COMMENTARY: What are the differences between Trump and Harris' economic policies?

The U.S. election is entering a countdown phase, and voters' ballots will influence America's future development. Politicians' policies will affect every American's wallet and impact the entire world. So, how do the economic policies of Mr. Trump and Mrs. Harris differ? Here, we will analyze tax policies such as corporate taxes, immigration policies, and tariffs of the two presidential candidates, Trump and Kamala Harris, to see what their differing viewpoints will bring to American society and how they will affect each of our lives. First of all, let's look at corporate taxes. Currently, the U.S. corporate tax rate is 21%, a result of Trump's previous term. Mr. Trump has stated his intention to reduce the corporate tax rate to 15%, while Kamala Harris is entirely opposed, aiming to increase the corporate tax rate from the current 21% to 28%. Her main reason is to reduce the government budget deficit and promote tax fairness. Speaking of the government budget deficit, in the U.S. federal budget deficit, social expenditures such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and interest on the national debt occupy a large portion, with social spending accounting for about 60% of the federal budget. These expenditures are the main components of the U.S. financial deficit, meaning that most of the deficit is due to social spending. Additionally, Kamala Harris's policy includes expanding tax credits for children, increasing investment in affordable housing, expanding health care insurance, etc. While these measures aim to improve social services and support middle and low-income households, they could increase the burden of social spending. So, will the increased spending be offset by corporate taxes? This remains a matter worthy of further discussion. For small business owners in the U.S., in recent years, with rising prices, minimum wages, property taxes, and insurance fees all increasing, adding tens of thousands of dollars has significantly reduced their profits. If current revenues do not change, but payroll taxes increase, businesses will have even less money to earn more. For small business owners, when we invest money and time, along with investment partners, if there is profit, we will continue to expand investment. However, no matter how hard we try, if we do not make money, we will give up. When all business owners give up, how can businesses develop? Not to mention that hiring more employees requires paying more taxes to the government. According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, SBA, and other related data sources, small businesses are companies with fewer than 500 employees contributing up to 44% of U.S. GDP, creating about 64% of job opportunities, and employing more than half of the private sector workforce in the U.S. If the government's tax policies make it impossible for small and medium-sized businesses to survive, it will harm the short-term and long-term interests of the United States. Another reason Kamala Harris has proposed increasing corporate taxes is to promote tax fairness. They argue that businesses, especially large multinational corporations, have minimized their actual taxes through tax exemptions and loopholes, with some companies hardly paying any taxes in the U.S., which is unfair to small businesses. Increasing the corporate tax rate would force large corporations to contribute more taxes from their profits, reducing tax avoidance. But the question is, will increasing tax rates make these large corporations comply with tax payments? For so many years, why have large multinational corporations still been able to avoid paying taxes in the U.S.? Because they have the capability to do so, utilizing globalization by establishing multi-tiered multinational corporate structures, including headquarters in countries and regions with low taxes for the purpose of tax avoidance. The most famous example is Apple's tax avoidance through a company in Ireland. If the U.S. further increases corporate taxes, will these giants have to hide even more? Because large companies and multinational corporations have the ability to do this, while small and medium-sized companies do not, only being able to stay here, then where is the fairness? On the contrary, Trump, during his previous term, implemented tax cuts, continuously emphasizing that tax cuts stimulate economic growth, increase job opportunities, and attract businesses to bring capital and investment back to the U.S. He believes that reducing tax rates can enhance the global competitiveness of American companies, giving businesses more capital to expand and innovate. Tax cuts can encourage businesses to establish factories and production facilities in the U.S., thereby promoting the return of the manufacturing sector. The overall goal is to boost the overall economic vitality and create more high-quality job opportunities through tax cuts. Reflecting on Trump's previous term, thanks to tax cuts, Apple committed to bringing $250 billion in foreign funds back to the U.S. and investing over $30 billion in U.S. infrastructure. This is one of the most typical examples. A historical lesson is the Reagan era. In the 1980s, when Reagan was elected president, the U.S. economy was in severe stagnation, with inflation at 13.5% and unemployment at 7.1%, both at high levels. To address these economic issues, Reagan implemented supply-side economic policies, one of the most important measures being tax cuts, significantly reducing personal and corporate income taxes to stimulate investment and consumption, thereby promoting economic growth. Although in the first two or three years, Reagan had to go through a difficult adjustment period, with the Democratic Party criticizing repeatedly, saying that these policies reduced government revenue, after two or three years, the economy began to recover. By 1983, the economy achieved strong growth, and the U.S. entered a prolonged period of prosperity, with inflation gradually decreasing and unemployment rates significantly falling. Reagan's policies ultimately spurred rapid development of the U.S. economy, making the years from 1983 to 1989 one of the golden periods of economic growth in the U.S. One of Trump's objectives in cutting corporate taxes Speaking of a related story, we know that TSMC, the world's largest advanced chip manufacturer, has now become the first Asian technology company to reach a market capitalization of over $1 trillion, specifically the first non-U.S. technology company to achieve this milestone. During Trump's first term, by encouraging businesses to build factories in the U.S., TSMC decided to build a factory in the U.S. TSMC perfectly exemplifies the entire leadership of Taiwan, their scientists and their high-quality engineers and technical workers, making them a crucial strategic resource and globally strategic-oriented companies. For the U.S., such important strategic objectives require that strategic materials be produced domestically to ensure reliability. Speaking about immigration policy, which most Americans are concerned about, According to recent polls, more than half of those surveyed, including 58% of independent voters and even 25% of Democrats, support the mass deportation of illegal immigrants, making it their top concern. On the issue of immigration and border security, Trump has always been very tough. On September 10, during a televised debate, Trump and Kamala Harris spoke about immigration issues. Trump said, In reality, the current immigration policy has forced many cities to face certain resource pressures. For example, budget allocations in New York and Chicago have been affected, with the continuous movement of residents causing many communities to undergo changes in housing prices, demand for public services, and other aspects. Hispanic voters were once a stronghold for the Democratic Party, but now many of the Democratic Party's immigration policies anger legally immigrated Hispanic individuals due to the open border policies. As a result, Trump has achieved the highest support rate among Hispanic voters in decades for Republican candidates. Upcoming voters are faced with a clear choice. Either allow Kamala Harris to reopen our borders, or choose Trump, who will immediately close the borders. As Trump said, Next, let's talk a bit about tariffs, an issue Trump emphasizes. He proposes imposing standard tariffs of 10% to 20% on all imported goods from every country, and for goods from China, he proposes a 60% tariff and the elimination of the preferential tariff regime for China. Given his past approach of say it with action, and the importance of fulfilling commitments to gain voter support, if Trump is elected, the likelihood of his tariff policies being implemented is quite high. Based on current analysis, the likelihood of him imposing tariffs of 10% to 20% on all imported goods is not significant. It might just be a threat and could be compromised to some extent in the future. However, for China, he is very likely to be serious. Some people say that increasing tariffs will raise the risk of inflation, but according to data from the US Department of Labor, imported goods from China only account for 2% of the items measured in the US CPI, Consumer Price Index, meaning that this tax increase is very unlikely to cause inflationary pressure. Finally, let's discuss the issue of capital gains taxes, a proposal by Biden that Kamala Harris agrees with, which involves taxing a minimum of 25% on billionaires with total income over $100 million. Traditionally, when you sell stocks, real estate, or a business, capital gains income must be taxed. However, when you haven't sold the business, real estate, or stocks, you usually don't have to pay taxes. We are not discussing whether Biden's proposal can be passed, but Biden's intention to implement this is essentially to stifle the US economy. Even well-known wealthy entrepreneurs who support Kamala Harris, such as Mark Cuban, say that this policy would completely destroy the stock market and the US economy. In reality, Americans have lived under both the Trump Republicans and the Democrats, allowing you to clearly understand which policies are beneficial or harmful. What is important is who you want to live with, the Republicans or the Democrats. Please leave your comments below to let us know your view. If you find this video useful, please support us with a subscribe, a like, and a comment to help us improve this channel. We sincerely thank you and look forward to seeing you in the next commentary.