many New York business leaders, who recoil at his plans for expansive new government programs funded with tax increases on corporations and the wealthiest New Yorkers. Some have quickly begun to throw their support behind the incumbent mayor, despite the scandals that have tarnished his tenure.Andrew Epstein, a spokesman for Mr. Mamdani, said the businessmen at the meeting were simply scared of “our plan to tax them a little bit more to fund an agenda to lower the cost of living and improve the quality of life for all New Yorkers.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares173 Views

      in Elections

      Business Lobbyists Scramble to Kill $100 Billion ‘Revenge Tax’

      by

      Critics contend that the measure will scare off the foreign investment that President Trump wants to attract.Business lobbyists are working to kill a measure in the Republican tax policy legislation that would punish companies based in countries that try to collect new taxes from American firms.The push comes as Senate Republicans are preparing to unveil their domestic policy bill on Monday, which will ultimately need to be passed and merged with the legislation that the House passed last month. That bill imposes a so-called revenge tax on foreign companies that try to enforce the terms of a 2021 global minimum tax agreement or impose digital services taxes on American technology companies.The legislation would substantially increase the tax bills for many foreign companies that operate in the United States, raising more than $100 billion over a decade. Critics argue that the provision would chill foreign investment at a time when the Trump administration is trying to attract international money.“I think the president has been pretty unequivocal on where he stands on wanting more investment into the U.S. from international companies,” said Jonathan Samford, chief executive of the Global Business Alliance, which lobbies on behalf of international businesses in the U.S.Mr. Samford added that the measure “directly contradicts the president’s investment vision.”The legislation is poised to reignite international tax and trade wars that have been on hiatus as policymakers around the world grapple with how to overhaul the global tax system. It has also stoked anxiety among Wall Street investors and is expected to be a topic of discussion as leaders of the Group of 7 countries gather in Canada this week for a summit.Since taking office, President Trump has made clear that he wants nothing to do with a 2021 deal brokered by the Biden administration that aimed to rewrite the rules of how the world’s largest companies would be taxed around the globe. That deal, which was agreed to by the G7, created a new global minimum tax rate of at least 15 percent that companies would have to pay, regardless of their headquarter location. The aim was to prevent countries from lowering their tax rates as a way to attract multinational corporations, creating a “race to the bottom” in taxation that left nations with fiscal shortfalls.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Officials Unveil Budget Cuts to Aid for Health, Housing and Research

      by

      The new blueprint shows that a vast array of education, health, housing and labor programs would be hit, including aid for college and cancer research.The Trump administration on Friday unveiled fuller details of its proposal to slash about $163 billion in federal spending next fiscal year, offering a more intricate glimpse into the vast array of education, health, housing and labor programs that would be hit by the deepest cuts.The many spending reductions throughout the roughly 1,220-page document and agency blueprints underscored President Trump’s desire to foster a vast transformation in Washington. His budget seeks to reduce the size of government and its reach into Americans lives, including services to the poor.The new proposal reaffirmed the president’s recommendation to set federal spending levels at their lowest in modern history, as the White House first sketched out in its initial submission to Congress transmitted in early May. But it offered new details about the ways in which Mr. Trump hoped to achieve the savings, and the many functions of government that could be affected as a result.The White House budget is not a matter of law. Ultimately, it is up to Congress to determine the budget, and in recent years it has routinely discarded many of the president’s proposals. Lawmakers are only starting to embark on the annual process, with government funding set to expire at the end of September.The updated budget reiterated the president’s pursuit of deep reductions for nearly every major federal agency, reserving its steepest cuts for foreign aid, medical research, tax enforcement and a slew of anti-poverty programs, including rental assistance. The White House restated its plan to seek a $33 billion cut at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, for example, and another $33 billion reduction at the Department of Health and Human Services.Targeting the Education Department, the president again put forward a roughly $12 billion cut, seeking to eliminate dozens of programs while unveiling new changes to Pell grants, which help low-income students pay for college.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Japan’s Debt, Now Twice the Size of Its Economy, Forces Hard Choices

      by

      Japan’s government faces pressure to curtail debt-fueled spending that some argue has staved off populist waves.Japan, which has the highest government debt among leading economies, is finding it difficult to spend like it used to.Debt-fueled public spending, enabled by low interest rates, has long been a way to address the country’s problems. Struggling farmers and emptying countrysides received generous payments from the central government. Relief aid during the Covid-19 pandemic morphed into new outlays for defense and subsidies to help consumers weather inflation.The spending continued even as more social security funding was needed for Japan’s growing number of seniors. Government debt has ballooned to nearly $9 trillion — more than double the size of the economy.Now, ahead of a heavily contested summer election, Japan’s ruling party is facing pressure to add even more debt. Small businesses hurting from U.S. tariffs are calling for government aid, and households squeezed by rising prices are demanding a rollback in taxes.But as the Bank of Japan moves away from the negative interest rates that for years made it easy for the government to borrow, the limits on spending are more stark.Recently, the market for Japanese government bonds has reflected concern about the country’s fiscal health. The yields on long-term bonds, an indication of investor confidence in the government’s ability to pay back its debts, rose to record highs at one point last week. And weaker-than-expected demand for an auction of 40-year bonds on Wednesday kept investors on edge.

      .dw-chart-subhed {
      line-height: 1;
      margin-bottom: 6px;
      font-family: nyt-franklin;
      color: #121212;
      font-size: 15px;
      font-weight: 700;
      }

      Japan 30-year government bond yield
      Source: FactSetBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Tax Cuts Now Could Lead to Rising Rates Later. Here’s How to Protect Yourself.

      by

      The swelling budget deficit makes future tax increases likely, our columnist says, even if taxes are going down now. Hedge your bets with a concept from investing — diversification.Investors must deal with uncertainty every day. Without knowing what the markets will bring, they try to get good returns without bearing excessive risk.The classic solution is diversification — holding a broad array of global stocks and bonds. By spreading your risk, you obtain some protection against a disaster in any single holding. Even through the chaos in the markets brought about by President Trump’s on-again-off-again tariffs, well-diversified portfolios have been shielded from the wildest swings in the markets.This survival strategy makes sense in thinking about your taxes, too.Every taxpayer must deal with at least two kinds of uncertainty. First, you don’t know exactly what your income will be in the future. And far more irksome, you don’t know what the tax code will be next year, or over the next decade or two. That’s especially true now, because of the likelihood of a swelling budget deficit stemming from the Trump administration’s tax and budget policies.Consider the budget negotiations underway in Congress. Will they mean higher or lower taxes in the future? There are major disagreements and it’s not clear how they’ll turn out. Yet this much seems evident: There is little appetite in the White House or Congress for short-term tax increases. So you may conclude that your taxes will stay the same or even be lower, and plan accordingly.But not so fast. It’s easy to construct an argument suggesting that whatever happens this year, taxes must rise, and fairly quickly. After all, there are already signs that the bond market is reacting negatively to the prospect of ever widening federal budget deficits, which seem baked into every version of the Republican tax legislation now under consideration.The deficit may become so high in the years ahead, in fact, that the United States may not be able to finance all of its debt cheaply. Moody’s said as much earlier this month, when it downgraded the credit rating of the United States, warning that political dysfunction is imperiling the nation’s financial future. It’s easy to imagine a pushback by financial markets so powerful that tax rates will need to increase in the future — even if Congress reduces them for most people now.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More