Clinton proposes tax relief for families with young kids
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton arrives to speak at a rally at The Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio today.
DES MOINES, Iowa » Continuing her policy focus on children and families, Hillary Clinton is pledging more tax relief for families with young kids.
The Democratic presidential nominee announced a plan on Tuesday to double the Child Tax Credit and to increase the amount that low-income families could get back in refunds.
Clinton said she is trying to help families struggling with the cost of child care, health care and college. She said the “new tax credit will make their lives a little bit easier and help restore fairness to our economy.”
Clinton has made women and families a central priority of her campaign. She has pledged not to raise taxes on the middle class and has proposed plans to cap child care costs and offer tax credits for excessive health care costs or for family caregivers.
The latest proposal is in keeping with that. Currently, the Child Tax Credit is $1,000 per child under 17. Clinton would increase it to $2,000 per child up until the age of 4.
Clinton would also increase the amount that low-income families could get back in refunds under the program. Families with young children would see the most benefit.
Clinton’s campaign said the plan would cost between $150 billion and $200 billion and would be paid with higher taxes on the wealthy. As with the current Child Tax Credit, it would phase out for higher income families.
Republican Donald Trump has proposed a more sweeping tax cut, condensing the current seven brackets to just three. But some analyses have found that his proposal could actually raise certain families’ tax bills because of how it changes deductions and exemptions.
Trump has also proposed a tax deduction for child care — which could provide greater benefit to higher income families. He also proposes expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit to aid lower-income families with child care costs.
12 responses to “Clinton proposes tax relief for families with young kids”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
The idea of Hillary caring for children is repulsive!!!
The only thing transparent about Hillary is her Dishonesty!!!
Do you remember?
How quickly we forget! If you’re over 35, take a walk with me down memory lane—you won’t believe what you have forgotten. If you’re under 35, read on—I promise you that you will be amazed at what you missed! (By the way, sadly, this isn’t a joke. I wish it was.)
REMEMBER WHEN BILL CLINTON WAS PRESIDENT?
(January 20, 1993 to January 20, 2001—two terms)
When Bill Clinton was president, he allowed Hillary to assume authority over an attempt to reform health care.
Her proposed plan was so bad that many Democrats came up with competing plans of their own in protest, and in spite of threats and intimidation, on September 26, 1994, the “Hillarycare” bill was declared dead.
This fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million for studies, promotion, and other efforts.
Then, President Clinton gave Hillary authority over selecting a female attorney general. Her first two selections were Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood—both were forced to withdraw their names from consideration.
Next, she chose Janet Reno, which husband Bill described as “my worst mistake.”
(Some may not remember that Reno made the decision to gas David Koresh and the Branch Davidian religious sect in Waco, Texas resulting in dozens of deaths of women and children.)
Husband Bill also allowed Hillary to make recommendations for the head of the Civil Rights Commission—Lani Guanier was her selection.
After considerable backlash from prominent Democratic senators concerning Ms. Guanier’s radical views, Bill Clinton withdrew her name from nomination, stating that she did not represents the civil rights views that he had championed during his campaign.
However, apparently a slow learner, husband Bill continued to allow Hillary to make more recommendations.
She chose former law partners, Web Hubbel for the Justice Department, Vince Foster for the White House staff, and William Kennedy for the Treasury Department.
Her selections went well: Hubbel went to prison, Foster (presumably) committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.
(Is anyone wondering yet what her Supreme Court Justice appointments would be like?)
Many younger voters will have no knowledge of “Travelgate,” the first major ethics controversy during Bill’s presidency.
Hillary wanted to award unfettered travel contracts to Clinton friend, Harry Thompson—but the White House Travel Office refused to comply.
She trumped up allegations of financial mismanagement and reported seven long-time White House employees to the FBI. This ruined their reputations, got them fired, and caused a thirty-six month investigation.
Eventually, most of the employees were reinstated and Clinton associates were forced out of the travel office. Only one White House employee, Billy Dale, was charged with a crime—the enormous crime of mixing personal and White House funds; a jury acquitted him in less than two hours.
Still not convinced of her ineptness, Hillary was allowed to recommend a close Clinton friend, Craig Livingstone, for the position of Director of White House Security.
When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of about 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, suddenly Hillary and the President denied even knowing Livingstone, and of course, denied knowledge of drug use in the White House.
Following this debacle, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office after more than thirty years of service to seven presidents.
Next, when women started coming forward with allegations of sexual harassment and rape by Bill Clinton, Hillary was put in charge of the “bimbo eruption” and scandal defense.
Let’s look at some of her more notable decisions in this regard . . .
She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit. After the Starr investigation, they settled with Ms. Jones.
She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor.
After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr’s investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs.
Hillary’s devious game plan resulted in Bill losing his license to practice law for ‘lying under oath’ to a grand jury, followed by his subsequent impeachment by the House of Representatives.
Hillary avoided indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice during the Starr investigation by repeating, “I do not recall,” “I have no recollection,” and “I don’t know” a total of 56 times while under oath. (Sound familiar?)
After leaving the White House, Hillary was forced to return an estimated $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork that she had “mistakenly thought was hers.”
So you see, the email scandal and all of her malfeasance regarding the handling of Top Secret information, not to mention the “pay to play” schemes of the Clinton Foundation, are nothing new.
Hillary’s entire political career has been nothing but a web of lies, corruption and destruction in her quest for power.
Is anyone else ready to say, “Enough is enough!”?
But unfortunately, I’m sure her loyal fans will say, “What difference does it make?”
The Ministry of Propaganda leaves another steaming pile on the sidewalk. No shame in the MSM. I’d think they could find a more flattering pic of the old gal instead of the department store dummy shot of her with a pasted on fake grin.
Hillary is trying to buy votes with her proposed “tax relief” which is in no way tax relief. To get relief from tax, you first must have to pay taxes. Her proposal is to double the Child Tax Credit for children up to age 4. Now read this very carefully. The people who receive the tax credit do not receive a “refund” as it says in the story because they do not have to pay one penny in taxes to get the so-called “refund.” What they are getting is a government hand out better known as welfare.
That’s a good explanation, the old bait and switch with middle class taxpayers getting the shaft. Unfortunately it’s too much for the typical democrat voter to grasp in one sitting so they blindly continue to pull the lever for the politician that is perceived to hand out the most goodies.
A credit is not a refund. Why should it be?
?Hey what’s good for Trump is also good for young families. Let’s make our tax system work for us.
Like CEI said “it’s too much for the typical democrat voter to grasp”
For the last 30 years She will lie and say anything for a vote then deny saying it. She’s just a horrible person.
She said Democrats are easy to manipulate.
Why encourage “low-income” families to have more kids . . . . . typical Democratic idiocy. So DUMB! Why not give “low-income” families a tax break for NOT having kids?! I suppose such a proposal makes “too much” sense for the Dems
Great idea…
“…families struggling with the cost of child care, health care and college.”
They shouldn’t have what they can’t afford.
Remove the tax levied against those who don’t buy obamacare.