Republicans in Congress desperately want to push through tax reform while they still can. The country desperately needs faster economic growth to pay for an ever-increasing national debt and to reverse the destruction of the middle class. America’s corporate tax rates have contributed to our losing competitiveness with the rest of the world.

It all sounds great on paper. In reality, I am cynical that real reform will actually happen. Right now there is lots of talk about “simplification.” But my guess is that what will actually happen is that deductions that the middle class use will be eliminated while the special interest loopholes will proliferate. Politicians make money by having special interests pay up to have the income tax code bent in their direction. How much money are they actually getting from the average guy and small independent businessmen?

Remember the old axiom. “Follow the money.” Cutting tax rates would be great, but if it is financed by taking away middle class deductions, what does it really mean? “Hey, we have simplified your life — now you don’t have to figure out how much interest you paid on your home mortgage — we will just eliminate that deduction!” Everybody wants to get rid of deductions, at least the ones that somebody else uses.

Personally, I have written many times in favor of doing away with the income tax altogether and replacing it with some form of consumption tax. We will never actually “drain the swamp” until we shake out all the special interest money that is fed by the income deduction game. But that is a column for another day and there is no way that politicians of either party are going to cut off their money train.

Donald Trump talks about helping the little guy. Count me cynical.

Both Republicans and Democrats are trying to come up with deductions they can cut from middle America so that they can give big business and the elites a rate cut. One I just heard about is dear to my heart and got me on my high horse.

Congress is reportedly actively considering eliminating advertising as a fully deductible business expense as part of their upcoming tax “reform” legislation. White House spokeswoman Natalie Strom said she could not comment specifically on the advertising deduction but noted the White House wants to “simplify” the tax code and reduce the “compliance burden.” She said, “that’s why we have to take a hard look at all deductions in order to create a tax code that actually makes sense for everyone.”

Well, at least it makes sense to all their buddies on Wall Street and in the Silicon Valley.

Small businesses do not own their own search engine. They don’t own their own media like Amazon does. Facebook doesn’t need to advertise — they already control everything you read. Wall Street doesn’t need to advertise. But Main Street does. Actually, it looks like I am on the Democrats’ side on this one. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement to The Hill that “it is unfair, illogical and counter-productive to treat business advertising costs any different from other ordinary and necessary business expenses.” Many conservatives are up in arms as well. Noted anti-tax activist Grover Norquist agrees with me — and Schumer.

“Pro-growth tax reform should allow businesses to immediately expense purchases and investments,” Norquist said. “The right policy is in place for advertising costs — they can be deducted immediately. Congress should expand this to other business purchases rather than forcing current purchases to be depreciated.”

Republicans in Congress want to offer immediate deductions for their big business and investor buddies, but want the small businessman to not be able to deduct the cost of trying to build his or her business. No problem, just let Amazon sell it, right? Don’t be fooled by the rhetoric. If an ad “tax” is included and in the name of “reform,” it will not be called an ad tax. It will be buried in an innocuous-sounding change in “amortization” of business expenses. What it really means is that advertisers will be taxed on money they spent—not on profits but on money invested in increasing economic activity in your town. Taxes on expenses, in other words, not on profit.

Why would Uncle Sam do that? Because international corporations want a smaller federal income tax. In order to pay for that reduction, Congress has to tax someone else. A lower corporate tax rate may be needed. Many businesses may benefit, but a loss of advertising will still be an overall loss to our towns because of the cumulative effect. This is a tax on Main Street to satisfy Wall Street. Every dollar of advertising that is taxed will reduce sales. It is as simple as that.

Would you support some kind of “advertising tax” being proposed by the Trump administration? That is this week’s Post weekly online poll question. Answer “Yes, if it would allow federal taxes to be reduced in other areas.” Or “No, it would be destructive to the economy and make success for small businesses much less likely.”