Tag: TAXUD

Remarks by President Trump Before Cabinet Meeting

Cabinet Room

11:40 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. We just returned from a historic 12-day trip to Asia. Everywhere we went, the American delegation was greeted with tremendous hospitality and tremendous respect. People are respecting our country again, believe me.

We brought back more than $300 billion worth of deals, which could reach well over a trillion dollars within a very near future. That means jobs for the United States at a very high level.

As you know, we’ve just come up with the best job performance in over 17 years. But this is a lot more jobs, and we think the number is going to actually get a lot better. We’re going to also put a lot of people that have not been able to find jobs, we’re going to put them back to work — because they’re not registered right now; they’ll be registered in a positive sense.

Japanese car companies will be opening up and expanding their plants in our country. We worked very closely with Prime Minister Abe on that. We’re renegotiating our bad trade deal with South Korea, and we’ve started talking about bilateral trade with many countries in Asia.

And most importantly, we’ve made clear to all countries that we cannot continue to be treated unfairly when it comes to trade any longer. It’s not fair to our companies, and it’s not fair to our workers. Last year, we lost over $800 billion on trade — on trade deals with other countries. So we had a negative number, a trade deficit of almost $800 billion with other countries. That’s not going to be happening. That’s changing. And I explained that to them. From the standpoint of Asia, they understand it. Every one of them understand it.

One of the primary goals of our trip was to pursue the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. I want to begin this morning by meeting and by talking about the fact that we will be instituting a very critical step, and that will start right now. Today, the United States is designating North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. It should have happened a long time ago. It should have happened years ago.

In addition to threatening the world by nuclear devastation, North Korea has repeatedly supported acts of international terrorism, including assassinations on foreign soil.

As we take this action today, our thoughts to turn to Otto Warmbier, a wonderful young man, and the countless others so brutally affected by the North Korean oppression. This designation will impose further sanctions and penalties on North Korea and related persons, and supports our maximum pressure campaign to isolate the murderous regime that you’ve all been reading about and, in some cases, writing about.

Tomorrow, the Treasury Department will be announcing an additional sanction, and a very large one, on North Korea. This will be going on over the next two weeks. It will be the highest level of sanctions by the time it’s finished over a two-week period.

The North Korean regime must be lawful. It must end its unlawful nuclear and ballistic missile development, and cease all support for international terrorism — which it is not doing.

Today, Cabinet discussions will also focus on crucial domestic policy issues. I want to congratulate the House of Representatives for passing a vital and historic tax cut last week, and I’m very hopeful the Senate will do the same very soon.

We’re going to give the American people a huge tax cut for Christmas. Hopefully that will be a great, big, beautiful Christmas present.

With the Democrats giving us no votes for tax cuts, for purely political reasons — obstructionists — it will be up to the Republicans to come through for America. I think they will. I hope they will. It’s up to the Senate. And if they approve it, the House and the Senate will get together — I’ll be there right in the middle of it — and we will come up with a bill that will be spectacular for growth and spectacular for the people of this country.

Our tax plan will be bring urgent relief to hardworking families. We’ll reduce rates, increase the amount of income taxed at a rate of zero, expand the Child Tax Credit — very important, and simplify taxes as most family will be able to file on a single sheet of paper. We’ll restore America’s competitive edge so we can bring back our jobs. We want to bring our jobs back to our country. We were decimated over the last 40 years. We want to bring our jobs back to the United States.

We’ll go from being one of the highest-taxed nations in the world to one of the lowest-taxed nations in the world. Corporate rate will be reduced from 35 percent all the way down to 20 percent, which will make us competitive again, and companies won’t be leaving our country. Finally, our tax plan will return trillions of dollars in wealth to our shores so that companies can invest in America again.

At the same time, we’re working to reduce wasteful government spending. We will hear from budget director, Mick Mulvaney, who is working with my Cabinet to find taxpayer savings in each and every department.

The Cabinet members that are with us today are working on getting reductions through their various departments, and we think we’re going to be able to save a lot of money — even lower than the budgets, in the budgets that we’re submitting.

We’ll be working on healthcare, infrastructure, and welfare reform. We’re looking very strongly at welfare reform, and that will all take place right after taxes — very soon, very shortly after taxes. So we’ll be submitting plans on healthcare, plans on infrastructure, and plans on welfare reform — which is desperately needed in our country — soon after taxes.

Today, we’ll also discuss the opioid epidemic that is ravaging so many American families and communities. Last week, I was proud to nominate Alex Azar to serve as the next Secretary of Health and Human Services. I urge the Senate to swiftly confirm his nomination, and I want to thank Acting Secretary Eric Hargan for serving with such devotion and for doing such a great job in the meantime. Thank you very much, Eric.

Finally, I want to wish the American people a truly happy and blessed Thanksgiving, especially to our brave men and women serving in our military and our Border Patrol and ICE agents along the very dangerous southern border. As you heard, we lost a Border Patrol officer just yesterday, and another one was brutally beaten and badly, badly hurt. Looks like he’ll make it, but very, very badly hurt.

And we talk about the wall — we’re going to have the wall. It’s a part of what we’re doing. We need it. It’s rough territory. That’s where the drugs are coming in. A lot of things are happening along the border — the southern border — and we’re going to straighten it out.

We’ve already reduced the numbers — and you see the numbers — they’re back to 78 percent down from what they were. And those numbers will get better and better but we have to stop the massive drug flow from pouring in. And my respect to the families that were so badly hurt yesterday, because they were devastating. Those two families were devastated.

I just want to wish everybody a very, very Happy Thanksgiving. We’re going to be working very hard during the recess in Florida. We’re going to Florida. And I want to thank you all for being here, and let’s start our meeting. And to the media, to the press, thank you very much. We appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you very much.

END

 

11:49 A.M. EST

Press Briefing by Press Secretary Sarah Sanders, 11/17/2017, #33

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

3:00 P.M. EST

MS. SANDERS: Good afternoon. Yesterday, momentum continued to build behind our plan to deliver massive tax relief and job creation for the American people. The House passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and the Senate Finance Committee passed its companion tax reform bill. These were important moments as we move closer to a final vote.

In recent months, we’ve heard from American entrepreneurs, workers, and families from every corner of our nation about how this plan will empower them to build a better life.

In Pennsylvania, Susie Schlomann said that our plan will be “incredible for me and other fixed-income retirees,” because tax relief is targeted at the middle class.

In Ohio, Kristina Port — a small business owner who raised twins as a single mother while launching her company — said the increase in the child tax credit would help working mothers. She also said simplifying the complex tax code would ease the burden on entrepreneurs and allow them to devote more of their time to growing their business, rather than wrestling with their taxes.

In state after state, story after story, we’ve heard how our plan will profoundly improve the lives of hardworking Americans. The optimism is coming back, because with this tax plan — combined with the President’s efforts to eliminate job-killing regulations — Americans feel like their goals are once again attainable.

It’s a reminder of one of the things that made our country unique to begin with. Our people have always been able to visualize a future for themselves and their children and make it a reality. That’s why it’s called the “American Dream,” and this tax plan will make it more attainable for more of our people than ever before.

But for this to happen, we need economic growth that makes it possible for businesses to create jobs and raise wages. So to give some perspective on how our tax plan is going to do that, I’ve invited Kevin Hassett, the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, to join us in the briefing today. Kevin will say a few words and then take some questions specific to this topic. And, as always, I will come back up to take the rest of your questions after that, which I’m sure will all be on tax reform. (Laughter.)

So, with that, I’ll turn it over to Kevin.

MR. HASSETT: Thanks, Sarah. Thanks. And it’s a pleasure to be here to see so many familiar faces. You know, last week I had the honor of chairing the Economic Policy Committee meeting at the OECD in Paris. And the Economic Policy Committee is one of the oldest committees in OECD, and it brings together people, like the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, from countries around the OECD.

And, at the meeting, they were going through the staff recommendations of the OECD for creating economic growth in countries around the world. And the three main points of the staff recommendations were tax reform, infrastructure, and deregulation — that if the government pursues those things, then they can produce more economic growth.

In fact, there was widespread acclaim for the President’s approach towards corporate taxation in particular, because the OECD has been calling for us to reform our corporate tax code for almost a decade.

And so the idea right now that this corporate tax reform is close to the finish line is celebrated not only by us at the White House, but by people around the world who have recognized that us having a non-competitive tax code, the highest corporate tax on Earth, a worldwide system that rewards companies for locating activity elsewhere, is bad not only for us but for the world economy — because a vibrant U.S. economy is good even for our friends in the OECD.

And, with that, I’m pleased to see that the House Ways and Means Committee and then the House have passed this bill, and that it’s out of the Finance Committee — I look forward to the Senate moving forward right after the Thanksgiving break.

And, I guess, I promised — I’m not good at this. I don’t know what the protocol is, but I’ll start in the front row and then work back.

Q Perfect. (Laughter.)

MR. HASSETT: Yeah, that’s right. I’m just an economist.

Q Kevin, I know you’re an economist but there’s obviously a political component to all of this. You got at least six senators up on the Hill, including Ron Johnson, saying that they can’t support the bill in its current form or they have serious concerns about it. You can only afford to lose two. Are you confident that you can get this passed through the Senate? Or could the President run into another situation, like he did with Obamacare? That he wins the House and then loses everything in the Senate.

MR. HASSETT: Look, there’s an old joke about economists, that there are three types: those who can count and those who can’t. (Laughter.) And it takes a while for that one to sink in. And the fact is that the President has supported, from the beginning, regular order because he doesn’t think that we have to wait until the thing becomes law to learn what’s in it; that the right thing to do is to expose the bills to scrutiny and debate.

And Senator Johnson — I met with him yesterday in his office — has some serious concerns, and it’s appropriate at this point in legislative process to bring those forward. And I’m hopeful that people can work it out and that everybody, even Democrats, will end up wanting to vote for it.

And so I’m not sure about the etiquette for follow-ups, so I’ll try to limit people to one because there’s a lot of hands.

Q What makes you think trickle-down economics is going to work this time when it hasn’t worked before?

MR. HASSETT: So trickle-down economics is something that, I guess, people who criticize the idea that taxes affect the economy will use to characterize approaches like the one that we’re pursuing. But I don’t think the idea that’s celebrated by even the non-partisan staff of the OECD — that if you have lower marginal rates, you get economic growth — is voodoo economics or controversial at all.

And yeah, the fact is that countries around the world have cut their corporate rates and had broad-based reforms, like we’re doing on the individual side, and then seeing economic growth result.

I don’t think there’s anybody who thinks that you’ll get no growth or negative growth for this. Maybe there are a few people. But in every economic model I’ve seen, you get growth — either a lot of growth, or sometimes if it’s a closed economy model, a little growth. But you get positive growth out of this. And that growth will benefit workers, and let’s talk about that.

So, right now, the way a U.S. firm avoids U.S. tax is they locate activity, say, in a country like Ireland instead of here. And so if you build a plant in Ireland, then you can sell the stuff back into the U.S. And when you sell the stuff back into the U.S., then it increase the trade deficit and doesn’t do anything for American workers, but it does increase the demand for Irish workers and drive up their wages.

And so what the President wants to do is cut the rate to 20 percent and build guardrails around the tax code so that people can’t transfer price — everything to Ireland anymore. And if we do that, then the people who benefit will be the workers here in the U.S. who have increased demand for their jobs.

Q And the incentive —

MR. HASSETT: I said no follow-ups. So I’m going to back this way and then I’m going to switch sides. I’m sorry I don’t know everybody’s names here.

Q One of Senator Johnson’s concerns is that this bill does not do enough for medium-sized and small businesses. Can you talk about what the bill does do for medium-size and small businesses?

MR. HASSETT: Sure. And the fact is that I want to remind everybody that the President has, really, three main non-negotiables for this bill: that there is a 20 percent corporate tax rate; that there’s a big middle-class tax cut; and that the bill simplified the tax code. And we believe, after analyzing the progress on the Hill, that both approaches satisfy the three main objectives.

And so the question then is, moving forward, what do they do about pass-through entities? What do they do about this, what do they do about that? And we at the White House don’t want to get ahead of that process.

The President supports regular order because that’s really how deals get made and how bills become law. The fact is, it’s urgent that we get a 20 percent rate for America’s workers. And it’s urgent that we get a middle-class tax cut for America’s workers. And the details about like exactly when the small business things kick in and out are things that we’re watching them work out up on the Hill. And we encourage them to pursue regular order because they need to listen to everybody and get the votes they need to make this law.

I’ll go to the lady, right there.

Q One of the major differences between the House and the Senate bill is the elimination of the non-taxable tuition waivers. So while they’re trying to reconcile their differences on that tax reform bill, what do you foresee which could potentially move this tax burden to a lot of young Americans?

MR. HASSETT: That’s the kind of detail that we’re letting Congress work out. The fact is that they’re finding the coalitions that they need to pass the bills in the House and the Senate. And we support that process. We support regular order. We support the transparency that leading debate about issues like this.

Sorry, now I said I’d come over here. Yeah.

Q Kevin, thanks for being here. On one of your TV appearances yesterday, you said that an average family, when this is all said and done, could accumulate a savings benefit of $4,000. That’s a lot of money.

MR. HASSETT: That’s a lot of money.

Q Can you walk us through that?

MR. HASSETT: Sure. And for those of you — and I see some nerdy-looking people out there, so I’m sure that there’s people that want to do this — (laughter) — that we’ve got two CEA reports that go through this in gory detail. And the fact is that you can get to numbers like that four different ways.

I won’t try to do that now in the limited time that we have, but the basic idea is that back when we increased our corporate tax rate from 34 to 35 percent, we were kind of in the middle of the pack of OECD nations. Subsequently, what happened was that countries around the world found that when they cut the corporate tax, that their economic activity increased and the welfare of their workers improved. And then they very often did it again.

A typical country, since our tax increase, has cut its corporate rate two or maybe even three times. And for economists, what that does is it gives us an enormous amount of data to analyze because there are countries that change their rate and countries that don’t. And you can compare the experiences of those two types of countries.

There’s a big peer-review literature that looks at that, including a paper that’s by a German economist — that’s about to come out in the American Economic Review. And what we do is we go through all those papers and we have charts that show, well, if this paper is true, what wage effect do you get. And most of the action is well north of $4,000. And that’s where the number comes from.

I’ll go in the middle, with the orange tie.

Q One of the criticisms, Kevin, of the tax reform proposal is that the corporate tax rate is cut permanently. The individual tax rate phases out after 10 years. Why, in your view, is that such a good idea?

MR. HASSETT: So the President supports permanent tax cuts for the middle class and permanent tax cuts for corporations. And that’s certainly the objective of the planners of this tax bill. But there are also Senate budget rules and reconciliation rules that are required to allow this bill to move forward with 51 votes.

Of course, the hope for everybody is that when the time comes for these things to expire, that they get extended, as happens — I might add — even for the top marginal rate when President Obama came into office. And so they extended most of the Bush tax cuts. But even the top rate, at the beginning — which interestingly they must have done because they knew that if you were to increase the top marginal tax rate during a recession, that it would be very harmful for the economy.

So, back then, there was bipartisan support for the idea that you should not lift the top marginal rate. And so there should be bipartisan support. There would be economic growth effects of bringing it down right now.

I’ll go back down into the middle there.

Q Hi, Emma Robinson, One America News. The two bills are different in that the House bill repeals or does away with the estate tax and the Senate doesn’t. And I know that was a big point for the administration, and Vice President Pence has voiced his support for repealing the death tax, as they call it. What are your thoughts on that? And do you think a final bill will include a repeal of it?

MR. HASSERTT: I think that — again, that’s one of the things that the Senate and the House are working out. I know that the President very strongly favors the elimination of the death tax. And if that is in the final bill, I’m sure that he’ll be happy about that. But he’s listed his non-negotiables, and those non-negotiables I cited at the beginning.

I’ll go back to the far back now.

Q Thank you, Kevin. I appreciate it. Can you talk about this moment earlier in the week at the Wall Street Journal event? Gary Cohn was on stage, and the moderator asked a group of CEOs, “If tax reform passes, who here is going to increase their investment?” And only a couple of hands went up in the room. Gary Cohn said, why aren’t there more hands going up?

Can you answer that question? Why aren’t there more hands going up in a room like that? You would assume that CEOs would say, yes, in fact, we are going to invest more if tax reform passes. Is the administration missing something there?

MR. HASSETT: So that’s a great question. And I went on a little bit after Gary Cohn, and when they asked that question, it was kind of hard for me because, like here, they are really bright lights, but even brighter there, and so I couldn’t quite see how many hands there were. But when I was there, it looked like maybe about half the hands went up. And I think if you go back and look, that it could be that people had time to think about it.

But as an economist, if I go back and look at the academic literature, very often people survey CFOs, and they say, hey, if we change the tax code, would you guys do anything? And they tend to always answer “no” in surveys. But if you look at the hard evidence about what they do, imagine if they didn’t respond to taxes, then they wouldn’t be pursuing their fiduciary duty to maximize profits for their shareholders. So it would be totally irrational for them to do that. And firms that did act rationally in response to the tax code would put them out of business by taking advantage of the tax code.

So the point is — the hard evidence is that people do respond. In fact, one of my very, very first papers that I ever wrote when I got out of grad school is the Brookings papers where we looked at the 1986 tax act, the changes that it made to the business tax code and how it affected investment. And there were very large effects.

Right here in the front.

Q Yes, yes. Gene Sperling, who was once in your position in another administration, says that this tax plan — be it historic — costs $1.5 trillion and it’s a deficit hole. And he says that basically — this is in a tweet. I’m just paraphrasing his tweet. He says, it basically doesn’t justify that cost for 100 million households for a tax increase.

MR. HASSETT: Well, I respect Gene a great deal and consider him a friend, and I disagree with him about that. And I’m sure we’ll at some point have a chance to talk about that.

But here’s the way I think about it and what I would say to Gene if he was here: That if you look at the Joint Tax Committee’s score, in the 10th year they say that the tax bill costs about $170 billion. If you look at the CBO projection of GDP, then in the 10th year GDP is about $28 trillion. And so the amount of deficit that you’re talking relative to GDP in the 10th year is only 0.6 percent. It doesn’t take a heck of a lot of economic growth to cover that hole by the 10th year.

And so the idea that right now we have the highest corporate tax on Earth generating almost no revenue — because people avoid the tax by moving factories to Ireland — that if we fix that, if we repair it and make the U.S. an attractive place again, that it’s going to blow a hole in the deficit — it’s just not economically rational.

And I know that the Joint Tax Committee score says what it says, and I respect the professionals in that staff, but the fact is that the OECD has a study, which we’d be happy to email you, that says that the U.S. in the corporate tax space is on the wrong side of the Laffer Curve; that we’ve got such a high corporate tax rate that we’re chasing business offshore and losing revenue.

And so the idea that this blows a hole in the deficit I think is just incorrect.

I’ll go to the purple tie.

Q I want to pick up where John, right in front of me, left off when he asked about the phase-out on the individual side. You’re an economist; however, the two answers that you gave were both political. One, there’s reconciliation rules. And two, hopefully politicians down the line solve it. But like I mentioned, you’re an economist. So can you not make an economic argument as to why this is good economically for people?

MR. HASSETT: Oh, is it good for things to expire?

Q Correct. Is there an economic argument as to why this is good for the country as it stands right now to expire within eight years or so?

MR. HASSETT: If you lower marginal tax rates, broaden the base, lower rates, give the middle class a tax cut, if you cut the corporate rate — if you do any of those things, they’re positive for economic growth. And they’re less positive for growth if they expire.

Expensing is kind of a strange thing in the sense that if you have expensing for a year, if you go back and look at U.S. history, very often in recessions, they’ll put in expensing for a year to try to stimulate the economy. When expensing expires, it could actually have a short-run stimulus because people try to buy capital before the thing goes away.

But for the most part, permanent tax cuts are far more impactful than things that expire — which is why if you go back and look at the Obama administration, when they were here during the beginning of the Great Recession, they even extended the Bush tax cuts at the top because they understood this.

Can I go right here? And then I’ll come to you, and then that might be the last question because Sarah is standing.

Q I actually want to follow up on that, though. You all made a value judgment to make the corporate tax cuts permanent and to make the individual tax cuts expire, even though you want all of them to be permanent. What’s the rationale for having corporations have that certainty of knowing that they don’t have to worry about what’s going to happen in Washington while families are going to have to worry about what politicians do six, seven years now?

MR. HASSETT: Sure. Well, those are the kind of things that are being worked out by Congress in order to create a bill that under Senate and House rules can become law. And the non-negotiables for us are both met in both bills, and we consider that good news. But the choices that the Senate has to make in order to acquire a coalition to make this law are choices that the Senate has to make. And we don’t want to get in front of that process.

Q You don’t see the value one way or the other, whether the corporate tax cuts versus —

MR. HASSETT: I think tax cuts that are permanent, of course, will have large positive effects.

I’ll give you the last.

Q Kevin, you’ve melded politics and economics here quite successfully, and I want to ask you a political and economic question. You’ve talked about growth covering what the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Tax Committee say could be a deficit hole, a deficit implication of $1.5 trillion. That is going to be measurable over time. There’s going to be a means by which either dynamic scoring or static scoring answers that question.

And since it’s on the mind of some of your undecided Republican senators, is this administration willing to commit to a review five years in to see if the growth models have held along your lines and the deficit implications aren’t as large — or, if they aren’t, to reassess these tax cuts in order not to blow a hole in the deficit?

MR. HASSETT: You know, I have not discussed with the President, and I don’t think Sarah has, what we’re willing to commit to in terms of what we do five years from now. But I can tell you —

Q Do you think there would be —

MR. HASSETT: But let me talk about what we can be clear about today, which is that, as the President came into office, the President’s opponents were saying that 2 percent growth was inevitable, that we were stuck in a secular stagnation; that the President’s policies couldn’t deliver 3 percent growth, and that it was a cockamamie idea to assert it.

We’ve had two quarters in a row of 3 percent growth. If you look at the fourth quarter data, it’s suggesting — at the Atlanta Fed, they have GDPNow, which is about 3.2 as of yesterday. So it’s saying that we’re growing at 3 percent. If we take that momentum into next year and add a tax cut, then we’re quite confident that one should be able to expect sustained growth at that level or above.

With that, I think I have to hand it back to Sarah. Thank you so much for being so gracious with your questions.

MS. SANDERS: Thank you, Kevin. Major, he’s right, I haven’t spoken to the President about that. But I do appreciate that you know that the President will still be here in five years. So, I like that vote of confidence that you would know that we will be here to take that review, and we’ll be sure to raise that with him.

Let me go back here.

Q Thanks, Sarah. I have a non-Roy Moore question for you. Can you say definitively — I want to ask you about Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri. Can you say definitively, from this podium, that he has not been held hostage by the Saudis? And does the President plan to speak to Prime Minister Hariri at all?

MS. SANDERS: I’m not aware of any anticipated conversations. That’s something I’d have to check on and get back to you. And I don’t have any further comment beyond that at this point right now. And I would refer you to the State Department on specifics of that.

Cecilia.

Q Thanks, Sarah. If it’s fair to investigate Al Franken and the allegation made by his accuser, is it also fair to investigate this President and the allegations of sexual misconduct made against him by more than a dozen women?

MS. SANDERS: Look, I think that this was covered pretty extensively during the campaign. We addressed that then. The American people, I think, spoke very loud and clear when they elected this President.

Q But how is this different?

MS. SANDERS: I think in one case, specifically, Senator Franken has admitted wrongdoing, and the President hasn’t. I think that’s a very clear distinction.

Major.

Q So I want to revisit something we discussed yesterday. You said, one of the ways that Alabama voters might be able to figure out if these allegations against Roy Moore are true is in the court of law. That’s a direct quote from you. There’s no criminal means by which that could happen. So are you suggesting that Roy Moore sue the accusers in order to hash this out in court?

MS. SANDERS: That would be something that I would refer to him to make that decision. That’s not something I would be able to advise on.

Q But that’s the venue you meant when you talked about “in the court of law.”

MS. SANDERS: I said that’s one option, one way to determine that process. But that would be a decision that he would have to make, certainly not one I’m going to make.

Q The only reason I raise that is because, during the campaign, as you well remember, then-candidate Trump said, after the election he would sue all the women who have accused him of sexual misconduct, and that you have, from the podium, deemed all liars. He hasn’t done that. Why hasn’t he done that?

MS. SANDERS: I haven’t asked him that question. I’d have to ask him and let you know why he hasn’t chosen to take that path. I’m simply stating that’s an option that Roy Moore has on the table.

Jeff.

Q Sarah, some critics have said that it was hypocritical of the President to tweet about Al Franken and not weigh in on Roy Moore.

MS. SANDERS: He has weighed in on Roy Moore. He did it while he was on a foreign trip in Asia. I did it repeatedly yesterday. In fact, I took about 15 questions on that topic and only one on Al Franken. So to suggest that this White House and, specifically, that this President hasn’t weighed in is just inaccurate and wrong. He weighed in; he said, if the allegations are true, he should step aside. He also weighed in when he supported the RNC’s decision to withdraw resources from the state of Alabama. It’s just a simply inaccurate statement to make about the President.

Sara.

Q Can you tell us whether the President believes the women who are making these allegations against Roy Moore? And would he be willing to ask the Alabama governor to delay the election or take a step like that to try to intervene in this electoral process in Alabama?

MS. SANDERS: The President certainly finds the allegations extremely troubling. As I stated yesterday, he feels like it’s up to the governor and the state — the people in the state of Alabama to make a determination on whether or not they delay that election or whether or not they support and vote for Roy Moore.

Matthew.

Q Thank you, Sarah. In light of the national discussion about the importance of taking these kinds of accusations seriously, I wanted to check: Is it still the White House position that all the women who have accused the President of sexual misconduct are lying?

MS. SANDERS: The President has spoken about this multiple times throughout the campaign and has denied all of those allegations.

Blake.

Q Thanks, Sarah. Let me ask you about something else — the pending potential AT&T and Time Warner merger. The President had said on the campaign trail, back in October of 2016 — and I quote here — he said it was a “deal we will not approve in my administration because it’s too much concentration of power in the hands of too few.” Does the President still feel that way?

MS. SANDERS: The President was asked about this a few days ago, maybe a week ago, while we were on Air Force One, and I’d refer you back to those comments.

April.

Q Sarah, is this an uncomfortable conversation about these sexual allegations for this White House be it Al Franken or be it Roy Moore?

MS. SANDERS: I think it’s an uncomfortable conversation for the country. I think that this is something that is being discussed pretty widely, and we certainly think that it should be taken very seriously. And it’s one of the reasons I stand up here and answer your questions every day, and will continue to do so and continue to address them.

Obviously, it’s something that should be looked at, and I think it should be looked at widespread not just in the political sphere, but in the business atmosphere and across the board in this country. And it’s something we certainly again take seriously.

Q A follow-up.

MS. SANDERS: Alex. We’re tight on time today.

Q I talked to Hillary Clinton today about the President’s past — and going back to what Matthew said, she said, look, I worry about everything from his past because it tells you how he behaves in the present and will in the future. What do you say to that as it relates to these allegations against the President?

MS. SANDERS: I think Hillary Clinton probably should have dealt with some of those of her own issues before addressing this President.

Alex.

Q Two questions. One on taxes, then immigration. A recent Quinnipiac University poll said 61 percent of voters think the Republican tax plan will benefit the wealthy while the White House has pitched this plan as a working-class tax cut. Why the disconnect?

And then on immigration —

MS. SANDERS: Let me answer that first question.

Q Okay.

MS. SANDERS: Look, we’ve actually argued that this tax plan benefits all Americans. That’s the point of it. Specifically, our priority is to target middle-class Americans and make sure that that is addressed first and that those people are prioritized in any piece of legislation for either the House or the Senate.

But at the same time, we want all Americans to benefit by a growing economy and a tax system that actually works for our country versus one that penalizes people.

We’re going to keep moving just because we’re tight.

John.

Q Let me come back and ask you the same thing I asked Kevin. You’ve got six Republican senators either “no” or seriously on the fence here. Can you win enough over in order to pass this? And if the President gets snookered again by the Senate, what’s his reaction going to be?

MS. SANDERS: We certainly are still very confident that we’re going to get this package passed, and we’d love to see some of the Democrats come on board and support this historic piece of legislation that we feel will be one of the great legacies of this presidency.

Q The fact that you didn’t get any Democrats in the House, how does that portend for getting them in the Senate?

MS. SANDERS: There’s always hope. We’ll hold out hope that Democrats in the Senate want to put partisan politics aside and put the people of this country first. We haven’t ruled it, and we’re certainly going to keep pushing forward. And we’re still confident we’re going to get it done.

Q Safe to say the President will not be pleased if he gets snookered by the Senate again?

MS. SANDERS: I think the American people will be the ones that won’t be pleased, because they’re going to be the ones that lose out the most if this doesn’t go forward.

Toluse.

MS. SANDERS: Thanks, Sarah. The administration put out a disaster funding request for about $44 billion today. It’s much less than what a number of different governors and officials in the various affected territories and states have requested. Can you explain sort of why the number is so low compared to what the local officials say they need?

MS. SANDERS: I don’t think $44 billion is a low amount. And my guess is if you ask any average citizen across this country, they wouldn’t feel like it’s low either.

But to this point, Texas has not put any state dollars into this process. We feel strongly that they should step up and play a role and work with the federal government in this process. We did a thorough assessment, and that was completed, and this was the number that we put forward to Congress today.

Q Are you expecting (inaudible) much more requests forward in the future, specifically for Puerto Rico?

MS. SANDERS: Yeah, absolutely. At this point, the request that went in today of the roughly $44 billion primarily addresses Texas and Florida. Those storms took place ahead of Puerto Rico, and the assessment for Puerto Rico hasn’t been completed yet. Once that’s done, we fully anticipate that there will be additional requests at that time.

Kristen.

Q Sarah, thank you. Steven Bannon is sending a strong message to the establishment to back off of Roy Moore. Does the President’s allegiance to Steve Bannon in any way implicate his response?

MS. SANDERS: The President doesn’t have an allegiance to Steve Bannon. The President has an allegiance to the people of this country and nothing else.

Q Has he spoken at all to Steve Bannon or any outside advisors?

MS. SANDERS: Not that I’m aware of. Not that I’m aware of.

Q How concerned is he, Sarah, about losing this seat to a Democratic candidate, who, right now, according to the polls, is leading?

MS. SANDERS: Look, I think that the President is less concerned about the seat and more focused on the policy and the legislation that we’re pushing through right now, like tax reform.

John.

Q Thanks a lot, Sarah. Just in regards to that question regarding the supplemental requests: The President and the administration has put forth $44 million. Puerto Rico has requested $94 million. Are they going to get somewhere along that order? I think half of the island is still without electricity.

MS. SANDERS: As I said, we’re going to wait until that assessment is complete and we’ll make a determination at that point and see what the best path forward is.

Q Did the President notify Governor Abbott —

MS. SANDERS: Sorry, I’m going to keep it brief.

Q Did the President notify Governor Abbott of the lesser amount that he’s put forward?

MS. SANDERS: John, I’m going to keep moving. I’m going to try be respectful of your colleagues.

Q Yesterday, the joint investigative mechanism was vetoed by Russia at the U.N. Security Council, and Ambassador Haley tweeted afterward that the veto proves that Russia cannot be trusted as a partner going forward in trying to solve the political situation in Syria.

Does the President have any response to the veto, first? What is the U.S. view, going forward, of how chemical weapons will be investigated and dealt with in Syria? And is it the U.S. position now that Russia cannot be a partner in trying to solve, or do a next-day political situation by —

MS. SANDERS: I think by the actions that the President’s taken specific to chemical weapons, I think he’s shown his position on that with a strike in Syria earlier this year.

In terms of Russia’s veto, it’s certainly not one we support. We do hope that, moving forward, they want to get on board and work with us on this. But at the same time, this isn’t something that we support their decision on.

Steven.

Q There’s been some extraordinary pushback on the administration’s decisions with respect to elephant trophies and hunting of lions and elephants in Africa. Can you shed some light on the decisions the administration has made? And will you make that pushback?

MS. SANDERS: Yeah, this is actually due to a review that started back in 2014, under the previous administration, done by career officials at the Fish and Wildlife Service. This review established that both Zambia and Zimbabwe had met new standards, strict international conservation standards that allowed Americans to resume hunting in those countries.

A ban on importing elephant ivory from all country remains in place. But again, all of this was based on a study that was conducted — that started back to the previous administration and done by career officials.

Darlene.

Q The senate tax bill has a tax break for corporate jets. How does that help the middle class?

MS. SANDERS: As Kevin stated before, this administration has laid out the priorities that we want to see reflected in this legislation. We’re going to continue to fight for those priorities and let the legislative process work through.

In terms of those specific pieces, that’s something I would refer you to members of the House and senate on that. But our focus is on making sure these priorities are answered and met.

We’ll make this the last one.

Q Thank you, Sarah. Yesterday — on Jared Kushner and on his campaign e-mails — that Senate Committee, they’re asking for those e-mails in the Russia investigation. You punted it to the Kushner’s attorney. Today, what’s the White House reaction to those previously undisclosed e-mails?

MS. SANDERS: Look, as I said, they were going to put out a statement; they did. And I would refer you back to that on anything specific to that inquiry.

Thanks so much, guys. Hope you have a happy Friday and a good weekend. We’ll see you on Monday.

END

3:41 P.M. EST

Remarks Followed by Q&A by the Vice President at the Wall Street Journal's CEO Council Meeting

Four Seasons Hotel

Washington, D.C.

4:47 P.M. EST

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you, John. Thank you for that warm introduction. Thank you all for that welcome.

It’s an honor to be here today at the 10th annual CEO Council of the Wall Street Journal. I know this has been an invigorating day and a half for all of you. And I’m humbled and honored to be able to speak to you today.

This is a gathering of leaders of consequence. It’s amazing to think that companies gathered here represent $2.5 trillion in annual revenue and millions of jobs across the United States of America. So we thank you for your leadership. We thank you for your investment in America and your belief in America’s future.

We know that communities large and small, across this country, depend on the companies that are represented here and the decisions you make each and every day. To the business leaders in this room, I’m grateful for the leadership that you provide and I bring greetings from a businessman-turned-President, who’s absolutely determined to make America’s economy great again. I bring greetings from the 45th President of the United States, President Donald Trump.

The President sent me here today to say thank you. Thank you for all that your companies mean to a growing American economy. But he also sent me here to give you an update on the progress of our administration. As we speak, the President is winging his way back from a 13-day journey across the Asia Pacific.

Throughout the past week and a half, the President has been busy forging stronger relationships with nations and key allies all across the region. He has in every real sense been about the business of restoring American leadership on the world stage; economically and diplomatically restoring that leadership and strengthening our economy along the way.

In fact, last Thursday, President Trump joined President Xi, in China, to announce a series of agreements between American and Chinese companies which would result in more than $250 billion in deals that will benefit the American economy.

But as the leaders in this room know well, strengthening America’s economy ultimately starts here at home. And President Trump has already taken decisive action — as you heard about from some of my counterparts who have been here earlier today — to strengthen the American economy. And I’m pleased to report to you on the progress that we’ve made.

Before we look forward — before we look at what we’ve accomplished, it’s important that we look back. I don’t need to tell all of you about the failed economic policies of the recent past. It seems like over the last eight years, Washington, D.C. was busy producing reams of red tape, restricting American energy, burdening American businesses, and American families with more government, more taxes, more regulation, and less freedom.

And we all know the results — the most powerful economy in the history of the world grew in the last eight years by only 1.8 percent. One company after another, heartbreakingly, not only laid off workers but many times announced plans to expand their operations not here, but around the world. Wages stagnated for hardworking American families. And worst of all, we saw a decline in the number of Americans who actually believed that the best days for America and the best opportunities for their children lie ahead. Make no mistake about it: Under President Donald Trump, those days are over.

Since the very first day of this administration, President Trump has fought tirelessly to give American businesses and American families the economic opportunities and freedom they need to prosper.

I’m pleased to report to you that since the advent of this administration, President Donald Trump has signed more laws rolling back federal red tape than any President in American history. This year alone, federal agencies have canceled or delayed 860 planned regulations, and we’ve kept new net regulatory costs at zero.

And next year, we’ve actually charged our Cabinet to achieve something that’s never been done before in modern American history. We’ve charged our Cabinet to achieve a net reduction in federal regulatory costs. The era of over-regulation is over in America.

At the same time, our administration has been busy unleashing American energy. As you all well know, affordable and abundant energy is the lifeblood of American business. And President Trump has been committed to putting into practice an all-of-the-above energy strategy that will unlock all of America’s boundless natural resources.

In one of his first acts in office, President Trump approved the Keystone and Dakota pipelines. We’re expanding access to offshore drilling. And last month, we announced that we’ll repeal the so-called Clean Power Plan that’s put such an enormous burden on job creators and businesses and the cost of energy in this country.

When it comes to international trade, President Trump has announced to the world in the recent days and announced throughout this administration that he’ll continue to put America First. Last week in Vietnam, the President laid out with specificity his vision for trade in this administration that would be both free and fair.

As the President said in his words, the United States will “no longer enter into large agreements that tie our hands, surrender our sovereignty, and make meaningful enforcement practically impossible.” Which is why earlier this year, the President made the decision to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Instead, as the President said, America will pursue bilateral trade agreements in his words, “rooted in the principles of fairness and reciprocity.” And as the President made clear, “we expect that markets will be open to an equal degree on both sides, and that private industry — not government planners — will direct investment.”

In fact, earlier this year, the President directed me to work with my counterpart in Japan, Deputy Prime Minister Aso, to initiate a Japan-U.S. Economic Dialogue. It’s already resulted in the lessening of market access barriers between the United States and Japan, and it is laying the foundation for a free trade agreement between the United States and our great ally, Japan.

And lastly, back here at home, President Trump has been busy appointing strict constructions to our federal courts at every level — men and women who will uphold the Constitution, faithfully apply the laws as written, and ensure the administrative state stays within its proper roles. Most notable amount of those appointments is the newest justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, Justice Neil Gorsuch.

So it’s about regulatory reform. It’s about unleashing American energy. It’s about bilateral trade, and it’s about the rule of law. That’s the leadership President Trump has been providing so far in the early days of this administration. But as I said, we’re just getting started.

What is really remarkable though, is that for the progress that we have made since that day, January 20th, America’s economy and confidence in America is rebounding in ways that are benefiting American workers and American growth.

Businesses from the outset of this administration, like those represented in this room, have already created 1.5 million new jobs, including 261,000 jobs created by businesses large and small in the month of October.

Employer confidence is soaring all across America, especially in the vital area of manufacturing, in the life of this country.

And of course, the stock market is setting new records nearly every week. And since the outset of this administration, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has actually increased 28 percent, creating $5.5 trillion in new wealth — benefitting pensions, retirement, and savings accounts for tens of millions of Americans.

As the President likes to say though, “It’s all about growth.” And today, I’m pleased to report to you that the economy has grown by at least 3 percentage points for the past two quarters. And the New York Fed expects it to grow even faster before the year is out.

In a word, the America economy has real momentum as a result of the policies and the leadership of President Donald Trump. But as I said before, we’re just getting started.

To keep this momentum going, the President and I believe, there’s one thing more we must do before the end of this year. And with President Trump’s leadership, and strong support in the Congress of the United States, we’re going to cut taxes across the board for working families and businesses large and small.

Now, I’m not here today to endorse any particular bill moving out of the House and the Senate. You heard a lot of details from Secretary Mnuchin, Secretary Ross, Gary Cohn — I know they’ve already given you detailed updates on that.

As you well know, the House of Representatives is set to vote on their tax cut bill later this week. The President will be traveling to Capitol Hill to speak to members of the House Republican Conference on this Thursday. And we may well expect a vote that day. The Senate will vote on their bill in the week after Thanksgiving. We are making steady progress toward delivering historic tax relief for the American people.

But as you heard from Leader McConnell and from the leaders in our administration, we’ve been hand in hand with leaders in both chambers of Congress to move forward on the President’s vision for tax reform.

But let me take a step back for just a second and talk about tax cuts in the context of American leadership. Over the last year as Vice President, I’ve traveled all across this country. Every place I visited, I’ve talked to job creators and working families about the enormous burden that our tax code places on their success and on growth.

And the truth is the tax code today takes too much of the American people’s hard-earned money. It makes it harder for companies, large and small, to grow. And the tax code is so complex, it seems mainly to benefit the lucky few — the wealthy, the well-connected who can afford to hire armies of lobbyists and lawyers here in our nation’s capital.

The simple truth is our tax code has been a barrier of growth. And as a result, American families and American business have been falling behind.

Today, it’s amazing to think: Taxpayers spend over 6 billion hours every year dealing with their taxes, and it costs our economy $262 billion every year in compliance. That’s more than $800 for every man, woman, and child in America just to figure out what you owe the federal government.

But it’s not just the complexity of our tax code that hurts working families, it’s the burden of high taxes that are imposed on our businesses, too.

Nearly 30 years ago, it’s amazing to think, America had one of the lowest corporate tax rates in the developed world. It spurred an era of soaring income and jobs and growth.

But today, America has fallen behind our competitors when it comes to corporate taxes and business taxes. Our corporate tax rate is now the highest in the developed world. And even worse, our outdated system of worldwide taxation penalizes businesses for being headquartered in America by taxing every dollar they earn overseas.

Now, I have no doubt that all the great Americans in this room want to expand your companies here in America first, to create more jobs in the communities in this country where you call home, to raise the wages of millions of Americans that you employ. But the truth is that too many American businesses have found it easier in recent years to close factories and move jobs overseas than to find a way to figure out how to grow here.

Well, those days are over.

The truth is too many companies in the last 10 to 15 years have faced that terrible choice between corporate profits and country. And working families have felt the pain in the form of hollowed-out communities, lost jobs, lower wages, and less hope.

And I know there’s pain involved. Just because you sit in the CEO suite doesn’t mean you’re not a real person who lives in the neighborhood, who knows people. I’ll never forget the day in Muncie, Indiana I was at the Rotary Club. And the owner of a third-generation business stood before his fellow Rotarians with tears in his eyes and announced that he was moving all of his manufacturing over to the East Coast of China just to keep his business doors open.

The truth is there were a lot of factors to that, but our tax code, our high corporate taxes was one of the main culprits. So those days of taxes driving jobs out of America are about to end. As I said before, we’ve fallen behind in tax policy and its impact on America.

And President Trump is absolutely committed to advancing tax cuts and tax reform along the following outline. First, we’re going to cut taxes for working families in real and meaningful ways and let people have more money in their pockets.

Secondly, we’re going to restore simplicity and fairness to the tax code, so that the American people have the opportunity to file their taxes on their own.

And lastly, we’re going to make our economy competitive again by making a corporate tax rate low and competitive on a global stage and transforming the way we tax business income to make American businesses competitive.

So let me take each one of those elements of the President’s vision one by one. First, as I mentioned, the President is committed to cutting taxes for working families. He talks about this tax cut bill being a “middle-class miracle.” And I promise you, as the legislation continues to move through the House and Senate, our focus is going to be on making sure that the majority of the resources here benefit the paychecks and benefit the pocketbooks of working families across America by lowering the marginal tax rates, by increasing and doubling the standard exemption, by increasing and improving the per-child tax credit. These are all elements of ensuring that middle-class Americans, working families will benefit and prosper as a result of this tax relief.

Let me also say with today’s headlines that the President and I welcome word that the Senate Finance Committee will include the repeal of the individual mandate of Obamacare in the Senate tax cut bill as it moves forward in that chamber.

As you all know, the President had urged that we include a full repeal of the Obamacare tax at the center of this tax reform. This would repeal the mandate that’s at the heart of Obamacare. But make no mistake about it, this would also be a middle-class tax cut.

As the Wall Street Journal reported yesterday in their left column, more than one in three households that paid the Obamacare tax, the mandate tax in 2015, earned less than $25,000 a year. And more than 90 percent made less than $75,000 a year, according to IRS data.

The truth is by eliminating the Obamacare mandate tax, we will pass and enact real tax relief for working families all across America, and we will end the era that began seven long years ago where the federal government has the taxing power to order every American to buy insurance — whether they want it, or need it, or not.

So this is all about benefits for working families. But secondly, we’re going to restore simplicity and fairness to the tax code. The goal is that Americans will be able to file their taxes — at least nine out of 10 Americans will be able to file their taxes on a single sheet of paper.

The truth is that average Americans should not have to go out and hire the accountants and the lawyers that a business has to hire just to figure out what they owe. So we’re going to work for tax simplification, and we’re going to lift an enormous burden off the American economy.

And make no mistake about it, when you think about the sheer cost in time and resources that Americans spend filling out their taxes, that opportunity cost robs real energy from our economy. And so by simplifying the tax code, we’re going to leave more money in the pockets of the American people and less time at a kitchen table over a calculator, anxiously computing late into the evening.

Finally, we’re going to make our economy competitive again by cutting the corporate tax rate and fundamentally transforming the way that we tax businesses in America.

Now, when it comes to economic growth, I want to tell you the President is very passionate about this last issue. If you take nothing else from my message today, I want you to take the fact that this is going to be a middle-class tax cut. We’re going to simplify the tax code. And without apology, we’re going to fight to make American businesses more competitive by lowering the business tax rate.

We’re going to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent — and not a penny more. The simple fact is — and you may have heard this from some of my counterparts — that President Trump has made it clear, he agreed on the 20 percent number, and that’s it. Truth is that when we get to 20 percent, we’ll go from one of the highest rates in the developed world to below the average in the industrialized world. And the President is determined to dig in for it.

We’re also going to make sure that small businesses, which are the engine of the American economy in so many ways, get the same tax relief as corporations like you. We’re going to cut the pass-through tax rate to 25 percent, which will be the lowest for subchapter S, small businesses, or LLCs, as they’re known — for small businesses, it will be the lowest tax rate since 1931.

We’re also going to replace the outdated system of worldwide taxation with a territorial system, so only the money that’s earned in America is taxed in America. And we’re going to let businesses fully and immediately write off the cost of new equipment and other capital investments because all companies need to grow and to grow fast.

And finally, we’re going to cut taxes on the trillions of dollars that many of your companies have locked overseas so you can bring those dollars back here to America to invest in American growth, American jobs, and America’s future.

So rest assured that President Trump is committed to middle-class tax relief and tax reform and simplification. But we also believe this is all about competitiveness, and we’re absolutely determined to work with the leaders in the House and the Senate to ensure that America’s business taxes put each one of you in a competitive position to grow jobs here in the United States of America and not have to make the choice that businesses have faced with heartbreak in years past.

We truly believe that tax cuts for businesses, for individuals are going to unleash a tidal wave of growth. With the American people having more money in their pockets, American consumers are going to have more dollars to spend. With more resources in your businesses, we believe we’ll see a wave of capital investment, creating millions of jobs, spurring an era of innovation.

And we truly do believe, as you’ve heard from Dr. Kevin Hassett and others today, we truly do believe that by lowering business taxes in America, that we will set the stage for wages to rise for working Americans all across this country.

Earlier today, Dr. Hassett, I know, spoke of the work that he’s done in this area. As he’s brilliantly showed in recent published work, our tax cut for American businesses we believe will boost wages for American workers. In fact, once these tax — go fully into effect, we believe the typical American household can actually expect an extra $4,000 in their pockets every year at least.

Now, previous administrations in both political parties have supported corporate tax cuts for exactly the same reason — because it is a consensus view — the degree of the impact has always been debated — but it has been a consensus view that lowering corporate taxes is the most effective way to move that stubborn number of wage increases in this country, and we’re going to be fighting and fighting hard for it.

The truth is that economists from across the ideological spectrum have long agreed that cutting taxes on businesses will boost wages for workers. And President Trump and I agree.

As the United States’ competitors have already proven, low business taxes mean bigger paychecks for workers. In the last year alone, the 10 developed countries with the lowest corporate tax rates experienced a wage growth of nearly 4 percent. The 10 countries with the highest tax rates, including the United States, had wage growth clocked in at a mere half a percentage point.

Men and women, those are hard numbers. Those are real numbers. And the reality is that we truly believe that by lowering business taxes in America, each and every one of you is going to invest in your most precious asset the most, that is your people — all the hardworking people that make your companies successful.

It’s happened in other countries. It’s happened in the past. It’s going to happen again in the United States of America.

And we need all of you to tell this story. The truth is each and every one of you needs to tell the story about what business taxes mean to the people who work for your companies and who work all across this economy.

And the truth is I want to thank the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal for doing the job that they’ve done to illuminate this reality.

But as I close I really do want to finish with a challenge to each and everyone one of you. We have a historic opportunity to renew sustained American growth at 3 percent or more, benefitting the American economy, American workers, and American businesses for generations, but we need your help.

President Trump and I need your full and unwavering support to pass tax cuts and tax reform and to do so this year.

You’re here today as a member of this council because you’re uniquely influential. You’re men and women who lead companies of enormous consequence in our economy, in the communities, in the country, and in the halls of government. So I want to encourage you to do a few things before you leave town and as soon as you leave town.

Number one, sit down with your employees, your suppliers, other business leaders in your community and let them know what you’ve heard here today. If you share our conviction that now is the time for historic tax relief for the American people, and that it’s going to make a real difference in the ability for your companies to grow, I want you to go tell somebody, especially the people that work for your, especially the people that supply your company, your vendors and your suppliers.

And I also want to encourage you to take the opportunity to speak to the people that represent all those people that work for you and let them know that now is the time for us to do all that we can to set politics aside and embrace this historic opportunity to pass meaningful tax cuts and tax reform for the American people.

This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity, but we’re not going to get it done unless we get it done together.

And the truth is that tax cuts have been throughout our history a bipartisan affair. When John F. Kennedy reduced taxes and spoke about a “rising tide lifting all boats,” it was bipartisan. It was bipartisan tax relief that passed.

When Ronald Reagan did the same in 1980, Republicans and many Democrats came together to support an effort to let the American people keep more of what they earn to make America more competitive.

And the truth is that we’ve got a historic opportunity, but I want to challenge each and everyone one of the leaders in this room to lead — lead on this issue. And do it in days, not weeks — because I have to tell you we’ve got a tremendous opportunity in front of us that with your help and with your support, with the strong leadership of President Donald Trump, and with the support of the men and women who represent the American people in the Congress of the United States, I truly do believe that we can pass historic tax relief in the Congress of the United States, and we can pass it this year.

But let me close just by saying it’s an honor to be with all of you. I’m very aware of the stature of the men and women in this room and the impact that you have on the life of this country, and the impact that you have on millions of hardworking Americans who work in the companies that you lead. And I’m honored to be with all of you today and humbled by it.

I also want to say to each one of you that I know that you’re great employers. You create great jobs in America. But I also want to say that I’m aware that you’re great corporate citizens. I know that it would be impossible to go into the communities where your companies employ Americans and not see the marquis and the banner of your company on virtually every worthy cause in town. Hard to go to a Little League game and not see the name of your company hung over the back fence outside, past the outfielders. And just know the President and I appreciate the generosity of each one of these companies as corporate citizens.

But it’s in that last word that I just want to challenge you — you’re such great corporate citizens, I encourage you to maybe exercise the citizenship in one more renewed way in the next month, and that is step up as corporate citizens to help us communicate past the politics of this town how important it is that we seize this opportunity to bring real tax cuts to the middle class in this country, to bring real tax reform and simplification to the American people, and that we bring about a transformational reform of America’s business taxes to unleash the boundless energy of the American economy.

And let me say with confidence that you all will do that, with confidence in the leadership of President Donald Trump and in all those that represent us in the Congress of the United States, I say I know we will pass the largest tax cut in American history, and we’ll pass it this year.

Let’s get to work. Thanks, everybody. God bless you and God bless the United States. (Applause.)

Q Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Thank you for being here. You’ve kindly agreed to take a few questions. You may or may not regret that decision later. (Laughter.) But we appreciate it.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: You bet. Good to see you.

Q Thank you. So as you said, as we speak, the President is winging his way back from Asia. So let me start there. And as you also suggested, in his work in Asia, the President annunciated I think a paradigm shift in trade, essentially no more big multilateral deals. We’re going to focus on bilateral deals that are better for the U.S.

But let me pose the problem as I can see with that, which is that (inaudible) —

THE VICE PRESIDENT: One of the earlier conversations the President and I had when I joined the campaign was precisely on the issue of trade. I come from a manufacturing state and an agriculture state, and the President spoke to me about a vision for trade that is really built on arms-length relationships with countries around the world.

President Trump believes in trade. He believes in, as he says, free and fair trade. But as he said to me then, and he said over the course of his travels this last week, the President just simply believes that these multilateral deals that tie many nations together ultimately result in the United States losing leverage for the ability to hold people accountable for the commitments that they make in the trade arrangements.

And he believes that we’ll be able to advance the interests of our country and the countries that we’re trading with more effectively if we simply have arms-length relationships.

It’s one of the reasons why he initiated the economic dialogue with Japan that Deputy Prime Minister Aso and I have been working very diligently on with meetings in Japan and here in Washington, D.C.

And, Jerry, I would tell you that I do believe that in talking with leaders around the world, there’s been a great deal of enthusiasm once they realize that President Trump when he said America First, he didn’t mean America alone. He just simply meant that he wanted to get back to win-win relationships.

And to see the magnitude of trade deficits that we have with many countries around the world, I can tell you every bilateral meeting we’ve ever had with a country that we enjoy a trade deficit with, it’s one of the first things the President talks about because he thinks trade relationships ought to — in a very real sense — be defined by it being a win for both parties.

And so I think that there has been great enthusiasm among countries, and I think you’re going to see this administration work very vigorously to expand access to world markets to improve existing trade relationships that we have. But it’s all with a focus on making sure that American workers and American businesses are winning every bit as much as companies and individuals in other countries.

Q But when the other 11 countries that were in the Trans-Pacific Partnership hang together as they did this week and say, we’re moving on, is that a train leaving with us left behind?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, we don’t think so. This is the most powerful economy in the history of the world. We’re in the midst of renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement. We truly believe — the President is very passionate about this, Jerry — that the United States of America has not pressed our interests on behalf of American workers and American businesses enough in recent years.

I’ve heard it many times in private, but the President said it very much in public this week when he was in China. He said, I don’t blame China for a bad trade deal. He blamed the policymakers in the United States who have allowed that kind of relationship to evolve.

So I think the honesty of that kind of dialogue and the strength of the American economy puts us in a position to move toward what the President envisions, which I think is bilateral win-win trade relationships that will be good for both the countries in the deal.

Q Let me turn to your sales pitch on the tax bill, tax reform. And note what we did a national poll in September in which only 16 percent of the people that we surveyed said they favored cutting corporate taxes, and 37 percent said businesses were paying less than their fair share of taxes. Which would suggest you got a ways to go yet to make the sale about a combination of a corporate tax cut and an individual tax cut. Can you do that?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I think we can. I have to tell you as I travel around the country, people know the time has come to cut taxes and to reform our tax code.

I participated by telephone today in a roundtable in Trenton, New Jersey. I’ve traveled around the country meeting with businesses large and small, and people get it. They understand, as I tried to articulate today, as you all know in your businesses what a barrier our tax code has been to growth and to jobs.

But make no mistake about it, we need business leaders in this country to go tell that story, too. We need you to go down to the cafeteria at your company and hold a town hall of your own and tell people about the impact that lowering business taxes is going to have on the ability for your company to grow, to create more jobs, and particularly as Dr. Hassett has pointed out, we really believe that there is a direct relationship between lower business taxes and higher wages for working Americans.

And so communicating that message, which I think we have had much success in doing, is going to be key to moving this forward.

Q And are you going to have 52 Senate votes going forward? Or is this problem in Alabama going to cost you one of those before you get to the end of this road?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: We believe we’ll have the votes. We believe that we’re making steady progress in the United States Senate and in the House of Representatives, and that we’ll have the votes. But we’re taking nothing for granted.

And let me also say that regardless of the outcome in an upcoming special election, the American people in both political parties I believe know that we need tax relief. They know the time has come for tax cuts. They know that American businesses are operating under an uncompetitive tax code. And so we are very sincere about reaching out to men and women in both political parties.

The President and I have sat down with Democrat members of the House, of the Senate. We continue to reach out in a constructive way. In this town that is so divided, and it seems like it’s more divided than it’s ever been, we truly believe that this is a real opportunity for the Congress to come together in unique ways and embrace the kind of tax relief that will put more money in the pockets of working Americans. It will simplify and lift the burden of the tax code and will unleash the boundless energy of American free enterprise to benefit American workers and the American economy for generations to come. So we’ll keep working it.

And with your help and with God’s help, and with President Donald Trump in the White House, I think we’re going to get it done.

Q Let me take advantage of your presence here to ask about one subject that hasn’t come up yet, but that I think is in the backs at least of everybody’s mind, which is North Korea. The rhetoric can get a little confusing sometimes. We’ve heard talk of raining fire down on the North Koreans if they don’t change their course, but we’ve also heard talk about the virtue of diplomacy and a willingness to meet with North Koreans, including the supreme leader of North Korea. Is there an opening here for diplomacy to solve the North Korean nuclear program or not?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: President Trump sent me to the region earlier this year. And he made very clear on this trip what our policy is, and that is that first and foremost, the era of strategic patience is over. Strategic patience itself, Jerry, has been a historically failed policy. One administration after another in both political parties have entered into an agreement with North Korea, given them time. North Korea breaks their word, moves forward and continues to develop a nuclear ballistic missiles program.

President Trump made it clear early in this administration, as he made clear on this trip, that’s over; and that we’re absolutely committed to resolving this issue. All options are on the table, and the President has made that clear. But we continue to hope and we continue to work to resolve this issue peaceably by brining economic and diplomatic pressure to bear on North Korea.

And largely owing to the President’s energetic engagement with leaders in the region, including President Xi, we believe that we’ve isolated North Korea economically and diplomatically in ways that has never occurred before. China has taken action, Jerry, as you know that they’ve never taken before. But we believe they need to do more. Other countries in the region need to do more.

But President Trump is absolutely committed to achieve what is the consensus objective of the world community, and that is that North Korea would abandon its nuclear and ballistic missile program. And that we would have nuclear-free Korean Peninsula. That is the goal.

We’ll continue to drive all of our allies in the region to assist us in achieving that by peaceable means. But that strategic patience and that waiting game is over, and the President’s message, I think, this week was very consistent.

Q That is the goal. Some people wonder whether denuclearization is a realistic goal at this point. And it raises the question of, why not simply, adopt a policy of containing and deterring the North Koreans? It worked with the Soviet Union for half a century and ultimately that regime fell, peaceably. Is that not a viable strategy?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I think President Trump’s speech in South Korea was historic and meaningful. It was meaningful because he spoke as much about the people of North Korea as he spoke about the strategic issues that we face.

I was deeply moved as the President talked about the differences — even the nighttime vision from outer space — to see one country in virtual darkness and another country lit by prosperity and freedom.

But then to literally speak directly to the leader of North Korea from that podium and to communicate to them that it’s in the interest of their people and the interest of their future to abandon nuclear and ballistic missiles and to join the family of nations to me was — I thought it was inspiring. And it continues to be talked about across the region, as such.

So I really believe that in the interest of the people of North Korea and in the interest of the national security of the United States of America, President Trump is going to remain determined to achieve the objective that we would one day have a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula and allow for the peaceable progress of the people of North and South Korea to move forward into history.

Q Mr. Vice President, let me ask you one final question. We, earlier today, canvassed this group and asked them for questions that I might pose to you. And there is one here that I did want to ask you, because I think it reflects some of the concerns that people have about the way things work in this town right now.

This person said, “I voted for Trump 12 months ago. I would vote for him today. I believe our system needs to be shaken up a little, but it’s painful to watch at times. Being a sensible Midwesterner,” — that’s you — “how do you put up with all the chaos and the periodic silliness?” (Laughter.)

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I couldn’t be more proud to be Vice President for President Donald Trump. Now, I want to stipulate, I’m very fond of him — we’ve become very good friends.

But I have to tell you, having spent 12 years in Washington, D.C., having spent four years as a governor, having seen the way this city was calcified, having seen the capacity of this city to always change the subject when something comes up that actually could benefit the American people and the American economy. Right? This is a city that always comes up with something else to talk about when we get to tax cuts. It’s the reason why it never happens, but every generation or so.

And I really do believe that the American people in their wisdom elected the right man at the right time to be President of the United States. He’s got broad shoulders. He’s got high energy. I expect there’s probably not a man or woman in this room sitting in a CEO suite whose team doesn’t have the same feeling about you all from time to time. Am I right?

The one thing — I’ll tell you a story about — can I just tell you one anecdote before I go?

Q Absolutely.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: So when we got the call about being considered for this job, I’d only met the President twice. It was just a handshake once in New York. And then once at Mar-a-Lago, he came out and said hello when we were having dinner there.

So when it came time for us to considered for this job, we said we were honored but we never expected that we would be asked. But if we were ever to be asked, I said, there’s two things I want to know before I would be able to answer that question. I was governor of Indiana and I loved my job. I knew I could make a real difference where I was.

But I said, two things I’d need to know: Number one — and the bosses in the room will like this — I said, number one, I’d like to know the job description. Because there’s only one person that writes it and it’s written every four to eight year. Right?

And the second thing I said is, we need to know them as a family, to know who they are because we really — we don’t know them. And I said, to know the Pences is to know a family. And I immediately, Jerry, said, now I know none of that’s possible.

This was late June. I said, we wouldn’t be able to spend the kind of time together that we could get to know each other. It was two days later, I got a call back that said, not only did the candidate like your response, but he wanted to invite you to spend Fourth of July weekend at Bedminster with him and bring your whole family. And his family is going to be there.

So we made our way out there. We arrived on a Friday night — now this is this the anecdote I wanted to share.

So we went to the clubhouse — little table we were sitting over in a corner. My wife and my daughter were with me. And Dave has been running Bedminster since the President bought it a number of years ago and turned it into a beautiful resort. And he walked over to the table and he said to me, I just wanted to check and make sure everything is okay and you guys have what you need.

I said, it’s wonderful, we’re very humbled to be here. I said, don’t worry about us, we’re not on the schedule until tomorrow morning. And Dave looked at me and he said, well you know how he is. And I said, I have no idea whatsoever. (Laughter.) I said, that’s really why I’m here.

And he looked at me and he said with a warm smile, he said, well he’s just going to want sure everything is right. He said, he’s called a couple times from the car just to make sure everything is squared away.

Now, there were two things in that moment that I’ve seen every single day serving shoulder-to-shoulder with President Donald Trump. Number one is he has high standards. He does — things have to be right. I mean to tell you, I’ve spoken to the President every day during this trip with few exceptions, and every day he’s talked to me about tax cuts. He’s totally focused on — he’s on the international stage 13 days, but he’s totally focused on moving an agenda forward for the American people. And he wants to get it done and he wants to get it done right.

And that kind of focus is what makes for successful CEOs like the men and women in this room.

But the other thing I saw was another quality of leadership. Because when Dave said to me, he’s going to want to make sure things are right, he said it with a smile.

I expect — maybe with a few exceptions in this room — the CEOs understand there’s two great qualities of leaders. Number one, you’ve got to have vision, you’ve got to have standards. Number two, you got to be able to inspire people to want to work for you. Right?

And that’s the kind of leader President Trump is. Each and every day — I have to tell you, — I see that energy, I see that vision, I see that determination, and I just know with confidence in my heart that he’s the right man at the right time to lead this country back.

And as we always say, I’m absolutely confident that seven years from now, we’ll look back and say, it was President Donald Trump who led a tremendous renewal of the American spirit. We made America safe again. We made America prosperous again. And to borrow a phrase, we’ll be able to say we made America great again. I really believe it.

Q Mr. Vice President, thank you for sharing with us. You were kind to do it. We meet every year about this time, in this room. So you can come back anytime you want. We appreciated it very much.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you all very much. It’s an honor. (Applause.)

END

 5:33 P.M. EST

Written question – Money laundering and tax evasion in any part of the world where EU-based organisations are involved – E-006752/2017

The EU is South Africa’s most important development and trade partner. The Commission is probably aware of the recent scandal involving the South African President Jacob Zuma and companies owned by the Gupta family. In this scandal, there have been a number of recent developments in the field of money laundering and tax evasion.

The Commission’s most recent proposal for a revision of the anti-money laundering directive clearly states, that before concluding trade, association and partnerships agreements with third countries, the EU should take into consideration a clear reference on the effectiveness of those countries’ anti-money laundering systems.

Given recent developments, can the Commission guarantee it will take up this matter at the next political meeting with the South African authorities held within the framework of the EU-Southern African Economic Partnership?

2018 Budget Will Create More Jobs for the Youth

President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo has assured traders at Abossey Okai (Spare Parts Dealers) that the 2018 budget will address more of their business concerns and create more jobs for the teaming youth in the country.

The 2018 fiscal year budget is scheduled to be read in Parliament by the Finance Minister, Ken Ofori Atta, on Wednesday, 15th November 2017.

Interacting with the traders including Executives of the Abossey Okai Spare Parts Dealers Association in Day-2 of his 3-day tour of the Greater Accra Region, President Akufo Addo said the 2018 budget would go beyond the 2017 Asempa Budget reliefs to address specific areas of concerns.

The President thanked them for the massive support shown him and his Party, New Patriotic Party (NPP) during the 2016 Elections. President Akufo-Addo implored them to fully support his government as it takes measures to restore the economy for a massive take-off.

President Akufo-Addo promised the traders of government’s quest to embark on a massive nation road construction, very soon, which include the road network in Abbossey Okai.

2017 Tax Reliefs

 The 2017 Asempa Budget, which was the first budget of the Akufo-Addo’s Presidency, abolished several taxes which included the one per cent special import levy, 17.5 VAT on domestic airline tickets, abolish 17.5 VAT on financial services, 17.5% VAT on selected imported medicines, 5% VAT on real estates, excise duty on petroleum, duties on importation of spare parts and levies imposed on Kayayei (head porters) by local authorities.

Foreign Retailers Practices unlawful

The Chairman of Abossey Okai Spare Parts Dealers Association, Joseph Paddy, called on the government to take a look at foreign retailers in local businesses. He said the activities of these traders are in conflict with Ghana Investment Promotion Centre law.  He also appealed to the President to work on the bad road network in Abossey Okai.

The President ended up his Second day tour of the Greater Accra Region at a rally at the Matse Agbona where he announced to the chiefs and people of the GA state of his government’s commitment to transforming Accra to become the cleanest city in Africa.

The President urged the GA citizens to take advantage of the Free SHS Policy and the numerous social intervention policies introduced by his government, adding, 2018 budget is about jobs. The President said allowances given to chiefs have been increase about 100 percent.

The James Town Matse, Oblempong Nii Kojo Ababio V, who congratulated President Akufo-Addo on winning the 2016 elections, commended him of the introduction of the Free SHS policy among others.

He implored the President to do all within his power to energize the fisheries business which is confronted with a lot of challenges.

Source: ISD (Rex Mainoo Yeboah)