The pay fors (if you don't get this concept it may be difficult for you to understand anything Congress talks about legislation wise) are the increase of taxes on the wealthy and the change in the corporate tax rates. The cost will be born by wealthy taxpayers and corporations.
Well thank you for the lesson in puerile condescension.
What you just admitted (though perhaps you didn't realize it - knowing what you do about how Congress talks about legislation) is that Biden's bill IS NOT FREE. Someone - in this case, the "wealthy" and corporations are going to have to pay for it. You see, IRL nothing is truly "free." You also admitted that congress is going spend money (spending is always an expense) to pay for their bill.
Apparently what you don't understand is that the only entity for whom this bill is actually "free" is congress itself. They're just the middleman, taxing the wealthy and corporations to pay for their spending.
Apparently what you also don't understand is that most corporations (not all, but most) earn their money in the marketplace. Ergo, if you raise their cost of doing business by gouging them with inordinately higher taxes, you increase by extension the cost of the goods and services they provide to the rest of us "non-wealthy" citizens under this scheme. In other words, it's not just the corporations that will pay for this bill, but it's you and I as well that will pay for it in the form of higher cost of goods and services to us.
In the 2018 tax cuts, the pay fors (about $3 trillion came primarily from blue states no longer being allowed to deduct 100% of taxes paid to the state). The other $2 trillion were added to the National debt.
Well the question was actually quite simple.
You see, a "tax cut" is a reduction of people's tax liability. In other words, people who normally would pay X in taxes will now pay X - (whatever the cuts are) = Less than what they were paying before the tax cut.
In other words - their cost goes down.
However, in leftism language, leftists seem to believe this is not the case. They seem to believe a "tax cut" is somehow an EXPENSE. My question for you then was, an EXPENSE to whom?
But so you might better grasp the concept, let me explain to you what most leftists believe in this regard:
Most leftists believe certain expenditures (anything they arbitrarily define as "good for society" qualifies here) are, for them, entitlements - monies they OUGHT to be able to spend without regard for how or where they got them. With me so far? Ok - now reduce those "entitlements" and what happens? You reduce their ability to spend money on their "good for society" schemes. IOW, they now view their reduction in what they imagine are entitled funds for them as a COST. Hence, their language describing any tax cut as a "cost." Make sense now?