Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-NY) spoke at a bloggers luncheon today sponsored by the Heritage Foundation. A member of the House Ways & Means Committee, Reynolds concentrated on the tax proposal released this week by Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY), including the AMT rewrite.

Key arguments from Reynolds:

More generally, Reynolds joined his Repubican collegues in characterizing Rangel’s Tax Reduction and Reform Act as a “Mother of All Tax Hikes,” even using MOTH as an acronym. And he contended that House Speaker Pelosi and other Democratic leaders are building distance between themselves and Rangel’s proposal. Reynolds

No matter what your opinion of Chairman Bill Thomas, when he had a trial balloon, he sent some unsuspecting subcommittee chairman to stand by him. Here’s Charlie Rangel – by himself – not one senior Democratic Ways & Means person or leadership in that room. It’s Rangel by himself the Monster MOTH, for Halloween, and that is the Mother of All Tax Hikes, which many in House leadership and others on Ways & Means have used, the Mother of all tax hikes. …

Charlie promised a lot of things and he has delivered on this one, I’m going to send you a $1.3 trillion tax increase, that as we’re beginning to see Ways & Means and others analyze, we’re seeing as nothing but heartburn and heartache, not only for personal tax filers, as well as corporate America, and will be very detrimental to us for global economy activity. My concern for corporations, we’re almost telling them, “Why don’t you move [overseas] for a better tax policy than you’ll have in your own country.”

Joe Mansour blogged on the gathering, which also included Ann Coulter via telephone, with a partisan take.

It was our first time to attend the weekly Heritage gathering, organized by Rob Bluey. A good outreach event, and we’d certainly welcome a similar invitation from a liberal think tank, too.

Just in time. From IGD News Service:

October 30, 2007 (IDG News Service) — The U.S. House of Representatives today approved a bill that would extend the soon-to-expire moratorium on Internet taxes by seven years, the final step before the legislation heads to President Bush for his signature.

The House voted 402-0 to accept a version of the moratorium extension bill that was passed by the Senate last Thursday. The Senate proposed the seven-year extension, amending an earlier iteration of the bill that the House had approved with a four-year extension.

Seven years is a good compromise upward.

NAM news release here.

[Editor's Note: NAM President John Engler is on a two-week trade and business mission to Japan and China, working with U.S. manufacturers and trade officials. We plan regular reports from abroad. In this entry, communications director J.P. Fielder gives us the lay of the land.]

To increase industrial cooperation between the U.S. and our major trading partners in Asia, NAM President John Engler launches two weeks of high-level meetings in Japan and China today.

This evening we landed in Tokyo for a whirlwind tour of the world’s second largest manufacturing nation. Why Japan when everyone is talking about the growth and importance of China and India? Well, Japan remains the world’s second largest economy, still nearly twice the size of China and a major trading partner to the U.S.

On Wednesday we will crisscross Tokyo, beginning with Gov. Engler’s appearance on CNBC’s Squawk Box Asia, followed by meetings with Sony’s President and CEO Dr. Ryoji Chubachi, Honda Chairman Aoki, executives from Nippon Keidanren (the NAM’s equivalent in Japan) and CISTEC, the Center for Infirmation on Security on Trade Controls. All of this before 5 p.m., when we’ll board a train to Nagoya in preparation for Thursday’s meeting with Toyota Chairman Cho (Toyota, based in the aptly named Toyota City, is just outside Nagoya).

Several substantive issues Gov. Engler is looking to discuss throughout the day:

Other points of interest we’ll keep you updated on after day one in Asia:

E. Stanley O’Neal rose from Alabama cotton picker to a master of Wall Street when he became Merrill Lynch chairman and chief executive in 2002.

However, O’Neal retired Tuesday after the brokerage company wrote down $8.4 billion in assets due to overexposure to the disastrous subprime mortgage market, asset-backed bonds and bad loans, according to news reports. The company posted a third quarter loss of $2.43 billion, its biggest quarterly loss in its 93-year history.

Despite the bad financial news there is still a good lesson to be learned about race from O’Neal’s rise and fall, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson writes today. African American executives can succeed and fail, just like their white counterparts, if given the opportunity to compete as equals, he argued.

What’s really significant is that there is a Stan O’Neal. And a Dick Parsons, the African-American CEO of Time Warner, rumored to be on his way out, too, after a long and profitable run. And a Ken Chenault, the African-American CEO of American Express, who is staying put, far as I know. And a Bob Johnson, the founder of Black Entertainment Television, widely acknowledged as the first African-American billionaire.

They attained Master of the Universe status by being smarter and tougher than their peers – and now a much bigger cohort of black corporate executives is coming up behind them. It just goes to show what happens when you open a door.

And don’t feel too sorry for O’Neal, according to a report in the Financial Times. He was paid $48 million last year and could walk away from Merrill Lynch with $100 million in deferred compensation and retirement benefits.

NAM members on our Key Vote Committee have given close study to H.R. 2262, the Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2007, which is expected to come to the House floor in the next day or so. (Key Votes are used in determining a Member of Congress’ support for manufacturing issues at the end of a session.) The conclusion: The legislation makes supply of raw materials more expensive not only through higher taxes but by also by limiting supply through the imposition of major new restrictions on accessing public lands.

From our Key Vote letter, which is going to the House of Representatives this afternoon:

The U.S. mining industry currently provides about 50 percent of the metals American manufacturers need to operate, including iron ore, copper, gold, phosphate, zinc, silver and molybdenum. The U.S. has become increasingly dependent upon foreign sources of minerals for products that are strategically important to both our national and economic security.

Rather than encouraging environmentally safe mineral development, H.R. 2262 would impose new taxes on the mining industry, including an eight percent royalty on new mining and a retroactive four percent royalty on existing mining operations. The bill would also establish new prohibitions on future mining on certain public lands and set highly prescriptive environmental standards that sometimes conflict with existing state and federal regulations.

Not only would the bill seriously impact the U.S. mining industry, it would increase the cost of raw materials for U.S. manufacturers, make our products less competitive in global markets and adversely affect thousands of high-paying manufacturing jobs. Moreover, we remain concerned that this sets an unwise precedent in targeting specific industries with new and burdensome tax increases.

Also worth mentioning is the trade deficit, which would certainly be affected by increased reliance on raw materials from overseas. It’s hard to see how a House member who rails against trade deficits could support H.R. 2262.

This legislation has failed to gain the national attention it deserves as an economy-stifling measure. Let’s change that.

Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel argues for his Tax Reduction and Reform Act in today’s Wall Street Journal. After focusing on the AMT provisions, he makes the broader case for tax reform.

In order to create an environment that allows American businesses to compete and win internationally, I propose a significant reduction in the corporate marginal tax rate, and a removal of incentives for businesses to move jobs overseas. The legislation will also repeal narrowly targeted tax breaks that have limited value, can often be cumbersome for companies to realize and, in some instances, have outlived their original intent.

Tax reform will not be achieved overnight. However, this package should bring even the most partisan conservatives to the table for an overdue debate on the future of our nation’s tax policies. This nation must come to grips with the repercussions of recent fiscal irresponsibility.

Opponents will attack my reforms by labeling them a tax increase. This false rhetoric ignores the tax cuts that would be provided to some 90 million Americans as well as the Joint Committee on Taxation’s Determination that the bill is revenue-neutral. Some of my Republican friends have even suggested financing of tax reform with a round of tax cuts that are not paid-for. Supporters of this approach should have the courage to lay out a precise plan for how they will pay for the ongoing war in Iraq, the commitments to our veterans, much-needed improvements in our infrastructure. and investments in our health-care and education systems.

The introduction of my bill marks the start, not the end, of the legislative process. Tax reform requires painful choices and my bill reflects that reality. But those who would attack my bill without suggesting alternatives are in the posture of defending the status quo, a posture that is outside the mainstream desires of the American people and the bulk of the business community.

Although not in the hard-copy version of the paper, the Journal gives online space to former Delaware Gov. Pete DuPont to offer the counterarguments.

[The] liberal establishment takes a negative view of tax rate reductions and embraces the opposite approach: ensure expiration of the Bush tax cuts in 2011 and in the meantime enact substantial tax increases.

NAM President John Engler’s weekly message is on the pending U.S.-Peru Free Trade Agreement, expected to come to a House vote next week.

We note that on September 25th, the House Ways & Means Committee approved the pact with strong bipartisan support. As NAM’s Engler commented then, Peru marked the first agreement to include labor and environmental provisions that helped broaden Congressional support for expanding trade:

“All members of the House should embrace the overwhelmingly bipartisan nature of the committee’s vote. It reflects the importance of trade to America’s economy and reaffirms my belief that the May 10 agreement was a key factor in incorporating the concerns that some members of Congress have with regard to trade.

“I look forward to a strong majority voting in favor of the Peru trade agreement. This is the start of a robust trade agenda and we look for quick, bipartisan action on our pending trade agreements with Colombia, Panama and Korea.”

We have resources available on the Peru agreement at www.nam.org/tradetoolkit.

John Edwards, Democratic candidate for president, cited in the Concord (N.H.) Monitor:

Like other Democrats, Edwards named his top three priorities as ending the war in Iraq, enacting universal health care and overhauling the American energy system. “Those are three things instantly I would do,” he said.

Hat tip: James Taranto, Best of the Web.

From De Tijd, the Belgian version of The Financial Times:

Volgens David Huether, de hoofdeconoom van de National Association of Manufacturers, zien zowat alle Amerikaanse sectoren hun exportcijfers groeien. Tot de grootste winnaars behoren onder meer de producenten van kapitaalgoederen zoals vliegtuigen, telecommunicatieapparatuur en auto-onderdelen, de leveranciers van industriële goederen als chemicaliën, en de voedings- en drankenindustrie.

Very timely observation, David.

Some Flemish-speaking business students translated part of the article for their blog. The headline is, “American companies profit from the weak dollar,” and it’s a story about the increased U.S. exports that result. And the paragraph, cleaned up:

According to David Huether, chief economist of the National Assocaition of Manufacturers, every sector is profiting from the growing exports. The biggest winners are producers of capital goods, like airplanes, telecommunications equipment and auto parts, and suppliers of industrial goods such as chemicals, foodstuffs and the liquor industry.

Very timely observation, David.

Good piece in The Hill, surveying business groups about their view of Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel’s tax proposal. While speculative, the lead seems about right: “Some prominent members of the business lobby came out swinging against the giant tax overhaul Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) introduced last week, but the legislation may ultimately attract its share of K Street backers.”

The story cites Dorothy Coleman, the NAM’s vice president for tax and domestic economic policy.

Dorothy Coleman, the vice president for tax policy at the National Association of Manufacturers, said that giving up the so-called “section 199” tax break for manufacturers could be a “good deal” for her members if it is paired with a significant corporate rate cut.

She emphasized that she would strongly oppose certain provisions if they were enacted alone, but regarded the overall proposal as “the beginning of a debate.”

“We’ll take a look at it and see where it goes,” Coleman said.