Search Form
First, enter a politician or zip code
Now, choose a category

Public Statements

Providing for Consideration of H.R. 4, Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act of 2011

Floor Speech

Location: Washington, DC

Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 129 and ask for its immediate consideration.

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. Res. 129

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4) to repeal the expansion of information reporting requirements for payments of $600 or more to corporations, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. An amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of the amendment recommended by the Committee on Ways and Means now printed in H.R. 705 shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) two hours and 30 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from South Carolina is recognized for 1 hour.

Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.


Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from South Carolina?

There was no objection.

Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 129 provides for consideration of H.R. 4, the Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act of 2011.

If you are looking for a prime example of government regulation which, first, is an unnecessary intrusion on small businesses, second, enlarges government bureaucracy at the expense of taxpayers and entrepreneurs, and, finally, creates a mountain of mind-numbing paperwork which has the net effect of killing jobs, then look no further.

Section 9006 of the health reform bill does all of that by requiring businesses to report every expense that they incur over $600; not just wages to their employees, but even for payments to other businesses and for merchandise.

Imagine, if you will, a small business that picks up a couple of dozen doughnuts from Krispy Kreme on a weekly basis. At the end of the year, they must send a 1099 to Krispy Kreme. Think about a small business owner, as I have been for the last 14 years, who buys stamps from the post office, and now you have to send a 1099 to the U.S. Post Office. What about if you buy a printer for your office or blinds for your office? Here comes more, another mountain of new paperwork. So now you're spending tax time preparing 1099s for Krispy Kreme, Office Depot, Walmart, Costco, Starbucks, and the list goes on and on.

It's one thing for a large corporation with an in-house tax department. It's another thing completely for a small business which spends an average of $74 an hour--that's $74 an hour--on tax compliance, the most expensive paperwork burden that the Federal Government imposes on all small businesses.

Then, to make matters worse, last year the President signed the Small Business Jobs Act, which expanded this onerous 1099 requirement to anyone who rents out property. How did this happen? Well, after the bill has been passed, we are learning more about it. We had a Congress that passed a bill through backroom deals shielded from the public view without reading them.

The American people have seen what's in this bill, and they don't like it. They don't like it one bit. That's why they sent all of us to Congress, to repeal, to defund, and to dismantle the health care reform. My Republican colleagues voted to repeal this bill 245-189, with a 49-vote greater margin than the original vote to pass it. That is also why two Federal judges have already ruled that national health care reform is unconstitutional.

And I am proud to be handling this rule on the House floor. H.R. 4 will remove an unnecessary burden from small businesses, so that instead of creating 1099s for their expenditures, they can create W-4s when they hire new employees.

I reserve the balance of my time.


Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot today about the cost and about taxes, about tax increases. We must be working from very different mathematical systems. They keep saying that we are raising taxes, and there is nothing further from the truth than the statements I have heard from the left.

You have consistently posed a question that all of America needs an answer to: Is this in fact a tax increase? Well, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation, this is in fact a net tax cut of over $20 billion over the next 10 years, and it will reduce the deficit by $166 million over the same period of time. Let's also keep in mind that these cost savings come from the government recouping money that the recipients should not have gotten in the first place.

That is not a tax increase. Let me say it one more time: that is not a tax increase. If we were looking for the way to actually get rid of this problem, there is a simple way to do that: let's repeal the entire health care law. Because the problem that we see today comes in the package of the health care law itself. So consistent with reality is the fact that the Democrats have put us in this position. So we are working in a bipartisan fashion through the 1099 repeal to eliminate this problem.

Finally, we should all bear in mind that while this resolution is a closed rule, the opposition was offered an opportunity to submit a substitute bill. They declined. We have also expanded debate to 2 1/2 hours.


Skip to top

Help us stay free for all your Fellow Americans

Just $5 from everyone reading this would do it.

Back to top