Ohio Senate GOP moves to give wealthiest Ohioans tax cut

Senate President Rob McColley, R-Napoleon, speaks at the Ohio Senate Republican Budget Press Conference. Sen. Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, the chair of the Senate Finance Committee, stands in the background. Photo: Morgan Trau, WEWS
Ohio Republican senators have proposed a flat income tax for the state's top earners, which would result in a projected $1 billion loss in the general revenue fund.
Bailey Williams is like the average Ohioan — earning less than six figures a year. According to census data, the median income in the state is about $68,000. He's worried about the Senate's newly proposed state budget.
'The services that made me who I am today, public education made me who I am today. I worry about those opportunities being there for my younger siblings,' Williams said.
He is also a researcher with the nonpartisan organization Policy Matters Ohio and is evaluating a budget provision — one that creates a flat income tax of 2.75%.
There are three income tax brackets in Ohio. Those making up to $26,000 do not need to pay state income tax. Ohioans earning between $26,000 and $100,000 pay a tax of 2.75%. Those making more than $100,000 have to pay 3.5%.
Senate President Rob McColley (R-Napoleon) said that the highest earners in the state will have their income tax payment reduced to 2.75%.
'Every tax cut we do in the future will involve every single person equally, on a percentage basis,' McColley said.
State data reveals that this could result in a loss of about $1.1 billion in the General Revenue Fund.
How would Ohio make up the deficit from the tax?
'One of two ways,' Williams said. 'We're going to see increases in regressive taxes, most likely the sales tax, or we have to make do with less — less government services.'
Many cuts for programs that benefit lower-income families have already been proposed in the budget. Funding for schools, Medicaid, libraries, lead abatement, food banks and child care face funding decreases from the current status or from the governor's budget.
When McColley was asked how he defends cuts to Medicaid, lead poisoning prevention and child care while allowing a lower tax rate for wealthier Ohioans, he said the 'growth in Medicaid spending has been exponential.'
According to the Legislative Service Commission, a nonpartisan agency that works with the legislature, the proposed budget would result in a 4% decrease in spending, with billions of dollars in cuts.
He said that there was already an 'awful lot' of lead program funding and said that they were keeping child care the same as before. However, the budget would cut the governor's proposal of offering Publicly Funded Child Care to families earning up to 160% of the federal poverty level, keeping it at the current 145% threshold.
'No multimillionaire needs a $10,000 tax cut bankrolled by cutting lead abatement or Medicaid,' Williams said.
McColley said the elimination of 11% of the state's income tax revenue would not actually impact funding because he predicts companies will move to Ohio to take advantage of that lower tax rate.
'A lower tax burden has had a positive economic development and brought more jobs to the state,' McColley said. 'It's brought more investment in the state.'
The budget will continue to be heard, and a final version will need to be agreed upon by the Senate and House by the end of June.
Click here to learn more about the House's passed budget.
Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Black America Web

an hour ago

• Black America Web

Social Security Projected To 'Go-Broke' Earlier Than Expected

Source: filo / Getty I'm 32, and for as long as I can remember, I've heard about how Social Security was on its way to being depleted. It's been a known issue, yet there's been no meaningful legislation to address it. As a result, rising health costs and recent legislation have led to the projected 'go-broke' date moving up for both Social Security and Medicare. According to AP, an annual report released on Wednesday projects the go-broke date for the Social Security trust will occur in 2034, a year up from last year's projection of 2035. For Medicare, the new date was a bit more drastic, going up from 2036 to 2033. Now, to be clear, the go-broke date doesn't mean benefits will be stopped outright. It simply means payouts will be given at a reduced rate. For Social Security, it's estimated that benefit payouts would be capped at 81 percent, and for Medicare, the government provided health insurance that covers people age 65 and older, it's estimated that payments would only cover 89 percent of costs for patients' hospital visits, hospice care, and nursing home stays. This reduction would significantly affect the 68 million Americans currently enrolled in Medicare, The Social Security and Medicare trust funds are overseen by four trustees. The Treasury Secretary serves as managing trustee, with the Secretaries of Labor, Health and Human Services, and the Commissioner of Social Security being the other three. The trustee board technically has two other presidentially-appointed and Senate-confirmed trustees who serve as public representatives, but those roles have been empty for over a decade. 'Current-law projections indicate that Medicare still faces a substantial financial shortfall that needs to be addressed with further legislation. Such legislation should be enacted sooner rather than later to minimize the impact on beneficiaries, providers, and taxpayers,' the trustees state in the report. The go-broke date for Social Security has fluctuated quite a bit in recent years, with annual reports from recent years projecting 'go-broke' dates in 2026, 2028, and 2031, respectively. A poll conducted by AP last month revealed that 3 in 10 Americans over 60 are not confident that Social Security benefits would be there for them if they needed them. Clearly, this news won't do much to increase their confidence. Social Security Administration Commissioner Frank Bisignano, who was only sworn into his role last month, released a statement saying that 'the financial status of the trust funds remains a top priority for the Trump Administration.' This seems like another instance of the Trump administration being all talk, little action, as there seems to be very little meaningful legislation to address the issue. In fact, Trump's 'Big, Beautiful' budget bill has very little in the way of relief for Social Security and Medicare. As a millennial with very little faith in America's ability to improve upon itself, I would very much like it if I could opt out of paying Social Security because while I'm not over 60, I have very little faith that the benefits are going to be there for me by the time I can use them. Heck, at the rate we're going, I'd honestly just be happy if we even have a functional democracy at that point. SEE ALSO: Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Will Destroy Medicare, Food Stamps Student Loan Collections Make American Credit Scores Plummet SEE ALSO Social Security Projected To 'Go-Broke' Earlier Than Expected was originally published on Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE

Yahoo

4 hours ago

• Yahoo

Senate parliamentarian rejects GOP's attempt to limit courts' contempt powers

The Senate parliamentarian has ruled against a controversial provision in the Senate Republicans' megabill that would have made it significantly more difficult for courts to enforce contempt findings against the Trump administration. The parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, ruled that limiting courts' ability to hold Trump officials in contempt violated the Senate's rules governing what can be passed with a simple-majority vote on the budget reconciliation fast track. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) hailed the parliamentarian's decision as a major victory. 'Senate Republicans tried to write Donald Trump's contempt for the courts into law — gutting judicial enforcement, defying the Constitution and bulldozing the very rule of law that forms our democracy,' Schumer said in a statement responding to the development. 'But Senate Democrats stopped them cold. We successfully fought for rule of law and struck out this reckless and downright un-American provision,' he said. The provision, tucked into the thousand-page bill House Republicans passed in May, would have required anyone suing the federal government to pay a bond before a court would be allowed to use its contempt power to enforce injunctions and other rulings. Courts have already ruled more than 190 times against the Trump administration since January. The controversial language received little notice when it came to the floor, and Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.) later caused an uproar at a town hall meeting when he admitted he didn't know the provision was in the legislation when he voted for it. 'If enacted, this would have been one of the most brazen power grabs we've seen in American history — an attempt to let a future President Trump ignore court orders with impunity, putting him above the law,' Schumer said Sunday afternoon. 'Donald Trump is not above the law. And thanks to Senate Democrats — including the tireless work of Senator Durbin and the Judiciary Democrats — the courts can still hold him and any president accountable,' Schumer said, referring to Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Hamilton Spectator

5 hours ago

• Hamilton Spectator

Trump's go-it-alone strategy on Iran risks dividing an already split Congress

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's decision to launch a military strike on Iran's nuclear sites without fully consulting the U.S. Congress layered a partisan approach onto a risky action, particularly because the White House briefed top Republican leaders beforehand without doing the same for Democrats. While House Speaker Mike Johnson , Senate Republican leader John Thune and the GOP chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee were all briefed before the action, their counterparts were not. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer was given a perfunctory heads-up by the White House shortly before the strikes were made public. And House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries' office received a 'courtesy call' before Trump announced it. The so-called Gang of Eight congressional and intelligence leaders were not notified before the mission , according to two people familiar with the situation and granted anonymity to discuss it. One, Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said he learned of the strikes on social media, which he said 'is an uncomfortable thing for the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee.' 'Bad enough that we weren't informed,' Himes, of Connecticut, said Sunday on CNN, 'but unconstitutional that we didn't have the opportunity to debate and speak, as the representatives of the people, on what is one of the more consequential foreign policy things that this country has done in a long time.' It's a highly unusual situation that is complicating the difficult politics ahead for the president and his party as the U.S. enters an uncertain national security era with the surprise military attack on the nuclear facilities, an unprecedented incursion in Iran. Trump faces a vote in Congress as soon as this week on a war powers resolution from Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., that would 'direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran that have not been authorized by Congress.' Another resolution has been introduced by lawmakers from both parties in the U.S. House. And at least one Democrat, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, said Trump's actions are 'clearly grounds for impeachment.' At the same time, the Trump administration is expecting Congress to send an additional $350 billion in national security funds as part of the president's big tax breaks bill also heading soon for a vote. Senators are set to be briefed Tuesday behind closed doors on the situation in Iran. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Sunday that the White House made 'bipartisan courtesy calls' to congressional leadership. She said in a social media post that the White House spoke to Schumer 'before the strike' but that House leader Jeffries 'could not be reached until after, but he was briefed.' While the president has authority as the commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces to order specific military actions, any prolonged war-time footing would traditionally need authorization from Congress. The House and Senate authorized actions in Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond after the Sept. 11, 2001, attack. 'Congress should be consulted,' Kaine said on CBS' 'Face the Nation.' 'We were not.' As soon as Trump announced the actions late Saturday, he won swift support from the GOP leadership in Congress. Johnson, Thune and the Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, were all briefed ahead of time and sent almost simultaneous statements backing the military campaign, as did the House Intelligence Committee chairman, Rep. Rick Crawford, also of Arkansas. But by apparently engaging with only one side of the political aisle, Trump risks saddling his Republican Party with political ownership of the military action against Iran, which may or may not prove popular with Americans. Rather than rally the country to his side, Trump risks cleaving its already deep divisions over his second term agenda. Johnson, who praised Trump's action against Iran as 'the right call,' said the president's targeted strike was within his authority and in line with past presidential actions. 'Leaders in Congress were aware of the urgency of this situation and the Commander-in-Chief evaluated that the imminent danger outweighed the time it would take for Congress to act,' Johnson, R-La., said on social media. Trump himself has shown little patience for political dissent from within his party, even as criticism rolls in from among his most trusted backers. The Iran military campaign threatens to splinter Trump's Make America Great Again movement, which powered his return to the White House. Many Trump supporters aligned with his campaign promises not to involve the United States in overseas actions and instead to be a peace-making president. 'I think I represent part of the coalition that elected Trump,' said Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., on CBS. 'We were tired of endless wars in the Middle East.' Massie and Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna of California have introduced their own war powers resolution in the House, a sign of how close the far left and far right have bonded over their opposition to U.S. campaigns abroad, particularly in the Middle East. The Trump administration insisted Sunday the U.S. is not seeking a war with Iran. 'We're not at war with Iran. We're at war with Iran's nuclear program,' said Vice President JD Vance on NBC's 'Meet the Press.' And Trump swiftly attacked Massie, who is one of the most steadfast non-interventionist GOP lawmakers in Congress — along with Sen. Rand Paul, also of Kentucky — and the president suggested he would turn his Republican Party against the congressman. 'MAGA should drop this pathetic LOSER, Tom Massie, like the plague!' the president said on social media. 'The good news is that we will have a wonderful American Patriot running against him in the Republican Primary, and I'll be out in Kentucky campaigning really hard.' __ Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .