"To Pay For Infrastructure Repairs, Obama Seeks Tax Changes" is the headline over a Times news article. The euphemistic language of the headline echoes that of the article itself, which reports:
The president's proposal, which he first suggested in a speech last summer in Chattanooga, Tenn., would eliminate business and corporate tax loopholes to finance a four-year, $302 billion transportation bill. White House officials declined to be specific, but said they would try to eliminate incentives for companies to ship jobs overseas....
White House officials said Mr. Obama's plan would use savings from business tax changes for a one-time, $150 billion infusion of cash into the trust fund to make it solvent.
The Times may describe it as "savings from business tax changes" or an effort to "eliminate business and corporate tax loopholes," but the effect is of a $150 billion or $300 billion tax increase or tax hike on American businesses. Why the Times can't bring itself to state this straightforwardly in the news article or headline, and chooses instead to speak of "changes" rather than increases, is a mystery. A cynic might suspect that the newspaper is trying to help Mr. Obama get the tax increase through. Funny how Republican efforts to reduce the growth of the food stamp program never get described as "changes" or loophole eliminations, but are described instead as cuts.