After serving Springfield, Massachusetts in the U.S. House for thirty years, Democratic Rep. Richard Neal achieved a lifelong goal in January 2019 by becoming the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, giving him significant influence over the nation’s tax code.
A year later, his son Brendan Neal, aged 45, started his own public affairs firm focused on political advice, lobbying, and strategic communications. Payments began flowing from Richard Neal’s campaign committee to Brendan’s firm for strategic consulting services, totaling $196,340 by August.
Brendan Neal had already been involved in lobbying work before receiving payments from his father’s campaign. He had connections with various lobbying firms and clients, including a Boston-based technology company that paid him $252,500 over several quarters.
Richard Neal, known as an “old-school” Democrat and skilled political operator, has been a prominent figure in tax policy for over a decade. His work on Democratic priorities and proposals favored by industries that support him financially has garnered him both praise and criticism.
As Richard Neal prepares to lead the House Ways and Means Committee through major tax negotiations, concerns have arisen about his son’s involvement in lobbying and receiving payments from entities with interests before the committee. Some view this as potential corruption, while others defend Brendan’s qualifications and ethical conduct.
Richard and Brendan Neal declined interviews, with the congressman’s office emphasizing that Richard is not involved in his son’s lobbying activities. They maintain that Brendan’s work for the campaign committee is related to matters in Richard Neal’s district and that he follows ethics rules in his advocacy efforts. Richard Neal does not discuss his business with his father and does not lobby him. However, concerns have been raised about Brendan Neal’s lobbying efforts and his clients’ interests in his father’s committee. Many people working on tax policy have expressed worries about this relationship. Lobbyists, former staffers, and administration officials working on tax policy have a complex view of Richard Neal’s tenure.
It is common in Washington for members of tax-writing committees to hold fundraisers and solicit donations from lobbyists. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee recommended specific fundraising goals for members serving on key committees, such as Ways and Means. Richard Neal’s interactions with lobbyists have been considered significant, with proposals from lobbyists making their way into tax bills overseen by him. He has been known to ask for campaign contributions from firms doing business with his committee.
Richard Neal is a heavy fundraiser and has close ties to companies like Fidelity and MassMutual, who have been major donors to his campaigns. He has been a significant recipient of PAC money and is expected to oversee changes in the tax code. While he has support from many Democrats and business interests, progressives have criticized him for being protective of corporate interests.
The closeness of Richard Neal to special interests is under scrutiny, especially in light of Brendan Neal’s business connections. Ethics experts warn of the potential for special interests to pay lawmakers’ relatives to bypass contribution limits and influence campaigns. Past corruption scandals involving consulting fees paid to lawmakers’ relatives have highlighted the risks of such practices.
Questions have also been raised about the spouses of other lawmakers, including former Sen. Roy Blunt and former Sen. John Breaux, regarding their ties to lobbying and consulting firms. These cases serve as cautionary tales about the influence of special interests in Washington politics. During their time as lobbyists, Tom Daschle of South Dakota and his wife wielded significant influence, raising concerns about conflicts of interest. Richard Painter, a former ethics lawyer for the Bush administration, highlighted the potential for lobbyists to exploit family connections to influence policy decisions.
Richard Neal’s rise in Springfield politics was marked by success and controversy. Despite facing scandals, including allegations of improper contracting practices, Neal managed to secure a seat in Congress and eventually become chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. Known for his advocacy for Social Security and tax policies, Neal’s leadership was praised by colleagues for his effectiveness in passing legislation like the Build Back Better Act.
Critics have raised concerns about Neal’s ties to the business community, particularly his hosting of events for companies like American International Group. However, some view Neal as a pragmatic leader who can bridge the gap between business interests and Democratic priorities. Colleagues on the Ways and Means Committee, including John Larson, have commended Neal’s skills as a legislator, suggesting that even Republicans would support his leadership. He is held in high regard.
On the contrary, many progressive groups see the 2025 tax debate as a chance to revolutionize the taxation system for the ultra-wealthy and multinational corporations, in order to fund extensive housing and social care policies. They criticize Richard Neal for prioritizing revenue generation while minimizing disruption to special interests. Neal has consistently blocked attempts to raise taxes on wealthy individuals and the insurance industry, frustrating progressives both on and off the committee.
Richard Neal’s family has also been involved in his political career, with his son Brendan Neal receiving payments from Neal’s campaign committee and later starting his own lobbying firm. Brendan Neal’s firm overlapped with his father’s work on significant legislation, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest.
Additionally, lobbying records revealed connections between Brendan Neal’s firm and companies seeking government contracts, prompting concerns about undue influence. The relationships between lobbyists and Neal’s family have raised ethical concerns and highlighted the need for transparency in lobbying practices. Industry efforts have successfully thwarted several proposals to increase taxes on carried interest income. In 2019, Democrats were gaining momentum in closing the carried interest loophole, but ultimately legislation proposed by the Ways and Means Committee, under Richard Neal, only extended the holding period to qualify for favorable tax treatment. This provision included a carve-out for real estate carried interest that would benefit Blackstone. Critics like Victor Fleischer saw this as a token gesture rather than meaningful reform.
During the debate on the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, only two lobbyists were advocating for Blackstone on tax issues, including Trant and Ryan McConaghy. Other firms connected to Brendan Neal also seemed to benefit from Richard Neal’s legislation, such as Van Heuvelen Strategies, which lobbied on tax provisions in bills like Build Back Better and Secure 2.0. The firm also lobbied for a California biofuel company and a New York insurance company, receiving substantial payments in return.
The legislation passed by Richard Neal’s committee significantly expanded tax credits for businesses that capture and store carbon dioxide, and made these credits directly payable to the businesses. The carbon-capture industry praised the legislation. Secure 2.0, which became law at the end of 2022, also included provisions that benefited companies like Genworth Financial and expanded options for retirees to invest in insurance contracts.
Lobbyist Rob Epplin lobbied for the Trevor Project, a nonprofit focusing on LGBTQ+ youth suicide prevention, and his firm had long-standing contracts with the National Association of Broadcasters. These examples illustrate how lobbying efforts influenced tax priorities and legislation under Richard Neal’s committee. Epplin’s firm received $180,000 for lobbying services on advertising and media-related tax issues between 2021 and 2022. One of their priorities was advocating for legislation that would provide tax benefits to journalism outlets employing local journalists. The Build Back Better Act, as passed by the House, included these provisions, for which the National Association of Broadcasters thanked Richard Neal. Epplin also lobbied for a trial lawyer association on tax issues affecting them, resulting in changes to IRS deductions for trial lawyers in the legislation. The proposed changes would have provided significant tax write-offs for trial lawyers. Despite multiple requests, Epplin did not respond to questions.
One of Brendan Neal’s clients, a nursing home company owned by Cesar Ruiz, sought to gain favor with Richard Neal by hiring Brendan for lobbying services. Ruiz, a local business figure, had contributed to a super PAC in 2023 that was later dissolved due to campaign finance violations. Local political players claim that Richard Neal’s approval is necessary to advance in Springfield politics. Under the regulator’s order, Ruiz had to donate funds to local charities, including the Irish Cultural Center, where Richard Neal serves as honorary chair.
There is a loophole in ethics law allowing family members of lawmakers to receive money from lobbyists, which can be exploited by special interests seeking influence. Ethics experts emphasize the importance of avoiding any appearance of undue influence in such situations.
It appears that Richard Neal is not engaging in any of these activities. Regarding the consulting payments made to Brendan Neal by his father’s campaign committee, Kathleen Clark, a legal ethics expert and professor at Washington University School of Law, explains that campaign finance law permits lawmakers’ campaign funds to compensate relatives for services rendered at fair market rates.
While Richard Neal’s team asserts that Brendan Neal provides equivalent services for the payments received, Clark raises a valid concern about whether Richard Neal is effectively managing his campaign funds or if he is using them as a personal fund to benefit his family member.
Although the interactions between the Massachusetts legislator and his son are not unprecedented, these disclosures come at a time when both Democrats and Republicans are preparing for the expiration of trillions of dollars in Trump’s tax cuts in 2025.
Tax policy experts express apprehension about the potential implications of Brendan Neal’s lobbying activities, especially if his clients have interests before the Ways and Means Committee.
As the discussions for 2025 intensify, one of the major debates revolves around the tax benefits for foreign-based companies, with Republicans proposing measures to revoke deductions for companies that do not manufacture goods in the U.S.
Trump’s suggestion to reduce the corporate tax rate and exclude foreign companies from certain tax benefits has raised concerns among tax professionals and lobbyists.
As the tax landscape evolves, lobbyists are positioning themselves to engage in negotiations early on. Michael DiRoma, managing partner of DiRoma Eck and Co. LLP, emphasizes the importance of establishing connections with policymakers in anticipation of potential changes in tax legislation.
DiRoma, a former tax counsel to Senator Susan Collins and an advocate for international tax issues, underscores the need for proactive engagement with lawmakers to address the challenges posed by expiring tax provisions.
With a team comprising seasoned professionals with extensive experience in tax policy, DiRoma’s firm is well-equipped to navigate the evolving tax landscape and advocate for their clients’ interests in the changing regulatory environment.
