Hunter Biden sues the IRS over tax disclosures after agent testimony

Hunter Biden has filed a lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service, arguing that two agents violated his right to privacy when they publicly aired his tax information as they pressed claims that a federal investigation of him had been improperly handled.

The lawsuit filed Monday says that his personal tax details shared during congressional hearings and interviews was not allowed by federal whistleblower protections.

The suit escalates the legal fight as a long-running investigation continues to unfold against a sharply political backdrop, including an impeachment inquiry aimed at his father, President Joe Biden.

It comes days after Hunter Biden was indicted on federal firearms charges alleging that he lied about his drug use to buy and possess a gun in October 2018. The case could be on track toward a possible high-stakes trial as the 2024 election looms.

IRS supervisory special agent Greg Shapley, and a second agent, Joe Ziegler, have claimed there was pattern of “slow-walking investigative steps” into Hunter Biden in testimony before Congress. The Justice Department has denied any political interference in the case.

The IRS and lawyers for the two men did not immediately return messages seeking comment.

GOP to put IRS Hunter Biden whistleblowers at center stage

House Republicans will put their claims of unequal justice for Republicans and Democrats at center stage Wednesday, bringing IRS whistleblowers before the public to blast the government’s investigation into Hunter Biden, the son of President Biden.

The hearing will serve in part as a way for Republicans to give former President Trump political cover as he faces a likely third indictment over Jan. 6, while also fueling a potential impeachment inquiry against Attorney General Merrick Garland.

IRS investigator Gary Shapley and an unnamed IRS special agent told the House Ways and Means Committee in May that they were displeased with the investigation into Hunter Biden’s tax matters, accusing prosecutors of slow-walking the investigation and allowing the statute of limitations to run out. Hunter Biden in June reached a deal to plead guilty to tax crimes for 2017 and 2018. 

In one point of drama, the identity of the unnamed IRS agent will be revealed at Wednesday’s hearing.

Republicans hope the credibility of the two whistleblowers will rub off on broader investigations of the Biden family’s business dealings. The House Oversight Committee claims it has uncovered financial documents showing that foreign companies funneled more than $10 million to Biden family members and associates, traveling through a web of shell companies.

“This is the A-team with the IRS. These two guys have stellar records,” House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) said Tuesday.

The hearing could also help Republicans distract from Trump’s numerous legal problems after the former president said Tuesday that he expected an imminent indictment in relation to the Justice Department’s probe into the Jan. 6 Capitol attack.

The hearing fits in with a broader GOP theme that the federal government is “weaponized” against Biden’s political opponents.

“If you notice recently, President Trump went up in the polls and was actually surpassing President Biden for reelection. So what do they do now? Weaponize government to go after their number one opponent,” Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said Tuesday. 

McCarthy complained that in Hunter Biden’s case, prosecutors waited until after the statute of limitations was up for some tax years, then brought charges on others. He also referenced Shapley’s complaint that Hunter Biden’s lawyers were alerted to investigators’ interest in a storage unit.

The White House in a statement criticized the attacks on Biden.

“Instead of wasting time on politically-motivated attacks on a Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney, the rule of law, and the independence of our justice system, House Republicans should join President Biden to focus on the issues most important to the American people like continuing to lower inflation, create jobs, and strengthen health care," said Ian Sams, the White House spokesperson for oversight & investigations.

The whistleblower testimony has prompted Republican accusations of corruption at the highest levels and led McCarthy to float a potential impeachment inquiry into Garland.

A key detail for Republicans in Shapley’s testimony is whether David Weiss, the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney for Delaware overseeing the Hunter Biden case, had authority to bring charges in other districts.

Shapley alleges that U.S. Attorney for D.C. Matthew Graves “did not support the investigation,” pushing Weiss to request special counsel status in order to be able to bring charges outside of his usual Delaware jurisdiction. According to Shapley, Weiss was denied that status.

Weiss and Garland have both denied this. Each said the Delaware prosecutor was assured he could seek special attorney status if desired, governed under a different statute that likewise would have allowed Weiss to bring charges in any venue. Graves has also said he did not oppose Weiss bringing charges in Washington.

Some lawmakers have argued Shapley’s testimony shows unfamiliarity with the statutes governing prosecutorial power.

“If you want to put the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney’s word up against a disgruntled agent — who clearly doesn't even understand the difference between a special counsel and a specially designated attorney under Section 515 — you’re playing with fire,” said Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), who before being elected to Congress served as a counselor in Trump’s first impeachment. 

But McCarthy said the differing accounts could be fodder for an impeachment inquiry, as Garland told Congress that Weiss had “full authority to make those referrals you're talking about or to bring cases in other districts if he needs to do that.” 

Democrats have also dismissed some of Shapley’s complaints, characterizing them as common differences of opinion between investigators and prosecutors.

Shapley’s testimony points to numerous instances where prosecutors expressed hesitation about taking any action that might influence the 2020 election. They appeared to be wary of repeating past actions that spurred criticism, notably former FBI Director James Comey’s statement about the Hillary Clinton investigation just days before the 2016 election. 

The Oversight hearing also demonstrates how Republican interest in Hunter Biden and the business dealings of Biden’s family has pushed them into multiple different directions — from tracking funds flowing to Biden family members; to alleged interference in the criminal case against Hunter Biden; to an unverified allegation that an executive of Ukrainian energy company Burisma (of which Hunter Biden was a board member) offered a bribe to President Biden. 

“There's really two investigations going on now. There's the investigation of the Biden crime, and there's investigation of a government cover-up,” Comer said.

While Comer said that the Ways and Means Committee and the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of Federal Government will also investigate any potential cover-up, he said that the Oversight panel is still focused on “following the money.”

Still, Oversight Republicans have gotten pulled into the cover-up allegations.

On Tuesday, Comer said in a statement that committee staff conducted an interview with ​​a former FBI supervisory special agent who confirmed some aspects of the IRS whistleblowers’ testimony — specifically, that the Secret Service and the Biden transition team were alerted to plans for the IRS to show up and seek an in-person interview with Hunter Biden that ultimately never happened.

Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said in a statement that Comer had “cherry-picked and distorted statements of a witness to advance Republicans’ false narrative about political interference in the Hunter Biden investigation.”

He’s also dismissed the GOP for fixating on investigations that Trump-appointed officials chose not to advance, pointing to Comer basing much of his investigation on a confidential tip about President Biden accepting a bribe that the FBI was not able to corroborate.

“There was an assessment opened up, and they decided not to move from the assessment level to either a preliminary investigation or to a full investigation,” Raskin said last week.

“They closed it down.”

This story was updated at 6:54 p.m.

IRS whistleblowers on Hunter Biden case to publicly testify

The House Oversight Committee will hear from two IRS whistleblowers next Wednesday, including one whose identity has yet to be revealed, after the duo alleged an investigation into Hunter Biden was slow-walked by prosecutors.

Testimony from IRS investigator Gary Shapley and another individual identified only as Whistleblower X was shared by the House Ways and Means Committee the day after U.S. Attorney for Delaware David Weiss announced he had reached a plea deal with Biden that would require guilty pleas on two tax charges.

Shapley in particular said Biden received preferential treatment, with prosecutors hesitant to pursue search warrants. He also said Weiss was unable to bring charges in D.C., where he believes he would have had the strongest case.

“These whistleblowers provided information about how the Justice Department refused to follow evidence that implicated Joe Biden, tipped off Hunter Biden’s attorneys, allowed the clock to run out with respect to certain charges, and put Hunter Biden on the path to a sweetheart plea deal. Americans are rightfully angry about this two-tiered system of justice that seemingly allows the Biden family to operate above the law,” House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) said in a statement.

“We need to hear from whistleblowers and other witnesses about this weaponization of federal law enforcement power. This hearing is an opportunity for the American people to hear directly from these credible and brave whistleblowers.”

Whistleblower X’s identity is set to be revealed at the afternoon hearing on July 19.

Weiss and the Justice Department have denied the claims from the whistleblowers, including specific claims that the Delaware prosecutor was denied special counsel status that would have allowed him to pursue charges in D.C.

While that facet of Shapley’s testimony is just one detail in his larger claims of mismanagement of the investigation, it’s become a central focus to Republican leadership, as Attorney General Merrick Garland said in an appearance before lawmakers that Weiss had total control of the investigation.

McCarthy first raised the prospect of a Garland impeachment in June, saying on Twitter that Shapley’s testimony could be “a significant part of a larger impeachment inquiry into Merrick Garland's weaponization of DOJ.”

“What's really concerning to me is who in this process is lying?” House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said to reporters Tuesday. 

“The Attorney General has told Congress one thing, David Weiss has told others different inside these meetings. I think the best thing is bring everybody in the room and find out who's telling the truth and who's not.” 

McCarthy was referencing testimony from Shapley saying Weiss said he was unable to bring charges in D.C. or secure special counsel status.

“I would later be told by United States Attorney Weiss that the D.C. U.S. Attorney would not allow U.S. Attorney Weiss to charge those years in his district. This resulted in United States Attorney Weiss requesting special counsel authority from Main DOJ to charge in the District of Columbia. I don't know if he asked before or after the Attorney General's April 26th, 2022, statement, but Weiss said his request for that authority was denied and that he was told to follow DOJ's process,” Shapley told Ways and Means investigators.

Echoing earlier statements that he had total control over the investigation, Weiss in a Monday letter offered his clearest language yet in pushing back on Shapley’s claims.

There are two statutes on the books governing such appointments and the powers associated with them, Weiss notes, including a status allowing him to file charges outside his district of Delaware. 

“To clarify an apparent misperception and to avoid future confusion, I wish to make one point clear: in this case, I have not requested Special Counsel designation pursuant to 28 CFR § 600 et seq. Rather, I had discussions with Departmental officials regarding potential appointment under 28 U.S.C. § 515, which would have allowed me to file charges in a district outside my own without the partnership of the local U.S. Attorney,” Weiss wrote in a letter obtained by The Hill. 

“I was assured that I would be granted this authority if it proved necessary.”

Biden has agreed to plead guilty to two counts of willful failure to pay taxes and amid the five-year investigation has since paid more than $200,000 in taxes.

He also agreed to enter a pretrial diversion program relating to a failure to admit to drug use when purchasing a weapon. 

“This was a five year, very diligent investigation pursued by incredibly professional prosecutors, some of whom have been career prosecutors, one of whom at least was appointed by President Trump,” Biden attorney Chris Clark said during an appearance on MSNBC last month.

“What I can tell you is, they were very diligent, very dogged. This was – it took five years and it was five years of work that they put in, and even throughout working out the ultimate resolution, I think that they were always driving for what they thought was fair.”

This story was updated at 5:45 p.m.

Hunter Biden’s lawyer blasts IRS whistleblowers in scathing letter to GOP committee chair

A lawyer for Hunter Biden blasted two IRS whistleblowers who claimed there was political interference in the investigation into the president’s son in a scathing letter to the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee on Friday.

Biden attorney Abbe Lowell slammed Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.), alleging that the committee’s decision to release the testimony of the two IRS agents last week was “an obvious ploy to feed the misinformation campaign to harm our client, Hunter Biden, as a vehicle to attack his father,” according to the letter obtained by Axios.

Gary Shapley, an IRS supervisory special agent, claimed in an interview with the House Ways and Means Committee that Biden received “preferential treatment” and that the Justice Department “slow-walked” its investigation into the president’s son.

Two days before the committee released the transcripts, Biden agreed to plead guilty to two misdemeanor offenses for failing to pay income taxes in 2017 and 2018, in addition to entering into a pretrial diversion agreement on a separate charge of unlawful possession of a firearm while addicted to a controlled substance.

Lowell criticized Smith in Friday’s letter for improperly releasing tax and investigation information and disseminating “incomplete half-truths, distortions, and totally unnecessary detail” about Biden.

“It is no secret these interviews were orchestrated recitations of mischaracterized and incomplete ‘facts’ by disgruntled agents who believed they knew better than the federal prosecutors who had all the evidence as they conducted their five-year investigation of Mr. Biden,” Lowell said.

In the wake of the accusations by the IRS whistleblowers, Attorney General Merrick Garland has maintained that the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney overseeing the case, David Weiss, had full authority to decide what charges to bring against the president’s son.

After Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) floated the idea of an impeachment inquiry into Garland, the White House slammed House Republicans, suggesting that they were “desperate to distract” from their economic agenda.

Smith, alongside House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), requested interviews with more than a dozen individuals involved in the Biden investigation on Thursday.

Whistleblowers say IRS recommended felony charges in Hunter Biden probe, allege political interference

Two whistleblowers told a House panel that the IRS recommended additional felony tax charges against Hunter Biden and alleged that the case was slow-walked by prosecutors.

Gary Shapley, an IRS supervisory special agent, told the House Ways and Means Committee in testimony released Thursday that the IRS recommended felony tax evasion charges, as well as felony charges for filing false tax returns, against Biden.

Biden ultimately agreed to plead guilty to two minor tax crimes and to enter into a pretrial diversion agreement on a separate charge of unlawful possession of a firearm while addicted to a controlled substance, according to court documents filed Tuesday.

In Shapley's opening statement to the committee, he alleged that Biden received “preferential treatment” and said the Justice Department, then under the leadership of Trump appointee Bill Barr, “slow-walked the investigation.”

“After former Vice President Joseph Biden became the presumptive Democratic nominee for President in early April 2020, career DOJ officials dragged their feet on the IRS taking these investigative steps,” he said.

A second unnamed whistleblower, a special agent on the IRS criminal investigation team, said that the conduct of prosecutors since October 2022 “has honestly been appalling,” alleging that they slow-walked the case.

The Biden investigation was handled by U.S. Attorney for Delaware David Weiss, a Trump appointee who retained his role despite the common practice of presidents asking U.S. attorneys to resign at the start of a new administration.

“As both the Attorney General and U.S. Attorney David Weiss have said, U.S. Attorney Weiss has full authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges as he deems appropriate.  He needs no further approval to do so,” the Justice Department said in a statement Friday.

Chris Clark, an attorney for Biden, likewise suggested the investigation was thorough.

“Any suggestion the investigation was not thorough, or cut corners, or cut my client any slack, is preposterous and deeply irresponsible,” Clark said.

While Shapley’s statement suggested IRS agents were interested in probing a comment in a Biden WhatsApp message that referenced his father, Clark pushed back on any suggested President Biden had any involvement in his client's business dealings.

“The DOJ investigation covered a period which was a time of turmoil and addiction for my client. Any verifiable words or actions of my client in the midst of a horrible addiction are solely his own and have no connection to anyone in his family,” Clark said.

“Biased and politically- motivated, selective leaks have plagued this matter for years. They are not only irresponsible, they are illegal. A close examination of the document released publicly yesterday by a very biased individual raises serious questions over whether it is what he claims it to be. It is dangerously misleading to make any conclusions or inferences based on this document.”

Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.) said Thursday that the whistleblowers’ testimony suggests Biden “received preferential treatment in the course of the investigation," noting that the president's son "has struck a plea deal that will likely keep him out from behind bars.”

The top Democrat on the committee, Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), called the allegations from the chairman “premature.”

“The Minority takes whistleblower allegations extremely seriously, but the fact is this exercise was not ready for primetime. Two interviews do not make an investigation when more than 50 employees were named, especially when you consider that one recanted key elements of his testimony earlier this week,” he said, noting an inspector general review of the matter is underway.

“It’s all premature, and the rush shows how pretextual this is. In this stunning abuse of power, Republicans relinquished the Committee to the fringes of their extremism, and without any regard for a legitimate legislative purpose.”

Shapley complained that DOJ concerns over Biden’s ties to his father hindered numerous investigative steps. 

He said prosecutors withheld the laptop from investigators - something he said was an unprecedented move. He said prosecutors were also hesitant to execute various search warrants, instead seeking cooperation from Biden’s legal team. He was also investigating possible tax violations from 2014 and 2015, complaining the delays hindered the chances of bringing charges on some of the most serious conduct given the statute of limitations.

"This investigation has been hampered and slowed by claims of potential election meddling,” Shapley said he wrote in a May 2021 memo.

Updated at 4 p.m.

What Will Joe Biden Do If Hunter Is Indicted?

By Charles Lipson for RealClearWire

What will President Biden do if his son is indicted by the federal prosecutor in Delaware? That’s one of three questions looming over U.S. Attorney David Weiss’ fateful choice.

The second is whether the indictment will go after a larger, coordinated family scheme of influence peddling or confine itself to smaller, tightly-confined issues like lying to get a gun permit and not registering as a foreign lobbyist.

The third is whether Attorney General Merrick Garland will approve Weiss’ proposed charges. Significant political calculations follow from those decisions.

It’s easy enough to answer what Garland will do. He has little choice but to approve any charges Weiss proposes after the government’s multi-year investigation. Anything else would look shady, a far cry from the neutral, apolitical justice Garland’s department is charged with dispensing. Burying the charges, after Garland’s refusal to appoint a special counsel, would embroil his department in its nastiest controversy since John Mitchell befouled it under President Nixon.

Assuming the federal attorney proposes felony charges and Garland approves them, Joe Biden faces the toughest choice of his political life.

The president’s dilemma is why it’s so interesting to follow recent speculation by Miranda Devine, a reporter and columnist for the New York Post. She’s the most informed journalist on the Hunter Biden story. Her paper broke the news about the emails on Hunter’s laptop, three weeks before the 2020 election, and Devine has done the best follow-up reporting.

To bury that story before the election took the combined, Herculean efforts of the legacy media, social media giants, and former CIA officials. Their success helped elect Biden. But the “little story that could” just keeps chugging along, mostly because the corruption is so extensive, so rich for investigation. Criminal charges now seem likely, not that the mainstream media has shown much interest.

Now, Devine is speculating that Biden is setting the stage to pardon Hunter, framing it as the actions of a loving father who backs his troubled child. “My son has done nothing wrong,” Biden told MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle in a rare one-on-one interview. “I trust him. I have faith in him, and it impacts my presidency by making me feel proud of him.”

Whether such sentiments presage a pardon, as Devine thinks, is still a guess. We can say something more concrete, though, as Biden weighs such a move. Four consequences stand out:

  • A presidential pardon would set off a political firestorm.
  • The White House will try its best to prevent any public revelation of the family’s business dealings. That means the president and his advisors want to prevent a trial, get Hunter to take a plea, and convince the judge to seal the evidence. Another option is to go trial, knowing it won’t be held until after the election.
  • If Biden pardons his son this year, he’s signaling he won’t run for reelection. He wouldn’t put that albatross around his own neck if he intended to face the voters.
  • If Biden does run and pardons his son after November 2024, the political impact depends on who wins the White House and Capitol Hill. The calculations are more complicated than one might expect.

Let’s consider each in turn.

First, a pardon would set off the biggest political firestorm since Watergate. It would look worse than self-dealing, bad as that is. It would look like the president is covering up his family’s corruption, not only to get Hunter off the hook but to prevent the disclosure of damning evidence in court.

That evidence is likely to touch many more Biden family members than Hunter, and perhaps the president himself. The more Biden family members who are implicated, the more the whole operation looks like a concerted operation to monetize Joe’s political position. It also might threaten to shred Joe’s repeated claim that he knew nothing about any family business interests or influence peddling. The wider the sleaze, the harder it is to sell that story.

The chairman of the House committee investigating these issues has said Hunter’s corruption was merely one part of the family business. And that business was selling influence. Rep. James Comer has publicly said that his House Oversight Committee has already collected evidence that nine Biden family members are involved in sketchy business deals, including substantial payments from foreign firms.

Some of those firms are closely linked to the Chinese Communist Party. Comer added that his committee is investigating the possible involvement of at least three more family members, as well as Joe Biden’s own role. His conclusion: “The entire Biden family” is entrapped in the financial enrichment scheme. So far, however, Comer hasn’t named names or provided the evidence. He says he will provide much more at a major press conference Wednesday.

Comer’s principle suggestion is that the Biden family’s influence-peddling scheme is much broader, and their criminal actions more serious, than isolated schemes perpetrated by the president’s conniving second son. He adds that his evidence points to Joe Biden’s direct involvement, including possible payments for official actions.

That is what he told Maria Bartiromo on Sunday, although he hasn’t yet provided the evidence for that incendiary allegation. Comer is also attacking the FBI for desultory investigation – which ignored much of the malfeasance – and calling out the mainstream media for its concerted silence.

Related: Hunter Biden’s Stripper Baby Mama Drama Isn’t Making Joe Biden’s Life Any Easier

The Internal Revenue Service might be implicated, too, since a lot of payments – and a lot of Hunter’s income – went through what Comer calls the family’s “web of LLCs.” A senior supervisory agent at the IRS is seeking whistleblower protection to tell Congress about “preferential treatment and politics improperly infecting decisions and protocols that would normally be followed” in investigating Hunter’s taxes.

If political pressure really was applied to the IRS over Hunter’s taxes, or if senior agents acted improperly to curry favor, those would obviously be very serious matters, legally and politically. Comer and the House Republicans in the committee’s majority want that testimony under oath and are seeking responses from the IRS and DOJ.

Anticipating an indictment soon, Comer has urged the Justice Department to hold off until his committee presents more evidence to the public this week. “When you have the opportunity to see the evidence that the House Oversight Committee will produce with respect to the web of [Biden family] LLCs, with respect to the number of adversarial countries that this family influence peddled in, and this is not just about the president’s son. This is about the entire Biden family, including the President of the United States.”

However wide-ranging the indictment is, Hunter will do everything he can to strike a plea deal and seal all the evidence to prevent its disclosure at trial. That would clearly be the preference inside the White House. But it’s not in the public interest.

If the DOJ tries to seal the evidence, it would be joining in a cover-up. The Department must require that Hunter attest to all incriminating evidence and that it all be made public as part of any plea deal. The judge himself should demand it. That requirement might kill Hunter’s willingness to take the deal. Rather than reveal the evidence now, the White House would prefer kick it down the road, to a trial date after the November 2024 election.

Whether a trial happens or not, a pardon for Hunter would be politically fatal for the president, and he and his advisers must know it. That leads to a clear conclusion. If Joe pardons Hunter this year, running for reelection becomes unrealistic. Such a self-inflicted wound would be a far more powerful signal of his intentions than a speech declaring his candidacy. There’s no way Joe would eviscerate his political prospects like that if he intended to face the voters again.

Of course, Biden could delay any pardon until after November 2024. That would still invite a high-profile congressional investigation and perhaps impeachment, but the political maneuvering would depend on the election outcome. If Biden loses and the current Republican House moves quickly to impeach, Senate Democrats would be in a bind. It takes overwhelming evidence to convince senators to humiliate a president from their own party. The only thing that would do it is overwhelming fear of their constituents at the ballot box.

Related: Things Get Awkward When Karine Jean-Pierre Gets Asked About Hunter Biden’s Baby With a Stripper

The situation is entirely different if Biden wins and the Republicans take both the House and Senate. The problem, in three words, is President Kamala Harris. Although the new House would have no trouble collecting votes for impeachment, they might hesitate before passing the ultimate decision to their Republican colleagues in the Senate. Do they really want to elevate Harris into the Oval Office?

None of these prospects is a happy one. Each one adds to the misery of a country beset by lawlessness on the streets, chaos at the southern border, stagnant real income, and a looming debt crisis. We need to know whether the Biden family – not just Hunter – was engaged in a series of corrupt schemes to peddle the influence of a high-ranking government official.

We need to know all the family members involved and their business partners. We need to know what they were paid for doing and who paid them. What we don’t need is a weak, narrowly-drawn indictment, an official cover-up of the evidence, and, worst of all, a self-serving presidential pardon.

Syndicated with permission from RealClearWire.

The post What Will Joe Biden Do If Hunter Is Indicted? appeared first on The Political Insider.

White House unveils details of $1.8 trillion American Families Plan

The White House has spent the final days before going public with President Joe Biden’s American Families Plan making final tweaks. But with Biden making an address to a joint session of Congress Wednesday night, it’s time. The plan, designed to complement Biden’s American Jobs Plan, includes funding for priorities like national child care, prekindergarten, paid family leave, and tuition-free community college. It extends the child tax credit in the American Rescue Plan, which is expected to slash child poverty nearly in half, along with the child and dependent care tax credit and the earned income tax credit for childless workers.

In all, the plan adds four years of free education for every student—preschool for three- and four-year-olds, and community college—as well as investing in historically Black colleges and universities, tribal colleges or universities, and minority-serving institutions; adding Pell Grants; and “evidence-based strategies to strengthen completion and retention rates at community colleges and institutions that serve students from our most disadvantaged communities.” In addition to the added years of universal prekindergarten, the American Families Plan has $225 billion for child care for younger children, ensuring that no family would pay more than 7% of its income for child care and a $15 minimum wage for the desperately underpaid childcare workforce.

Biden’s plan also invests in teachers, including helping teachers obtain in-demand certifications, increasing scholarships for future teachers, teacher retention programs, and recruitment and retention of teachers of color. 

A paid family and medical leave provision “will provide workers up to $4,000 a month, with a minimum of two-thirds of average weekly wages replaced, rising to 80 percent for the lowest wage workers. We estimate this program will cost $225 billion over a decade,” the White House said in a fact sheet, noting that “Over 30 million workers, including 67 percent of low-wage workers, do not have access to a single paid sick day,” and that women and people of color are particularly affected.

The American Families Plan also extends the summer child nutrition expansion being put in place this summer through the American Rescue Plan, and expands school meal programs.

But while it will includes $200 billion for Affordable Care Act subsidies, the Biden administration is  reportedly planning a separate bill for other healthcare priorities. Congressional Democrats have pushed back, urging the White House to include health care in this package.

When Republicans ask how Biden plans to pay for the proposal, one of the answers will be raising taxes on rich people, including an increase on the capital gains tax for people who earn more than $1 million. There’s another plan for paying for it, though: collecting the taxes that are already owed but go unpaid. As much as $1 trillion in taxes isn’t collected every year, the head of the Internal Revenue Service recently estimated, as enforcement has lagged and the number of auditors on staff has dropped down to 1950s levels. (The U.S. population has close to doubled since the 1950s.)

The Biden administration is looking to increase the IRS budget by $80 billion over 10 years—and collect as much as an additional $700 billion in taxes over the same time period as a result. That’s not a tax increase. It’s just enforcement of the existing laws, and it would target wealthy people who are currently getting away with significant tax evasion. A recent National Bureau of Economic Research paper estimated that the top 1% of earners are underreporting more than one-fifth of their income, while audit rates for the group dropped from 8% to 2.5% between 2011 and 2017, and down to 1.6% in 2019. Meanwhile, audits for people earning under $25,000 dropped much less, from 1.2% in 2011 to 0.7% in 2017. 

It goes without saying that even if we assume the rich and the poor underreport their income at the same rates, there’s a lot more revenue to be gained from auditing the rich, whose underreporting is also much more likely to be a product of intentional strategies and high-powered accounting than of simple mistakes. That, however, makes it more complicated to audit rich people, and requires investments in staff and auditing capacity.

Biden’s address to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday night will have limited attendance due to COVID-19 health guidelines. Additionally, the House is on recess and many Republicans are expected not to bother making the trip to Washington, D.C., for the event.