Aug. 13, 2021 3:15 p.m. ET
Jason L. Riley’s comment “Biden is delivering Obama’s third term“(Aug. 10) claims that allowing working parents to keep more of their hard-earned money is” a redistribution of wealth in the form of a government-guaranteed basic income. ”
The reasoning doesn’t make sense. The alternative to a tax code that allows working parents to keep more of their money is a tax code that allows the government to confiscate and redistribute more of that hard-earned money.
It is about the misrepresentation of my proposal to extend the child allowance for working parents. In 2017, despite opposition from many in my party and the editorial page of the journal, I worked with Sen. Mike Lee and Ivanka Trump to double the recognition under the Tax Cut and Jobs Act. By some estimates, the changes helped the average family of four keep an additional $ 2,900 per year of their own money.
This is not a redistribution; it’s common sense. Fortunately, Senate Republicans agree and unanimously voted in March to expand credit beyond the TCJA level to up to $ 3,300 per child, including $ 4,200 for children under 6 years of age. But it is an offset against taxes paid, which means work is required.
The new child benefit of the Biden government, on the other hand, is a redistribution of wealth and the first step towards a universal basic income, as it does not include any work obligation. For example, in the next six months, some American households with no working adults will receive more than $ 6,000 in cash payments from the federal government.