LyrArc Article Gist
The European Union Commission says Ireland must recover 13 billion euros in back taxes for giving tax preferences to Apple that are against EU rules. The EU Commission says Ireland allowed Apple to pay a corporate tax rate of 1% on its European profits in 2003, and .005% in 2014. The EU Commissioner says the use of Ireland as the place where Apple pays taxes on operations in Europe has no base in reality, as most profits are earned in other countries outside Ireland. Taxable profits of Apple "did not correspond to economic reality," according to Ms. Vestager, the EU Commissioner.  In the current environment where political upheaval is unsettling the democratic process in the U.S., Britain, Spain, France and Italy, as well as in Brazil and other countries in the developing world- because of deep recessions, and efforts to cut the deficits with deep cuts in state spending including in education and healthcare, basic services- the moves by companies to reduce taxes to these absurdly low levels such as .005% when other companies in the EU are paying 12.5%, is becoming increasingly unpopular. As pointed out in this BBC News article this sounds like the way Carnegie, Rockefeller and Vanderbilt operated during the late 19th century, and were seen as operating in a manner that was above the law. Janet Yellen pointed out at a Boston Fed Conference on inequality in Oct 2014 that the bottom half of the distribution or 62 million households in the U.S. in 2013, had a net worth of about $10,000, One quarter of these households had a net worth of zero dollars. The working class and blue collar workers in the U.S. provide much of the support at Trump rallies. Younger college educated people support Sanders, because of the situation of the working and middle class in the U.S., and a similar situation exists in Europe. It is for the sake of the democratic process and delivering services in education, healthcare, and other basic areas to all, that companies small and large need to pay their fair share of taxes, regardless of size, influence, or technological advantages. Today this is is seen by most leaders who draw public support as the right way forward for the U.S., Latin America, Europe and Asian countries, including proper allocation of resources to best serve the needs of working people. For example the 13 billion euros is equal to all of Ireland's healthcare budget, and 66% of its social welfare budget.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The differences in the Democratic party between conservatives and liberals that make it difficult to get things done in healthcare, energy and other areas. The lack of White House leadership in a number of areas, and in anumber of instances. The lack of Senate leadership on these issues with the Senate not having done much in energy and healthcare legislation. Add to this the influence of the $133 million that lobbyists spent in the 2nd quarter 2009 alone. The failure of Republicans and Democrats in Congress to push vigorously for cost control in the health care industry adds to these problems.

LyrArc Article Gist
Dionne cites comments by Bowles and Simpson saying the Paul Ryan U.S. budget proposal falls short of a serious bipartisan effort for deficit reduction for a number of reasons. The reasons cited by Bowles and Simpson are: The proposal exempts defense spending from reductions, does not apply savings from tax expenditures to deficit reduction, relies on much larger reductions in domestic discretionary spending than the Bowles-Simpson deficit reduction plan, and at the same time making reductions in safety-net programs that could in their words "place a disproportionately adverse effect on certain disadvantaged populations." This should give moderates in this debate time for pause and reflection says Dionne.

LyrArc Article Gist
Samuelson warns that turning seniors into a protected class making no sacrifices whatsoever, will mean shrinking all other social programs, defense and investments in education and infrastructure. This is the reality of the budget deficits facing the U.S. He cites the Congressional Budget Office projections that even with cutting defense and non defense discretionary spending by a third, the U.S. risks a deficit in 2023 of about 6.75% of the economy or gross domestic product (GDP). To cover this would require $1 trillion in higher taxes, an increase of a third above the 1970-2011 average. He says Democrats are using demagoguery and intimidation on this issue, and ironically even Paul Ryan's proposal reflects a desire not to touch seniors benefits and willingness to pass on the costs to the young to pay for these programs. Social Security and Medicare are a critical part of the American fabric, and no one wants to dismantle them, it is about modernizing them to reflect higher life expectancy and larger wealth accumulated by the elderly compared to previous generations, and to reduce the burden on the young. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Senator Schumer calls it a "momentous 24 hours here in the US Congress, a legislative one two punch that you rarely see." Schumer negotiated a major climate change action bill for $369 billion in the Senate, that also covers tax changes to cover costs, and helps cut drug and health care expenses of Americans. The second quarter shows healthy job gains of average 375,000 a month and unemployment at 3.6%. The economy declined by 1.1% but much of this was from a slowdown in home and business construction sectors sensitive to higher interest rates and from higher inventory. Consumer spending increased by 1% during the quarter. The Fed's series of 0.75 percentage points interest rate increases had softened inflation expectations before they get entrenched in the economy. This makes it possible for Democrats to present a message to ordinary Americans that president Biden is getting things done with 2 legislative achievements. A $280 billion bill for investment in the semiconductor industry in the US. And a huge win on climate change with the $269 billion Schumer is negotiating in the US Congress. It is the opposite of what Republicans are saying is Biden's failure to tackle inflation. Appropriately Biden and Schumer are calling this the bill the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. How did Schumer get this done? After the Ukraine war and EU decision to shut down Russian oil supplies, cut oil and gas use by 15%, and the climate change action inducing fires and floods, there is increasing awareness about climate change action as vital for our future all over the world. This gives more confidence to Democrats to negotiate a temporary continuation of oil and gas, with increased exports of US LNG to Europe. Senator Manchin from an energy producing state of West Virginia was brought over to Schumer's side with this idea. What Biden gets is a 40% reduction of US carbon emissions over 2005 levels, enough to get within reach of the 50% he promised at COP26 in Glasgow. It is a win-win for all sides and for the American people, and shows that patience and hard work, and persistence in the face of adversity can bring results. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Under a plan called "premium support" Paul Ryan's U.S. budget proposal would have seniors choose a private insurance plan from a federally operated exchange. Each year the government would pay private insurers a specific amount to cover the cost of premiums with the rest borne by seniors. The total amount paid by the government would go up only at the rate of overall inflation, it would not go up at the higher rate of health care inflation. By doing this the government would take off the trillions of dollars of projected spending on health care that are largely the result of the higher inflation rate in health care costs. This higher inflation rate on health care costs is something that both parties have failed to control, and remains a major weakness in all health care proposals to date, including the Obama health care legislation. Allowed to continue growing at this rate when U.S. debt to GDP is nearing 100%, health care inflation costs pose major risks to the nation's finances.

LyrArc Article Gist
Comments by the banking sector and the central bank of Canada on the Volcker Rule.

LyrArc Article Gist
The State Budget Crisis Task Force is co-chaired by former Fed chairman Paul Volcker and Richard Ravitch, a former lieutenant governor of New York. The Report of the Task Force says rising pension expenses and healthcare costs for public sector employees and Medicaid costs are severely reducing the ability of states in the U.S. to fund essential infrastructure improvements, education for low income students and other services. The report said there were six major threats to the fiscal situation of states- including Medicaid spending, underfunding of retirement, "budgetary gimmicks" to address the short term needs, and uncertain tax revenues. Ravitch told a news conderence: "It will be a hell of a lot more expensive to deal with theses problems in five or ten years than to deal with them now." The report focussed on California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Virginia and Texas. It was funded by the foundation of Blackstone Group co-founder Peter Peterson, and George Soros's Open Society Foundation....

LyrArc Article Gist
A Wall Street editorial on the problems identified in the budgets and finances of U.S. states identified by the State Budget Crisis Task Force co-chaired by Volcker and Ravitch. This includes Medicaid costs, underfunded pensions, and budget gimmicks that understate the true extent of problems.

LyrArc Article Gist
The rarely mentioned origins of the U.S. Medicare reform proposal of Rep. Paul Ryan and Rep. Ron Wyden, which includes work done at the Hoover Institution and liberal think tanks, in a debate subject to distortions on all sides.

LyrArc Article Gist
Ip's point about the actions of previous president's in promoting a recovery long after they are in office has to be qualified by the uncertain economic outlook for 2013, with a slowdown in the eurozone, China and India, and the efforts to control the deficit in the U.S. also affecting the economic outlook. The process of deleveraging has still to work itself out and the economy is still being supported by the Fed's continual easing of monetary policy.

LyrArc Article Gist
The American Treasury Secretary who handled the 2008 financial crisis, Henry Paulson, gives the new US financial reform legislation an incomplete grade. His main concern is that the too-big-to fail risk in the US banking system continues, and without clear rules a lot depends on the regulators. He does not see higher capital requirements doing much to ease that problem, and sees another crisis in a few years as inevitable. Former SEC chief, Harvey Pitt, gives it an F for failure or an I for Incomplete. He sees it as a boon for lawyers, because it is not clearly written and leaves so many loopholes, to a degree that is simply astounding. He says it does nothing in the way of preventing another crisis. Does nothing for transparency, nothing for monitoring and action by regulators, all factors that led to the crisis of 2008. Nouriel Roubini gives it a C+, because it does little to fix the reasons why securitization failed and caused the crisis, and in this way will keep credit creation and expansion in a weak state. He sees this financial reform bill as a failed effort that is laying the ground for the next crisis, with little action in the "too-big-to-fail" area, a huge dilution of what former Fed Chairman paul Volcker had advocated in the Volcker rule, and no real impact on the risky trading of derivatives. Bill Gross of PIMCO gives his frank assessment in no uncertain terms. A D+ for this bill. It shows how lobbyists for the banks still control Congress he says. It would have been better to let Paul Volcker take charge completely, than to have the lobbyists dilute the critical reform proposals. Simon Johnson gives it the lowest passing grade at MIT, a B. The only large change he says, is the Kanjorski Amendment, which give federal regulators the authority to breakup the large banks. But he cautions that it may require another crisis for the regulators and Congress to "get it," and do what they should be doing....

LyrArc Article Gist
Doctors face a 21% cut in the amount of Medicare payments for treating seniors having Medicare, though this cut will be delayed till 2011 under legislation in Congress. This issue goes back to 1997, when a budget law set spending targets, and stated that if they were exceeded formulas to reduce doctors payments would go into effect. The formulas seriously cut into doctor payments by Medicare in 2002, so the formula was put off. The result of this is that the cuts based on the formula now amount to 21%. The cuts are not expected to go through, but at the same time Congress has an headache on its hands with the growing deficit. In the Senate there is opposition to a $120 billion bill to extend long term unemployment benefits which lapsed in June 2010, for tax breaks, and other expenses. Senators want to pare down the bill's price tag, as $80 billon of this is unfunded and will be added to the budget deficit. For a primary care doctor in Washington state, Medicare pays about $95 compared to private insurers payment of $129, and a plan for state workers that pays $140....

LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Volcker before the U.S. Senate Banking Committee on May 9, 2012, before the announcement of the $2 billion trading losses by J.P. Morgan Chase. The following day Chase announced the losses from trades made by JP Morgan trader Bruno Iksil- nicknamed the "London Whale"- who made a complex hedge on a group of corporate bonds, betting $100 billion that the bonds would not default. The Volcker rule as it is currently written would not prevent such a transaction. The problem as Volcker pointed out before the Banking Committee is that under "too big to fail," "the losses would be socialized with the potential gains all private."

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about the true cost of the Obama health care legislation and the assumption that the legislation cuts the deficit by billions of dollars. This WSJ editorial says one has to look at this closely, and not merely look at CBO projections, which may be based in a certain context and not reflect the true costs, especially because many accounting gimmicks and use of numbers to present a particular picture is taking place. The information this editorial cites is that: it uses 10 years of taxes to fund six years of subsidies, Social Security and Medicare revenues are double-counted to the tune of $398 billion, a new program funding long-tem care frontloads taxes but backloads spending, and the assumption of an automatic 25% cut to physician payments that Congress is unwilling to authorize. Rep. Rand Paul has tried to present an alternative view which needs to be studied just as closely, because of the enormous impact of a jump in spending at a time when the public finances are fragile. WSJ also cites the work of Richard Foster, the chief Medicare actuary, as an alternate perspective of how things could turn out, Doug Holtz-Eakin, and Eugene Steuerle. It calls for common sense in evaluating programs, entitlements, defense or other government spending. They not only cost money, but costs escalate over time as history has shown over decades, till they eventually are discovered to be not affordable unless the middle class is willing to dig deeper into its finances to pay for them. Alternate perspectives from a range of informed opinion, Howard Dean, Martin Feldstein, and the head of Harvard's Medical School show that the issue needs to be looked at closely and carefully and cannot be something in which CBO numbers can be trusted to tell the whole story. Especially when common sense, history, and informed opinion across a spectrum of thought advises caution, and fragile public finances also suggest caution. Howard Dean, former Governor of Vermont, says the health care bill is not real reform, and may do more harm than good. He says in a Washington Post article, December 17, 2009, the Obama health care bill does not insert competition into insurance markets, does not significantly reduce costs, and does not improve the delivery and use of health services. It was he says done with a political calculus and crafted for votes not real reform. Jeffrey S. Flier, Dean of the Harvard Medical School, gave the Obama health reform bill an "F" grade, saying in a Nov 18, 2009, WSJ article, that it was disingenuous to call this reform, Congress and the White House were simply deceiving the public. He said the bill will accelerate US health care spending, postpone most of the major health care problems, expecially the ones that drive cost, including the "fee for service" system and delivery of health care. He says in his discussions with economists and other health care leaders the opinion was unanimous that the bill will accelerate health care spending. He cites Massachusetts as an example, where access to care was expanded under the same dysfunctional system, and spending went up, and it doesn't work. Feldstein, who in early 2008 suggested proactive solutions to the mortgage debt crisis which were never adopted, says that the Obama health care law means higher taxes in the long run to pay for the $1 trillion cost of health care for the uninsured group over 10 years. Feldstein says that the Obama plan is to cut Medicare to cut spending, and will reduce the amount of medical services, as reduced spending comes from fewer services, not reducing payments to providers. And he asks if the cost reductions are weighted too heavily towards reduced services and not reduced payments to providers ,would this result in large cuts to services to affect the quality of healthcare for the 85% of the American people who are accustomed to a different pattern of healthcare. ...