It’s Not a Loophole Just Because Dems Don’t Like It

While peddling the ludicrously named Inflation Reduction Act on CNN this past week, Sen. Joe Manchin claimed that Democrats were merely trying to “close the loopholes and collect the taxes that are owed to the Treasury and the United States people.”

In Washington, a “loophole” is a euphemism for a perfectly legal policy that Democrats have decided they want to regulate or tax. The word “loophole” suggests that some ambiguous wording or omissions in the text of a bill have allowed people to exploit the law. Few of the Democrats’ “loopholes” meet this definition. Indeed, in most cases, the “loopholes” they’re talking about were Intentionallywritten to exist in the present form.

Take the “carried-interest loophole,” which intentionally functions in tax code as a means of incentivizing investment, risk, and “sweat equity”—ownership stakes generated through work rather than just capital investment. Manchin might be looking for ways to raise “revenue” so he can tell constituents his bill won’t add to the deficit. Others who support zero-sum populist economics could want to punish private capital and redistribute the wealth. The American Investment Council claims that 74% of private equity investments went to small businesses in 2002. Whatever the case, no matter what Manchin says, none of the new taxes found in the reconciliation bill are now “owed to the Treasury and the United States people.”

The 15% corporate minimum tax is also subject to this. It is important to emphasize that corporate taxes are passed onto employees and consumers. Moreover, manufacturing companies, who spend lots on upfront capital investments—not the euphemistic “investments” preferred by politicians when talking about subsidies, but the real kind—are the ones who are going to end up being hurt. The Tax Foundation claims that this tax will result in the loss of 27,000 jobs. Manchin’s bill will also reinstate the expired, failed superfund tax for crude and imported oil. This will be added to your energy bills. It’s unclear what “loophole” Manchin is claiming the superfund tax is closing.

That said, the “loophole” charade isn’t new. It’s been most effectively deployed in attacking gun rights, which, let’s face it, the left sees as a loophole in the Constitution. There is no “gun-show loophole,” since the law was written so that only commercial transfers, and not private ones, would require a federal background check. If the Senate rejects your efforts to accommodate your preferred background check policies, as it did in 2013, it’s not a “loophole”—it’s just “the law.” There is no “Charleston loophole,” since the shooter didn’t exploit existing law, rather he took advantage of a data entry mistake. The three-day waiting period for background check was negotiated and then made a part of the law at the time it was passed. And there isn’t any “No-Fly List Gun-Ownership Loophole,” either. There are the Second to Sixth, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fifth amendments to the Constitution.

Framing these debates as a struggle between those who support closing “loopholes” and those who want to keep them, as the media always does, is a way of circumventing debate and advocating for policy. It’s intentional. After all, the word “loophole” strongly insinuates a policy is unjust. Reporters wouldn’t call laws that legalize abortion into the ninth month of pregnancy—as a number now do—a “viable-baby termination loophole” simply because Republicans say it is.

Now, it’s a senator’s prerogative to vote for a bill that pumps hundreds of billions more into an economy experiencing spiking inflation or raise taxes on consumers, energy producers and manufacturers during a recession. What he isn’t doing, however, is closing any “loopholes.”

COPYRIGHT 2022 CREATORS.COM

The Daily Signal is open to all perspectives. This article is not meant to represent the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Are you a fan of this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Include the article’s URL or headline, along with your name and the address of your town or state.