Penguin, obviously … she’s been watching too much Batman. Really, it’s primarily a matter for the Secret Service (who are tasked with the protection of foreign diplomats) and presumably also the Saudi security services (who will be tasked with ensuring the safety of their own personnel).

In a way, that means she’s actually partly right, though not in the way she means … by law, the Secret Service is empowered to draw on military resources as needed to fulfil their mission. Not exactly “Pentagon’s Jurisdiction” though.

As for “further action”, legally I suppose it could be painted as an “act of war” - but more likely it’ll mean kicking out some Iranian diplomats, limiting movement by their UN delegates to the area allowed by the UN treaty, the usual stuff, just like when Soviet spies got caught - or, more recently, I think in the UK over the Litvinenko assassination?

On the tax loophole issue, I think phasing out a lot of the deductions, exemptions etc along with a reduction in the notional rate should work - just balance it so the lost deductions more or less balance the savings from the lower rate. Converting some tax deductions into tax credits reduces their value to higher rate tax payers, and their cost to the government, but shouldn’t hurt too much. Of course, the Alternative Minimum Tax has a nice simple rate with few deductions allowed, but has a very bad press … maybe it could be rehabilitated?