Over the span of three decades, Democratic Rep. Richard Neal of Springfield, Massachusetts served in the U.S. House. In January 2019, he achieved a lifelong goal by becoming the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, granting him significant influence over the nation’s tax code.
A year later, his son Brendan Neal, aged 45, established a solo public affairs firm specializing in political advice, lobbying, and strategic communications. Subsequently, payments from Richard E. Neal for Congress Committee to Brendan Neal Strategies began, initially amounting to $4,425 each month on the 13th. These payments increased to $4,630 in 2024 and have continued through August, totaling $196,340.
Brendan Neal’s lobbying work commenced before his firm received money from his father’s campaign. He received payments from Van Heuvelen Strategies, a lobbying firm focusing on several Ways and Means issues, as well as from a nursing home and a business in Springfield. Additionally, a lobbyist from the same area reached out to Brendan Neal on LinkedIn, leading to a lucrative contract with a Boston-based technology company.
During this period, the same lobbyist earned significant sums working on tax issues for Blackstone, a major donor to Rep. Richard Neal. Notably, one key issue involved eliminating special tax treatments like carried interest, which is a controversial loophole in the tax code.
Richard Neal, who has been a prominent figure in tax policy for over a decade, is set to lead the House Ways and Means Committee through a massive tax renegotiation. While he is viewed as an adept political operator by some, others criticize his ties to special interests and reluctance to close tax loopholes benefiting corporations and the wealthy.
Concerns have been raised about Brendan Neal’s earnings from his father’s campaign and other clients with interests before the committee. Critics suggest that these payments could be seen as attempts to influence Rep. Neal’s tax policy decisions. Despite these concerns, both Richard and Brendan Neal declined to be interviewed.
Richard Neal’s office maintains that the congressman is not involved in his son’s lobbying activities and emphasizes the positive impact of his policies on average Americans. Brendan Neal asserts that he follows ethical guidelines and does not discuss his business with his father.
While some individuals working in tax policy express reservations about Brendan Neal’s lobbying work, others in Washington acknowledge that relationships with lobbyists are common in the political landscape. Members of both parties serving on tax-writing committees have a long-standing practice of holding fundraisers to solicit donations from those seeking to influence bills. The national parties require members on important committees to contribute more than the average member to party-affiliated campaign committees. For example, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee suggested “party dues” for the 2023 election cycle were $660,000 for ranking members of several “A” committees, including Ways and Means.
Richard Neal’s engagement with lobbyists has been considered particularly strong by those working on tax legislation. Lobbyists often see their proposals incorporated into complex tax bills overseen by the chief Democratic tax writer, such as the 2022 retirement legislation known as Secure 2.0, which cost the federal government around $51 billion.
Some individuals, including a former lobbyist and a former staffer turned lobbyist, have pointed out that Neal frequently requests campaign contributions from any firm doing business with his committee, for himself and his Democratic colleagues.
Although Neal is known for being a heavy fundraiser, a spokesperson for his campaign stated that the contributions he receives do not impact his values but rather go towards flipping the U.S. House. He has close ties to Fidelity and MassMutual, both of which have been significant donors to his campaigns.
Neal was the biggest recipient of PAC money in the House in 2020 and the second-largest recipient during the 2022 cycle. With Democrats having a fundraising advantage in the effort to regain control of the House, Neal is set to oversee changes in the tax code following the expiration of trillions of dollars in Trump tax cuts.
Business interests view Neal as a receptive Democratic ally, particularly given the progressive tax legislation embraced by the Biden administration and Senate Finance Chair Ron Wyden. Despite his ability to bring together Democratic members of the Ways and Means Committee, some progressives feel he has been overly protective of corporate special interests.
Ethicists and tax policy advocates are now examining Neal’s connections to business interests, especially in light of revelations regarding his family’s business connections and the potential for influence campaigns by K Street power players.
There is precedent for special interests attempting to circumvent contribution limits by paying a lawmaker’s relative, as seen in past corruption scandals involving lobbyists like Jack Abramoff. The scrutiny of Neal’s connections to special interests continues, raising questions about the potential influence of family members of lawmakers who work as lobbyists. “I would not allow a lobbyist to pay my son a significant amount of money and then proceed to lobby the committee.”
Richard Neal’s rapid rise in Springfield politics was seen as a representation of the American dream by some constituents. He grew up in a working-class neighborhood in Springfield and was raised by relatives on Social Security survivor benefits after losing both his parents.
His political career began as the co-chair of George McGovern’s 1972 presidential campaign in western Massachusetts. He later served as an aide to Springfield Mayor William Sullivan and went on to win three terms on the Springfield City Council. Neal successfully ran for mayor in 1983 and revitalized the city’s neighborhoods and downtown areas during his time in office.
In 1993, after being elected to Congress, Neal faced scandal when it was revealed that a company he granted a no-bid $2.5 million contract to had engaged in a scheme to overcharge the city. Although he denied any wrongdoing, the company’s president was fined for false billing.
Neal’s career continued to advance, and he eventually became the chairman of the powerful Ways and Means Committee in 2019. He used his position to push for federal aid for local programs and championed Social Security.
Despite his accomplishments, Neal faced criticism for his ties to the financial industry and his handling of tax policies. Some viewed him as too cozy with special interests and resistant to raising taxes on the wealthy.
Additionally, concerns were raised about his family’s involvement in his political career, with his son receiving payments from Neal’s campaign committee and later starting a lobbying firm that overlapped with his father’s work in Congress. Federal law requires lobbyists to register with Congress and disclose their expenses, as well as the subject of their lobbying and other relevant information. The connection between Brendan Neal and Matt Trant, a seasoned lobbyist, was evident when they exchanged messages on LinkedIn. Trant eventually secured a contract with a biotechnology company seeking government contracts, with Brendan Neal later joining as a lobbyist for the same company. Trant’s lobbying efforts also extended to tax-related provisions in the Build Back Better Act for Blackstone, a private equity firm. Despite Trant’s significant donations to Richard Neal’s campaign, questions arose about the favorable treatment of carried interest, a tax benefit that has been fiercely protected by private equity firms like Blackstone. The legislation ultimately crafted under Richard Neal only extended the holding period for favorable tax treatment, disappointing many Democrats. Trant’s lobbying efforts for Blackstone, including carried interest, were highlighted during the debate on the Inflation Reduction Act. Other firms associated with Brendan Neal also appeared to benefit from Richard Neal’s legislation, raising concerns about potential conflicts of interest. In 2019 and 2020, Van Heuvelen’s firm hired Brendan Neal through a contract worth at least $20,000. During the same period, the firm was lobbying for four different clients on tax provisions related to Build Back Better and Secure 2.0. Van Heuvelen showed a strong interest in these bills by making his first-ever contributions to Richard Neal in 2019, donating a total of $26,600 to the lawmaker’s campaign committee and leadership PAC between 2019 and 2022. Additionally, between 2020 and 2021, Van Heuvelen’s firm had contracts for at least $190,000 from three companies to lobby on tax credits for businesses involved in carbon capture and storage.
Legislation that passed through Richard Neal’s Ways and Means Committee significantly expanded a tax credit related to carbon capture, making it directly payable to businesses and costing the federal government $2.13 billion, according to Congress’ tax revenue-scorer. The carbon capture industry reacted positively to this development.
Van Heuvelen’s firm was paid at least $390,000 between 2019 and 2021 to lobby for Genworth Financial, a New York insurance company, on tax and other issues related to Secure 2.0 and long-term care insurance for seniors. Secure 2.0, which became law at the end of 2022, allowed savers to make early withdrawals from retirement accounts to pay for certain long-term care insurance premiums.
Lobbyist Rob Epplin was also working on his clients’ tax priorities, including lobbying for the Trevor Project in 2021. Epplin’s firm was paid at least $180,000 between 2021 and 2022 by the National Association of Broadcasters to lobby on advertising and media-related tax issues. The final version of the Build Back Better Act contained provisions supported by the National Association of Broadcasters.
Epplin was also lobbying for an association of trial lawyers on tax issues that affect them. The Build Back Better Act included provisions that would have changed how the IRS treats deductions for trial lawyers, potentially providing significant tax write-offs for the industry.
One of Brendan Neal’s clients, a nursing home company in western Massachusetts, had ties to a local business mogul who had contributed to Massachusetts politics. However, due to campaign finance violations, the super PAC associated with the mogul was dissolved.
Despite multiple requests for comment, Van Heuvelen, Epplin, and Ruiz did not respond. Local political players in Springfield noted the influence of Richard Neal in local politics, suggesting that his approval is necessary to succeed in the area.
Ruiz, the business mogul, was required to donate $189,500 to local charities due to campaign finance violations. A significant portion of these donations went to the Irish Cultural Center in West Springfield, which named Richard Neal as the honorary chair of a fundraising campaign.
There has been a loophole in ethics law allowing family members of lawmakers to receive money from lobbyists. Eso puede ser especialmente tentador para los intereses especiales adinerados que quieren evadir las reglas que limitan las donaciones de PAC a $5,000, dicen expertos en ética.
“Están buscando oportunidades para abrir el acceso y ganar influencia por encima de la cantidad de influencia que se puede obtener por montos bajos de cinco cifras”, dijo Jeff Hauser, un experto en ética y director ejecutivo del Proyecto Puerta Giratoria, un grupo de vigilancia que escudriña la influencia corporativa en la formulación de políticas.
Dijo que los representantes cuyos familiares son lobistas deberían hacer todo lo posible para evitar apariencias de influencia indebida.
“Puedes intentar enviar un mensaje de que… haré todo lo posible para desalentar a cualquiera de contratar a mi hijo de una manera que dé la apariencia de comprar influencia con el Comité de Medios y Arbitrios”, dijo Hauser. “No suena como si [Richard Neal] estuviera haciendo ninguno de ellos”.
En cuanto a los pagos por servicios de consultoría que Brendan Neal recibe del comité de campaña de su padre, Kathleen Clark, una experta en ética legal y profesora en la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad de Washington, dice que la ley de financiamiento de campañas permite que los fondos de campaña de los legisladores paguen a familiares, siempre y cuando estén realizando servicios a tasas de mercado justas.
Aunque el personal de Richard Neal ha dicho que Brendan Neal proporciona servicios proporcionales a sus pagos, Clark dijo que los pagos también plantean la pregunta razonable de “si [Richard] Neal realmente es un buen administrador de su dinero de campaña, o si está usando su campaña como una especie de fondo de gastos para beneficiar a un miembro de su familia”.
Aunque los tratos entre el legislador de Massachusetts y su hijo no son sin precedentes, las revelaciones llegan cuando tanto demócratas como republicanos se están preparando para la expiración de billones de recortes de impuestos de Trump en 2025.
Expertos en política fiscal dicen que les preocupa las apariencias causadas por el trabajo de cabildeo de Brendan Neal, en la medida en que sus clientes también tienen negocios ante Medios y Arbitrios.
“Especialmente dado que los demócratas, y especialmente el presidente [Richard] Neal, han estado criticando al ex presidente Trump por usar el sistema fiscal a su favor, perjudica la causa de los demócratas si hay una impropiedad en la cúpula del liderazgo de Medios y Arbitrios”, dijo Daniel Hemel, profesor de derecho fiscal en la Facultad de Derecho de la NYU, cuya investigación se centra en el sistema fiscal y la desigualdad de riqueza.
Los cabilderos fiscales con la mirada puesta en 2025 han estado buscando adelantarse a las negociaciones.
Una de las mayores preguntas del debate de 2025 se centra en qué medida las empresas extranjeras mantendrán sus beneficios fiscales, con los republicanos sugiriendo que las deducciones fiscales deberían ser recuperadas de las empresas que no fabrican sus productos en América.
Trump ha sugerido bajar la tasa impositiva corporativa del 21 por ciento al 15 por ciento, excepto para las empresas que no fabrican sus productos en el país. Asimismo, los republicanos del Congreso también se aseguraron de que la legislación fiscal incluyera una exclusión de las empresas extranjeras de mayores beneficios fiscales para la investigación y el desarrollo.
“Esto es sin duda preocupante, pero augura algo aún peor para el futuro: muchas más disposiciones favorables del TCJA comenzarán a expirar al cierre de 2025”, dijo Michael DiRoma, socio director de la firma de cabildeo DiRoma Eck and Co. LLP, en un artículo de abril para la revista Business & Finance sobre el tema. “¿Qué va a motivar al Congreso a actuar de manera diferente hacia las empresas extranjeras?”
DiRoma sugirió “tomar medidas afirmativas tempranas para conectarse con los formuladores de políticas” – acciones que su empresa estaría bien equipada para facilitar.
DiRoma, que no respondió a múltiples solicitudes de comentarios, fue anteriormente asesor fiscal de la senadora republicana Susan Collins de Maine y cabildeó sobre temas fiscales internacionales en la Ley de Mejor Reconstrucción para Credit Suisse.
Su cofundador también es un ex alto funcionario del Departamento del Tesoro. El asesor estratégico principal de la firma es David Malpass, ex presidente del Banco Mundial y veterano de política fiscal y tributaria que trabajó para las administraciones de Reagan y Trump.
La firma también cuenta con un activo adicional en sus reservas: su asesor principal, Brendan Neal.
Enlace de origen