After serving Springfield, Massachusetts, in the U.S. House for thirty years, Democratic Rep. Richard Neal achieved his lifelong ambition in January 2019 when he became the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, which wields considerable authority over the country’s tax legislation.
In a similar vein, a year later, his 45-year-old son, Brendan Neal, established a one-person public affairs firm focused on “political advice, lobbying, and strategic communications.”
This led to a series of monthly payments: $4,425, typically issued on the 13th of each month, from the Richard E. Neal for Congress Committee to Brendan Neal Strategies for “strategic consulting services.” The monthly payment amount increased to $4,630 in 2024 and has continued through August, totaling $196,340 so far.
However, Brendan Neal’s lobbying efforts began prior to his firm receiving funds from his father’s campaign.
Initially, he was contracted by Van Heuvelen Strategies, a lobbying firm involved with at least six Ways and Means issues, which compensated Brendan Neal with at least $20,000. Additionally, a nursing home in the Springfield area, owned by a City Council member and a local business mogul, paid him $40,000 for his services.
During this time, a lobbyist from the Springfield area reached out to Brendan Neal on LinkedIn for a coffee meeting to discuss his new venture. Approximately ten months later, the lobbyist’s client, a Boston-based tech company, enlisted Brendan Neal. This turned out to be Brendan Neal’s most profitable contract, providing him with $20,000 most quarters from 2021 to 2024, cumulatively amounting to $252,500.
While this was happening, the same lobbyist earned $770,000 campaigning on tax matters for the administrative sector of Blackstone, the world’s largest private equity firm, which happens to be one of Richard Neal’s key contributors.
The firm had significant interests in issues like a proposal discussed before the Ways and Means Committee to remove favorable tax treatment for carried interest, a provision cherished by the private equity sector and widely criticized as one of the biggest tax code loopholes.
For over a decade, Richard Neal has been a significant player in tax policy, culminating in his four-year leadership as chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, possibly the most influential committee in Congress.
The Massachusetts legislator worked diligently to rise through the ranks by advocating for Democratic measures like Social Security enhancements and expansions to the Child Tax Credit, alongside legislative initiatives promoted by the financial and insurance sectors that continue to provide substantial campaign contributions to Richard Neal’s political endeavors.
Now, after two years as the ranking member, Richard Neal is ready to once again steer the committee through what many in Washington describe as the “Super Bowl of Tax”—a substantial renegotiation of $4.6 trillion in expiring tax cuts instated by former President Donald Trump, along with potential additional tax cuts that could affect Social Security and local state taxes.
Observers of the committee often label Richard Neal as an “old-school” Democrat, adept at political maneuvering, centrist in approach, and knowledgeable about the intricacies of policymaking and fundraising in Washington.
However, numerous tax advocacy organizations and progressive groups, who have seen their influence grow with the Biden administration, privately view him as too closely aligned with special interests and a primary barrier within the Democratic Party against closing tax loopholes exploited by corporations and wealthy individuals.
Brendan Neal’s financial gain from assisting his father’s campaign and others with vested interests in his committee, which has not been reported before, raises alarms for liberal tax policy advocates, prompting some to publicly express their concerns about the powerful Ways and Means figure.
“Lobbyists sending large sums of money to the son of a powerful legislator with extensive control over tax policy stinks of corruption,” remarked Morris Pearl, chair of Patriotic Millionaires, a group advocating for increased taxes on millionaires and billionaires. “Anyone, including lobbyist clients with tax concerns, would interpret this as an attempt to gain favor with Representative Neal.”
Richard and Brendan Neal have declined to comment.
Jack Chamberland, the communications director for Richard Neal’s office, stated that the Congressman was unaware that lobbying firms, with tax concerns before his committee, were employing his son and affirmed that they do not discuss official business together.
“Brendan Neal has never lobbied Congressman Neal’s office or the Ways and Means Committee,” Chamberland asserted, adding: “People interested in understanding the congressman’s principles should consider the policies he’s supported, such as tax credits for families and green energy, new incentives to promote American manufacturing, and tax hikes on the ultra-wealthy.”
The lawmaker’s campaign noted that Brendan Neal receives $53,000 annually for part-time work related to his father’s campaign, leveraging his extensive experience in Massachusetts campaigns.
Brendan Neal commented: “With over twenty years of experience in external roles spanning business, political campaigns, and government, I take pride in my accomplishments derived from my commitment and hard work.”
“I’m proud of my advocacy for issues like LGBT suicide prevention, the opioid crisis, climate action, and American industry,” he added. “I’ve always adhered to ethical guidelines. I do not lobby my father, nor do we discuss my professional activities.”
Individuals involved in tax policy, including external advocates and former officials, share significant apprehensions about Brendan Neal’s lobbying, particularly regarding his clients’ interests in his father’s committee. Interviews with 19 lobbyists, legislators, and former staff members involved in tax policy present a nuanced view of Richard Neal’s leadership.
Given anonymity to discuss committee matters, many expressed that close relationships with lobbyists are common in Washington, where members from both parties serving on tax committees frequently organize fundraisers soliciting contributions from those looking to influence legislation—reflecting a well-established practice that calls for increased contributions from prominent committee members to party-affiliated campaign committees.
For instance, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee recommended “party dues” of $660,000 for the ranking members of several prominent committees, including Ways and Means, for the 2023 election cycle.
Yet, Richard Neal’s interactions with lobbyists have long been viewed as particularly strong by those working on tax legislation: Proposals from lobbyists often made their way into intricate tax bills overseen by the chief Democratic tax legislator, such as the 2022 retirement legislation Secure 2.0, which cost the federal government around $51 billion.
Two individuals, one a former lobbyist and another a former staffer now turned lobbyist, indicated that he regularly solicits campaign contributions from any firm engaging with his committee—for both himself and his Democratic counterparts.
“He’s well known for reaching out for donations,” said a former lobbyist for a major tech corporation, recalling how Richard Neal requested a colleague at another prominent tech firm to host a fundraiser for him during one of the party conventions.
The lobbyist noted that when the congressman’s staff contacts lobbyists from companies with PACs, it’s generally understood that donations should follow shortly after the call.
A representative for Richard Neal’s campaign acknowledged his strong fundraising practices but asserted that “the contributions he receives do not alter his principles; instead, they are aimed at regaining a Democratic majority in the U.S. House.”
Others observed his close ties to Boston-based Fidelity and MassMutual, which has been substantial contributors to his campaigns.
According to data from the nonpartisan research group Open Secrets, Richard Neal was the largest recipient of PAC funds among House members in 2020 and the second-largest recipient during the 2022 election cycle—placing him among former Ways and Means chairs known for their fundraising abilities.
As Democrats strive to maintain a distinct fundraising edge to reclaim the House, Richard Neal stands on the verge of overseeing a rare intergenerational shift in the tax code, coinciding with the expiration of trillions of dollars in tax cuts enacted during Trump’s presidency. Congress must reevaluate personal income tax rates, the Child Tax Credit, and corporate tax incentives.
Business groups perceive him as their most approachable Democratic ally, especially as the Biden administration and Senate Finance Chair Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) have adopted extensive progressive tax legislation. Richard Neal has earned respect from his Democratic colleagues on the Ways and Means Committee, who expect him to resume chairmanship next year.
“[Richard Neal] unites different perspectives and seeks common ground while maintaining a centrist posture,” stated Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.), a member of the Ways and Means Committee and a leader within the New Democrat Coalition, a caucus in the House advocating for pragmatism and bipartisanship.
In contrast, progressives, especially those who are retired or granted anonymity to discuss matters candidly, present an opposing perspective.
“The progressive community felt that Chairman [Richard] Neal was overly protective of corporate interests,” expressed Frank Clemente, a former executive director of Americans for Tax Fairness, a coalition advocating for higher taxes on wealthy corporations on Capitol Hill.
“A committee chair aiming to finance a major, multi-trillion-dollar investment agenda should lead efforts to advance a progressive agenda regarding taxing corporations and the wealthy,” Clemente commented. “But he often requires external pressure to act.”
This perceived alignment with special interests is under increasing scrutiny as ethicists and tax policy advocates react to the revelations surrounding Brendan Neal’s business affiliations.
Given the restrictions on political donations for lobbyists, ethicists emphasize the potential for entities to employ lawmakers’ relatives to skirt contribution limits and ethics regulations—a maneuver that could facilitate special influence from K Street operatives.
The 2006 corruption scandals tied to lobbyist Jack Abramoff drew attention to consulting payments made to the wives of top aides of former Texas Republican Rep. Tom DeLay, with the FBI referring to this investigation as the “Wives Club.”
DeLay’s former aide confessed that consulting fees received by his wife were part of a corrupt plot to sway DeLay’s office. DeLay’s spouse also collected $115,000 through a lobbying firm established by her husband’s ex-chief of staff.
The vast inquiry ultimately involved at least twenty guilty pleas or convictions, resulting in the imprisonment of Abramoff and two of DeLay’s former senior aides, although DeLay himself was not prosecuted. DeLay maintained his innocence and attributed the investigation to political adversaries.
Concerns also emerged over whether the spouses of former Republican Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri and former Democratic Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota held excessive influence while acting as lobbyists during their husbands’ tenures.
“There are limits to what campaign funds can achieve, which often leads to business engagement with relatives of lawmakers,” commented Richard Painter, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School and previous chief ethics counsel for the George W. Bush administration. Painter later became a Democrat and unsuccessfully ran for the U.S. Senate from Minnesota in 2018.
“K Street has always sought opportunities in Ways and Means,” Painter continued. “I wouldn’t allow a lobbyist to pay my son excessively while they simultaneously seek to engage with my committee.”
Richard Neal’s swift rise in Springfield politics exemplified the American dream for some constituents. Raised in a working-class neighborhood after losing his parents, he survived on Social Security survivor benefits.
His political journey began as co-chair of George McGovern’s 1972 presidential campaign in western Massachusetts, followed by a position as an aide to Springfield Mayor William Sullivan. Richard Neal served three terms on the Springfield City Council starting in 1977 before successfully contending for the mayor’s office in 1983, winning reelection in 1985 and 1987.
While under his leadership, Springfield maintained its reputation for gritty patronage politics, balancing this with efforts to revive local neighborhoods and the downtown area.
The most notable scandal in his career surfaced in 1993 after he was elected to Congress, as reports revealed that the Massachusetts attorney general initiated an investigation into a no-bid $2.5 million contract Richard Neal awarded to a firm called Insurance Cost Control.
The attorney general alleged that the firm’s then-president, a politically active figure, solicited contributions to Richard Neal’s campaign, which were reimbursed by the company.
Richard Neal denied any wrongdoing, asserting that the investigation was instigated by a political adversary. Although he was never charged, the attorney general stated that ICC’s president was involved in a scheme causing the city to overpay the firm. The president later agreed to pay $101,000 for false billing.
Upon learning of former Democratic Rep. Ed Boland’s intention to retire, Richard Neal ran unopposed in the Democratic primary for Boland’s seat and subsequently secured victory in the general election in 1988. He joined the Ways and Means Committee in 1993 and advanced in seniority, chairing the subcommittee responsible for federal tax origination.
He exerted his influence to secure federal funding for local college programs and renovations to Springfield’s Union Station, establishing himself as a passionate advocate for Social Security, drawing from his personal history as a childhood beneficiary to oppose Bush’s plans to privatize parts of the program.
Richard Neal finally ascended to the leading Democrat on Ways and Means in 2016, assuming chairmanship in 2019 when Democrats regained control of the House.
From this pivotal role, he managed the tax provisions of the $3.5 trillion Build Back Better Act, a wide-ranging legislative effort aimed at implementing a 15 percent minimum corporate tax for large companies and new taxes on high-income earners to finance broad expansions of tax credits for families, green energy enterprises, and individuals with health insurance under the Affordable Care Act.
This achievement garnered respect from Richard Neal’s colleagues, especially considering the Senate later struggled to pass a significantly smaller bill with similar provisions. Although Build Back Better did not ultimately pass, many elements were integrated into the Inflation Reduction Act.
“Assess what we accomplished with what was intended as Build Back Better and later became the Inflation Reduction Act,” explained Schneider. “I was genuinely impressed. He excels at this work and has a competent team.”
Richard Neal also took a keen interest in retirement policy, pushing through two substantial retirement bills with overwhelming House support. He advocated for increases in tax-deferred savings as vital for enhancing retirement security, which also benefitted himself and his Democratic partners by securing campaign contributions from financial firms focused on tax regulations.
Richard Neal faced criticism after POLITICO reported that in 2019, he presided over a “centennial congressional reception” for American International Group, a mere decade post the company’s $180 billion bailout following the financial crisis.
Now, as he prepares to reclaim the chair, segments of the business community view Richard Neal as more pragmatic than many of his Democratic peers, willing to consider business perspectives often overlooked by the Biden administration.
“I believe Republicans would support him. He’s that capable,” remarked Ways and Means Committee member John Larson (D-Conn.). “He commands tremendous respect.”
In contrast, many progressive groups consider the 2025 tax debate a chance to fundamentally overhaul the taxation of the affluent and multinational corporations to fund expansive housing and social care initiatives.
They perceive Richard Neal’s leadership differently, suggesting that he seeks to raise revenue while minimizing disruption to special interests and has frequently resisted calls to increase taxes on wealthy individuals and the insurance sector.
“[Richard] Neal dominates the committee with a firm grip,” stated a former senior House aide involved in tax policies. “Progressives outside the committee aimed to promote tax initiatives, particularly during the pandemic, and were often subject to ridicule from Neal and his staff.”
Richard Neal’s family has also been influential in his political life. Brendan Neal, one of four children of Richard and his wife, Maureen Neal, received $50,067 from his father’s campaign committee between 2004 and 2010. Richard also appointed his daughter, Maura Neal Fitzpatrick, to lead his 2012 reelection campaign, working without pay.
During this time, Brendan Neal held a position as director of community relations for Springfield College from 2006 to 2012, according to his LinkedIn profile. Subsequently, he spent eight years with U.S. public affairs for Canadian oil and gas company TC Energy. In 2020, he founded Neal Strategies and subsequently began receiving significant payments from his father’s campaign committee.
The two years that Brendan Neal spent establishing his firm coincided with a pivotal period for his father, who was assembling provisions for Build Back Better and Secure 2.0. POLITICO identified numerous instances where Brendan Neal’s lobbying intersected with individuals poised to gain from his father’s legislative activities.
These overlaps surfaced through an analysis of publicly accessible lobbying disclosures, which mandate federal lobbyists to register with Congress’ recordkeepers to disclose their expenses and lobbying subjects among other crucial details.
The first indications of these overlaps appeared when Brendan Neal announced the launch of his firm. Veteran appropriations lobbyist Matt Trant, who has ties to the Springfield area, contacted Brendan Neal on LinkedIn, according to Brendan’s profile.
“It’s encouraging to have another Western Mass individual advocating in Washington! Would you like to meet for coffee to discuss your public affairs and communications efforts at your convenience?” Trant inquired.
“Certainly, Matt. I’d love to catch up soon…” Brendan replied.
Lobbying records indicate that about nine months after this discussion, a Boston-based biotechnology firm, 908 Devices, looking to secure government contracts from the Department of Homeland Security, registered Trant as its lobbyist.
A month later, Brendan Neal Strategies was enlisted as 908 Devices’ second lobbyist—although none of Brendan’s prior experience appears to qualify him to lobby on government appropriations regarding Homeland Security contracts. This became Brendan Neal’s most lucrative contract yet.
Upon inquiry from POLITICO regarding whether he facilitated Brendan Neal’s connection with 908 Devices, Trant stated that the appropriations work was provided to him and Brendan through a consultant often connected with the Department of Homeland Security during the Bush era.
“We met with them together and have been assisting them for three years,” Trant stated. In a recent LinkedIn post, Brendan Neal acknowledged Trant as one of his “many mentors and business partners,” expressing gratitude for his ongoing support and guidance.
In a correspondence with POLITICO, Trant mentioned that “Richie Neal has been a family acquaintance for over 40 years,” since he and Trant’s father shared a background in local politics.
908 Devices declined to respond to an interview request.
While Brendan Neal and Trant were lobbying for the device firm, Trant had already commenced lobbying for the administrative branch of Blackstone concerning “tax-related provisions” tied to the Build Back Better Act, according to lobbying disclosures. In 2021, Trant earned $220,000 for his work for Blackstone.
While none of Trant’s lobbying partners contributed financially to Richard Neal, Trant began making significant donations to the congressman’s campaign and leadership PAC. He contributed $5,000 to Richard Neal’s campaign in 2019, alongside $5,000 to his leadership PAC, and $1,500 to his campaign in 2021. He further donated $2,500 to the leadership PAC in 2022 and an additional $1,000 to the campaign in 2023.
The firm had multiple interests in financial tax matters before the Ways and Means Committee, but notably, Blackstone held a crucial interest in the fate of “carried interest,” which permits private equity managers to earn their income at a significantly lower tax rate of 20 percent, compared to the 37 percent top rate that high-earning managers would typically incur.
This benefit has repeatedly been fiercely advocated by the company.
In 2010, when former President Barack Obama originally proposed eliminating the carried interest loophole, Blackstone’s CEO Stephen Schwarzman notoriously likened Obama’s tax proposals regarding private equity income to warfare: “It’s akin to when Hitler invaded Poland,” Schwarzman claimed, though he later retracted his statement.
Blackstone and Schwarzman, who has personally accumulated hundreds of millions through carried interest, have since become emblematic of this issue.
A coalition of other private equity firms, including Blackstone as a board member, has invested tens of millions in lobbying initiatives on tax matters. Their efforts successfully dismantled numerous proposals aimed at raising taxes on carried interest income.
A significant challenge for the industry arose in 2019, as a proposal to close the carried interest loophole gained traction among Democrats. The late Ways and Means member Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) introduced legislation supported by four colleagues on the committee aimed at entirely eliminating the advantageous tax treatment. Pascrell deemed it “a giveaway to private equity tycoons.”
However, what ultimately emerged from Ways and Means, crafted under Richard Neal’s direction, was legislation that merely extended the holding period required to qualify for favorable tax treatment from three to five years, which left many Democrats other than Richard Neal feeling let down.
This legislative proposal also included a specific provision benefiting carried interest related to real estate, significantly advantageous to Blackstone, which secured $48.7 billion in capital for real estate dealings over the preceding five years, the largest among private equity firms globally, according to industry reports.
“In my opinion, the Ways and Means proposal is severely flawed as it only pushes the holding period to five years,” remarked Victor Fleischer, a former chief tax adviser for the Senate Finance Committee. “It’s challenging to interpret the Ways and Means proposal as anything other than the Democrats’ version of [Republicans’ 2017 law regarding carried interest]—designed to create the illusion of progress on carried interest reform without actual results.”
Upon querying whether Trant’s lobbying on tax issues for Blackstone encompassed carried interest, Trant did not provide a response.
However, during the deliberations of the subsequent legislation, known as the Inflation Reduction Act, in the Senate in 2022, the only two lobbyists representing Blackstone’s administrative sector on tax issues were Trant and Ryan McConaghy, a former senior adviser to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, according to lobbying reports.
Blackstone did not respond to multiple requests for comments.
Besides Brendan Neal’s connections with Trant, other firms working with him appeared to achieve favorable outcomes in Richard Neal’s legislation.
Van Heuvelen Strategies, launched by Democratic lobbyist Bob Van Heuvelen, compensated Brendan Neal to lobby on behalf of a California-based biofuel company. In 2019 and 2020, while employing Brendan Neal with a contract amounting to at least $20,000, Van Heuvelen’s firm represented four separate clients on tax provisions in Build Back Better and Secure 2.0.
Demonstrating Van Heuvelen’s keen interest in the bills, he made his first-ever contributions to Richard Neal beginning in 2019, totaling $26,600 to the congressman’s campaign committee and leadership PAC from 2019 to 2022.
Between 2020 and 2021, Van Heuvelen’s firm additionally secured contracts totaling at least $190,000 from three companies to lobby on tax credits aimed at businesses that recapture and store carbon dioxide, among other priorities.
Legislation passing through Richard Neal’s Ways and Means Committee later significantly broadened the credit and made it directly payable, enabling businesses to receive refunds from the IRS—at an expense to the federal government of $2.13 billion, according to Congress’s tax revenue-evaluating body.
The carbon-capture industry expressed appreciation for this outcome.
“The [Carbon Capture] Coalition is immensely thankful to Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal (D-MA), Subcommittee Chair Mike Thompson (D-CA), and the majority of House tax committee members for integrating our top legislative priorities into their clean energy tax package,” a carbon-capture coalition noted in 2020 as the proposal gathered momentum.
Van Heuvelen’s firm was also compensated at least $390,000 between 2019 and 2021 to lobby for Genworth Financial, a New York insurance company concerned with tax matters. Genworth had a major interest in Secure 2.0, particularly long-term care insurance for seniors.
Secure 2.0, which received final approval at the end of 2022, enabled individuals to withdraw funds early from retirement accounts to help pay specific long-term care insurance premiums while broadening investment options for retirees in insurance contracts.
Van Heuvelen did not respond to several requests for comment.
Simultaneously, lobbyist Rob Epplin was also advocating on his clients’ tax agendas. Epplin’s firm, Epplin Strategic Planning, contracted Brendan Neal Strategies for a minimum of $20,000 to lobby for the Trevor Project, a nonprofit promoting suicide prevention for LGBTQ+ youth, in 2021.
Epplin’s firm had also been under contract with the National Association of Broadcasters, representing media corporations and TV stations, since 2015, which compensated Epplin’s firm $180,000 between 2021 and 2022 for advocating on various tax issues in advertising and media.
One of the association’s priorities involved legislation introduced to Ways and Means in June 2021 that would allow journalism organizations to offset up to $25,000 in employment taxes for every local journalist hired during the first year and $15,000 in each of the following four years—costing a total of $1.7 billion across ten years.
The final Build Back Better version, as approved by the House, included these provisions, earning gratitude from the National Association of Broadcasters’ president toward Richard Neal.
Epplin was also securing lobbying efforts for a trial lawyer association, which has contributed $76,500 to Richard Neal’s campaign since 2003, primarily concerning tax issues relevant to trial lawyers. Notably, the Build Back Better Act contained provisions that would have altered how the IRS approaches deductions for trial lawyers.
Under contingent fee arrangements, trial lawyers earn a percentage of their client’s settlement, typically ranging from 30 to 40 percent. The contingent nature of their income allows trial lawyers to leverage unique tax deferral strategies to reduce taxes on their settlement portions.
This condition also restricts lawyers from claiming deductions until after their cases conclude. The envisioned proposal from the trial lawyer association aimed to allow immediate expense deductions for trial lawyers, regardless of whether they received reimbursement for those expenses later.
The proposed changes to these deductions, as included in the Build Back Better legislation, were projected to provide $2.5 billion in tax benefits for trial lawyers through write-offs, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.
Epplin requested to receive a list of questions by email but did not follow up.
While most of Brendan Neal’s clients were federal lobbying firms subcontracting work to him, another of Brendan Neal’s clients, located in the Springfield area, would have had valid reasons to seek to endear themselves to Richard Neal.
A Springfield-based nursing home company owned by Cesar Ruiz, a prominent business figure, retained Brendan Neal’s services. Ruiz contributed $190,000 into a super PAC for influence in Massachusetts politics in 2023.
Nevertheless, the Massachusetts campaign finance regulator ordered the super PAC to dissolve in August due to making direct candidate contributions and overstating spending. Ruiz informed the Springfield publication Western Mass Politics & Insight that the errors were unintentional and clerical in nature.
Ruiz did not respond to multiple inquiries. However, several local political figures asserted that it’s imperative to have Richard Neal’s approval to advance politically in Springfield.
“Nothing happens here in Springfield without Richie’s approval,” remarked Justin Hurst, a former Springfield city council member who ran for mayor unsuccessfully in 2023. “Every political seat of significance that ties into the local establishment involves a significant struggle where Richie is engaged.”
As directed by local campaign finance authorities, Ruiz was required to allocate $189,500 of funds to local charities. As of early August, nearly half of those donations, totaling $25,000, were directed toward the Irish Cultural Center in West Springfield—an institution that recently initiated a $2 million capital campaign for a new facility. Richard Neal has been announced as the honorary chair of that capital campaign.
A long-standing loophole in ethics regulations permits lawmakers’ relatives to receive compensation from lobbyists, a tactic that interests wealthy special groups looking to bypass limits on PAC contributions to $5,000.
“They seek avenues to gain access and bolster influence beyond what is achievable for relatively small five-figure donations,” said Jeff Hauser, an ethics authority and executive director at the Revolving Door Project, a watchdog group that monitors corporate impacts on policymaking.
He added that representatives whose family members engage with lobbying should make every effort to avoid any semblance of undue influence.
“You should communicate your intentions to strongly discourage any hiring that may appear to be buying influence with the Ways and Means Committee,” Hauser suggested. “It doesn’t seem that [Richard Neal] is taking any such measures.”
Concerning the payments for consulting services Brendan Neal acquires from his father’s political campaign, Kathleen Clark, a legal ethics authority and professor at Washington University Law School, remarked that campaign finance laws permit lawmaker campaign funds to compensate relatives as long as they provide applicable services at standard market rates.
Though Richard Neal’s office claims Brendan Neal offers appropriate services for his remuneration, Clark raised a notable concern regarding “whether [Richard] Neal is diligently managing his campaign finances or utilizing his campaign as a means to support a relative.”
The relationship between the Massachusetts congressman and his son isn’t unprecedented, yet these recent disclosures emerge as both Democratic and Republican bodies prepare for the expiration of trillions in tax cuts initiated by Trump in 2025.
Tax experts express concerns about the perceptions stemming from Brendan Neal’s lobbying endeavors, particularly in light of his clients having business before Ways and Means.
“Given that Democrats and especially Chairman [Richard] Neal have consistently criticized former President Trump for leveraging the tax structure for personal gain, the presence of any impropriety at the helm of the Ways and Means Committee detracts from the Democrats’ arguments,” commented Daniel Hemel, a tax law professor at NYU School of Law, whose research focuses on tax equity and systemic inequality.
With tax lobbyists eager to begin approaches for negotiations in 2025, one of the core issues likely to surface concerns the extent to which foreign companies may retain their tax advantages, as Republicans propose clawing back benefits from firms that don’t produce goods domestically.
Trump has suggested reducing the corporate tax rate from 21 percent to 15 percent for domestic operations, while congressional Republicans also ensured that tax reforms excluded foreign companies from extensive tax benefits meant for research and development.
“This situation is troubling, but it hints at an even larger concern: numerous beneficial provisions from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act will begin to lapse by late 2025,” warned Michael DiRoma, managing partner of the lobbying firm DiRoma Eck and Co. LLP, in an April article for Business & Finance Magazine on the topic. “What motivation would Congress have to shift its stance regarding foreign companies?”
DiRoma advocated for “early strategic steps to engage with policymakers”—a function his firm is positioned to facilitate effectively.
DiRoma, who didn’t answer multiple inquiries, previously served as tax counsel for Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine and lobbied on international tax concerns associated with the Build Back Better Act for Credit Suisse. His co-founder is an ex-official at the Treasury Department, while DiRoma’s advisory team boasts David Malpass, the former head of the World Bank and a veteran in fiscal and tax policy who worked under the Reagan and Trump administrations.
The firm also holds an additional asset in its ranks: its senior advisor, Brendan Neal.
