Advertisers Wage Campaign Against Camp’s Tax Plan

Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (L), R-Michigan, listens to testimony by Marilyn Tavenner, Administrator for Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, US Department of Health and Human Services as she speaks during a hearing with the House Ways and Means Committee in Washington, DC, October 29, 2013.
National Journal
Billy House
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Billy House
Feb. 24, 2014, 5 p.m.

Ad­vert­ising lob­by­ing groups are mo­bil­iz­ing like mad men against a key piece of the tax-code re­form pack­age that House Ways and Means Com­mit­tee Chair­man Dave Camp could un­veil as early as Wed­nes­day.

“WE NEED YOUR HELP,” warns an alert sent out by the As­so­ci­ation of Na­tion­al Ad­vert­isers to its 574 mem­ber com­pan­ies last week. The group is bra­cing for battle against what it ex­pects to be a call to change the stand­ard tax de­duc­tion that busi­nesses use for ad­vert­ising ex­penses.

“[Camp] said it is time to take on spe­cial in­terests. But ad­vert­ising is not a spe­cial in­terest, and has nev­er been con­sidered a spe­cial in­terest” in the tax code, said Dan Jaffe, the Wash­ing­ton-based ex­ec­ut­ive vice pres­id­ent of the ANA.

Oth­er na­tion­al ad­vert­ising groups — such as the Ad­vert­ising Co­ali­tion and the Amer­ic­an As­so­ci­ation of Ad­vert­ising Agen­cies — are also push­ing against such a plan.

Ad­vert­ising is now treated as an or­din­ary, fully de­duct­ible busi­ness ex­pense in the year it is in­curred. The trade groups and their mem­bers fear that Camp is about to pro­pose that busi­nesses may de­duct only 50 per­cent of their ad­vert­ising ex­penses in a tax year — and re­quire that the bal­ance be amort­ized over some num­ber of years.

The latest word, they say, is that he may seek to amort­ize the de­duc­tion over a five-year peri­od. That is short­er than a pre­vi­ously-floated 10-year frame but sim­il­ar to what former Sen­ate Fin­ance Com­mit­tee Chair­man Max Baucus pro­posed in a dis­cus­sion draft in Novem­ber.

Op­pon­ents say any such change would severely dam­age agen­cies and oth­er busi­nesses that rely on ad­vert­ising spend­ing.

Ex­actly what Camp will pro­pose could still be un­der re­vi­sion, and a com­mit­tee spokes­wo­man de­clined to provide fi­nal de­tails on Monday — in­clud­ing wheth­er he would call for lower­ing the cor­por­ate tax rate from 35 per­cent to 25 per­cent. Demo­crats on the com­mit­tee said he was sug­gest­ing that change to them last sum­mer, along with lower­ing the rate for top in­di­vidu­al earners from 39.6 per­cent to 25 per­cent. The talk now is that the chair­man may be re­con­sid­er­ing that ori­gin­al plan, and that his top rate may not go be­low 30 per­cent.

But Demo­crats ar­gue that without new rev­en­ues, any such re­duc­tion wouldn’t be paid for, and so would add to the na­tion’s debt.

Camp, who faces a term lim­it at the end of 2014 as Ways and Means chair­man, will have an up­hill battle in get­ting House GOP lead­ers to back ac­tion on his pro­pos­als dur­ing what re­mains of this midterm elec­tion year. But ad­vert­isers say they don’t want to al­low any mo­mentum to build for some fu­ture ef­fort in the House and Sen­ate that is aimed at the de­duct­ib­il­ity of ad­vert­ising ex­penses.

As part of its ef­forts, the ANA has already re­leased a study with the Ad­vert­ising Co­ali­tion that says lim­it­ing the abil­ity of busi­nesses to de­duct the cost of ad­vert­ising in this way could threaten 1.7 mil­lion jobs and $456 bil­lion in sales over the next five years.

And to put a per­son­al touch on that case for law­makers, the IHS Glob­al In­sight study breaks down what would be the im­pact of the tax pro­pos­al in each of the na­tion’s 435 con­gres­sion­al dis­tricts.

In its alert to mem­ber busi­nesses, the ANA has asked them to “please con­tact mem­bers of the House Ways and Means Com­mit­tee that your com­pany has close re­la­tion­ships with and stress to them the im­port­ance of main­tain­ing the full de­duct­ib­il­ity of ad­vert­ising ex­pendit­ures.” The ANA has also put to­geth­er a list of talk­ing points and noted a web­site that deals with “the ad tax threat.”

What We're Following See More »
Morning Consult Poll: Clinton Decisively Won Debate
1 days ago

"According to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll, the first national post-debate survey, 43 percent of registered voters said the Democratic candidate won, compared with 26 percent who opted for the Republican Party’s standard bearer. Her 6-point lead over Trump among likely voters is unchanged from our previous survey: Clinton still leads Trump 42 percent to 36 percent in the race for the White House, with Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson taking 9 percent of the vote."

Trump Draws Laughs, Boos at Al Smith Dinner
2 days ago

After a lighthearted beginning, Donald Trump's appearance at the Al Smith charity dinner in New York "took a tough turn as the crowd repeatedly booed the GOP nominee for his sharp-edged jokes about his rival Hillary Clinton."

McMullin Leads in New Utah Poll
2 days ago

Evan McMul­lin came out on top in a Emer­son Col­lege poll of Utah with 31% of the vote. Donald Trump came in second with 27%, while Hillary Clin­ton took third with 24%. Gary John­son re­ceived 5% of the vote in the sur­vey.

Quinnipiac Has Clinton Up by 7
2 days ago

A new Quin­nipi­ac Uni­versity poll finds Hillary Clin­ton lead­ing Donald Trump by seven percentage points, 47%-40%. Trump’s “lead among men and white voters all but” van­ished from the uni­versity’s early Oc­to­ber poll. A new PPRI/Brook­ings sur­vey shows a much bigger lead, with Clinton up 51%-36%. And an IBD/TIPP poll leans the other way, showing a vir­tu­al dead heat, with Trump tak­ing 41% of the vote to Clin­ton’s 40% in a four-way match­up.

Trump: I’ll Accept the Results “If I Win”
2 days ago

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.