Tax bill contains 'sledgehammer' for Trump to retaliate against foreign digital taxes
WASHINGTON :U.S. President Donald Trump would have the power to retaliate against countries that impose special digital service taxes on large U.S. technology companies like Amazon and Alphabet, under a provision in the sweeping tax bill that Congress is considering.
"If foreign countries want to come in the United States and tax US businesses, then those foreign-based businesses ought to be taxed as well," said Representative Ron Estes, a Kansas Republican who helped craft the provision.
Some 17 countries in Europe and others around the world impose or have announced such taxes on U.S. tech products like Meta's Instagram. Germany announced on Thursday it was considering a 10 per cent tax on platforms like Google.
The levies have drawn bipartisan ire in Washington. Democrats who oppose much of the tax bill have not spoken out against the retaliatory tax provision, found in Section 899 of the 1,100-page bill.
Trump has been pressing foreign countries to lower barriers to U.S. commerce. Under the bill, Congress would empower his administration to impose tax hikes on foreign residents and companies that do business in the U.S. The U.S. Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the power to decide on taxes and spending.
The provision could raise $116 billion over the next decade, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. But some experts warned that an unintended consequence of retaliatory taxes could be less foreign investment in the U.S.
"This new Section 899 provision brings a sledgehammer to the idea that the United States will allow itself to be characterized as a tax haven by anyone," said Peter Roskam, former Republican congressman and head of law firm Baker Hostetler's federal policy team.
The House of Representatives narrowly passed the bill on May 22, and it now heads to the Senate. Democrats broadly oppose the Republicans' tax and spending bill, which advances many of Trump's top priorities such as an immigration crackdown, extending Trump's 2017 tax cuts and ending some green energy incentives.
Section 899 would allow the Treasury Department to label the foreign tech taxes "unfair" and place the country in question on a list of "discriminatory foreign countries." Some other foreign taxes also would be subject to scrutiny.
Once on the list, a country's individuals and its companies that operate in the U.S. could face stiffer tax rates that could increase each year, up to 20 per centage points.
Joseph Wang, chief investment officer at Monetary Macro, said Section 899 could help Trump reduce trade imbalances because if foreign investment decreases it could depreciate the U.S. dollar. This in turn could spur exports of U.S. products by making them cheaper overseas.
Portfolio interest would remain exempt from any tax Trump imposes, but some experts cautioned that taxing foreigners could quell foreign investment in the U.S.
"Foreign investors may change their behavior to avoid the taxes in various ways, including potentially by simply investing elsewhere," said Duncan Hardell, an advisor at New York University's Tax Law Center.
PUSH BACK TO GLOBAL MINIMUM TAX
The new approach follows the 15 per cent minimum global corporate tax deal negotiated by the administration of Democratic former President Joe Biden. Republicans, led by Representative Jason Smith of Missouri, chairman of the House tax committee, opposed that approach, arguing it unfairly benefits Chinese companies.
Foreign countries have invoked that global minimum to slap higher taxes on U.S. tech firms, if they concluded that generous U.S. tax credits for research and development pushed their tax burden below that 15 per cent threshold.
Trump in February directed his administration to combat foreign digital taxes, but they were not addressed in the trade deal announced in May between the U.S. and the United Kingdom, which imposes a 2 per cent levy on foreign digital services.
It was unclear if the Treasury Department would actually use the new authority if it becomes law, or if the mere threat of action would convince other countries to change course. The department did not share its intended strategy when asked.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
3 hours ago
- CNA
I started using corporate lingo ironically – and now I can't stop
I nodded as a coworker listed out a few suggestions on ways her team and mine could collaborate in the next few months. 'Yeah, that sounds like a good way to synergise,' I said. And then we both made a face. Almost a decade ago, when I started my first official 'office job', I made a silent vow to myself that I would never become One of Those. A corporate drone on autopilot, mindlessly regurgitating buzzwords and key phrases day in and day out to no real end until I would one day reach my final form: a glorified LinkedIn bot. I didn't really 'use' corporate lingo so much as make fun of it – in a good-natured, tongue-in-cheek sort of way. It was a quick fix for lightening the mood for everybody, myself included: 'Well, since that project fell through, guess that's one less loop to close, huh?' But these days, I find myself starting to slip into corporate lingo unironically, the same way I started doing years ago with skinny jeans, emojis, and the acronym 'LOL'. LINGO LIMBO More people are expressing annoyance or frustration with it these days, especially on social media, but make no mistake – corporate lingo is nothing new. From the 'value chains' of the 1980s and 1990s to the 'key performance indicators' you hear your own manager wax on about today, such jargon has long been a mainstay of working life. Like with most things that eventually trigger widespread discussions and accusations online of being 'annoying' or 'cringe', there's a legitimately useful element to corporate lingo's villain origin story. Business and work have grown more complex over the last few decades. Thanks to globalisation, the systems we operate in have become more interconnected and as a result, more expansive and intricate. So have the individual roles we play in those systems. We started needing quicker, simpler ways to sum up big or complicated ideas – or ideas that weren't that big or complicated, but were just a mouthful to say. After all, it's definitely easier to say 'outsourcing' than 'farming this out to a peripheral individual, group or organisation so I have more time and energy to focus on more important things'. But over time, something happened to corporate lingo: People started creating buzzwords and phrases for things and situations that didn't seem to require it at all. We stopped postponing or revisiting discussions of an issue and started 'circling back' instead. We eschewed talking to each other and started 'touching base' instead. And then people started 'checking in', but not just any checks, mind you. Temperature checks. Sense checks. Vibe checks. Instead of coining new terms to neatly condense big, complicated ideas, we now seem to be finding overly complex ways to phrase very simple things. WHEN YOU SAY NOTHING AT ALL Again, it's not a bad thing to develop lingo over the course of engaging with other fellow humans in labour. Well before we became office dwellers, plenty of colloquialisms from agricultural work had been leaving the farm to become part of everyday English. For example, "No reason to have a cow about that" or "beat a dead horse". Such jargon of yore does the work it's meant to do, which is to replace a wordy sentiment or thought process with a bite-sized turn of phrase. In comparison, what exactly does the phrase 'moving the needle' accomplish, particularly when in most cases, you immediately have to go on to explain exactly what needle you're hoping to move and in which direction? (Yes, we've done it, we've made shop-talk more efficient – all we had to do was transform our seven-word statement into a 15-word run-on behemoth.) The danger is when we're more concerned about communication for communication's sake, rather than the purposes and objectives for which we're communicating. Are we trying to be in the know, or simply appear so to others? Are we really achieving or improving productivity, or just performing it? MAKE WORK JARGON WORK AGAIN Either way, corporate lingo is here to stay. The exact words and phrases in rotation may come and go, but humans will always want to find a way to jazz up interpersonal communication simply because we're creative, social beings. So is there a way to salvage this? (Or, for the corporate jargon-heads out there: What are the actionable insights and key takeaways to be derived from this?) For my part, I still find myself resisting what I feel are inorganic attempts to shoehorn unnecessary lingo into conversations about work, but I'm trying not to be pedantic about it. If someone says 'Can we align or bridge the gap on this?', I respond, 'Sure, what's unclear right now?' If someone says 'Can I get a sense check on when this might be completed?', I give them a date. (But maybe I'll also have a little rant to a fellow coworker later on about why the question can't simply be 'When will this be done?') Instead of the snark I used to deploy perhaps a little too freely in response to cringey corporate jargon, I try to reach for the same attitude I employ whenever I'm speaking with someone who may not be entirely fluent in English – if I understand what they're saying, maybe how they're saying it doesn't have to matter as much. Still, at the end of the day, there's never any harm in asking, plain and simple: 'What do you mean?'
Straits Times
6 hours ago
- Straits Times
Pakistan to nominate Trump for Nobel Peace Prize
FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump talks to reporters upon his arrival at Morristown Municipal Airport in Morristown, New Jersey, U.S., June 20, 2025. REUTERS/Ken Cedeno/File Photo ISLAMABAD - Pakistan said on Saturday it would recommend U.S. President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, an accolade that he has said he craves, for his work in helping to resolve the recent conflict between India and Pakistan. Some analysts in Pakistan said the move might persuade Trump to think again about potentially joining Israel in striking Iran's nuclear facilities. Pakistan has condemned Israel's action as a violation of international law and a threat to regional stability. In May, a surprise announcement by Trump of a ceasefire brought an abrupt end to a four-day conflict between nuclear-armed foes India and Pakistan. Trump has since repeatedly said that he averted a nuclear war, saved millions of lives, and grumbled that he got no credit for it. Pakistan agrees that U.S. diplomatic intervention ended the fighting, but India says it was a bilateral agreement between the two militaries. "President Trump demonstrated great strategic foresight and stellar statesmanship through robust diplomatic engagement with both Islamabad and New Delhi, which de-escalated a rapidly deteriorating situation," Pakistan said. "This intervention stands as a testament to his role as a genuine peacemaker." Governments can nominate people for the Nobel Peace Prize. There was no immediate response from Washington. A spokesperson for the Indian government did not respond to a request for comment. Trump has repeatedly said that he's willing to mediate between India and Pakistan over the disputed Kashmir region, their main source of enmity. Islamabad, which has long called for international attention to Kashmir, is delighted. But his stance has upended U.S. policy in South Asia, which had favored India as a counterweight to China, and put in question previously close relations between Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In a social media post on Friday, Trump gave a long list of conflicts he said he had resolved, including India and Pakistan and the Abraham accords in his first term between Israel and some Muslim-majority countries. He added: "I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do." Pakistan's move to nominate Trump came in the same week its army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, met the U.S. leader for lunch. It was the first time that a Pakistani military leader had been invited to the White House when a civilian government was in place in Islamabad. Trump's planned meeting with Modi at the G7 summit in Canada last week did not take place after the U.S. president left early, but the two later spoke by phone, in which Modi said "India does not and will never accept mediation" in its dispute with Pakistan, according to the Indian government. Mushahid Hussain, a former chair of the Senate Defence Committee in Pakistan's parliament, suggested nominating Trump for the peace prize was justified. "Trump is good for Pakistan," he said. "If this panders to Trump's ego, so be it. All the European leaders have been sucking up to him big time." But the move was not universally applauded in Pakistan, where Trump's support for Israel's war in Gaza has inflamed passions. "Israel's sugar daddy in Gaza and cheerleader of its attacks on Iran isn't a candidate for any prize," said Talat Hussain, a prominent Pakistani television political talk show host, in a post on X. 'And what if he starts to kiss Modi on both cheeks again after a few months?" REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
International Business Times
7 hours ago
- International Business Times
Wall Street Shows Mixed Signals as S&P 500 Down 0.21%, Dow Gains 38 Points as Middle East Tensions Escalate
U.S. stock markets finished Friday with mixed results as traders continued to grapple with new geopolitical uncertainty in the Middle East and further cycles in oil and currency markets. The Dow Jones Industrial Average added 38.47 points, or 0.1%, to end at 42,210.13. The S&P 500, on the other hand, slipped 0.21%, while the Nasdaq Composite sank more deeply by 0.49%. Investor sentiment took on a cautious tone as President Donald Trump postponed taking military action in the wake of recent flare-ups in the Israel-Iran conflict. Markets began the day on a positive note, but worries about what could unfold over the weekend contributed to choppy trades and late-session declines. Energy prices also signaled the market's unease. Brent crude dropped 2.3 percent to $77.01 a barrel, but it was still up 3.6 percent for the week. U.S. crude futures settled at $74.93, down 0.28%, but still up 2.7% for the week, despite a holiday-thinned session on Thursday. "People are holding back from major moves ahead of the weekend. There's still a lot of risk tied to how the situation unfolds," said Rick Meckler of Cherry Lane Investments. Diplomatic Moves and Geopolitical Risks: The United States forged ahead with targeted sanctions on enterprises tied to Iran's defense industry, a diplomatic strategy from the White House. But analysts warn that with Israel and Iran continuing to trade hostilities, any miscalculation would see the crisis ratchet higher and put vital oil infrastructure at risk. "There's always a chance of an unintended spark in these kinds of conflicts," said John Evans, an analyst at PVM Oil Associates. European officials called on Tehran to resume negotiations over its nuclear ambitions after a high-level meeting in Geneva ended without progress. European stock markets closed slightly higher, buoyed by optimism from earlier Asian trading sessions. The MSCI World Index was down slightly by 0.01%, while gains in Hong Kong and Seoul helped balance out losses in the other Asian markets. Fed Talk Spotlights Policy The Gap: Federal Reserve officials spoke publicly for the first time since comments by the Fed's chair, Jerome H. Powell, on Wednesday, indicating that the central bank is likely to cut interest rates this year. But he cautioned that inflation, particularly from Trump's trade tariffs, is a risk. A divide among policymakers is also now visible. Governor Christopher Waller insisted to open the door to a rate cut as soon as the next meeting, and Richmond Fed President Tom Barkin countered that there's no rush to move. Powell, for his part, warned against putting too much stock in forecasts in such a dynamic environment. Waller's dovish take sent bond markets into motion. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasuries fell 2 basis points to 4.375%. Strong safe-haven demand, which has been soaring in recent weeks because of global tensions, was another factor contributing to the fall. Currency and Commodity Price Movements The dollar was stronger, reaching a three-week high against the yen. A gauge of the dollar against major currencies inched 0.03% higher on the day and 0.6% for the week. The euro was 0.3% firmer at $1.1528. Gold prices were down 0.13% at $3,365.91, set for a weekly decline despite some strength earlier in the week as a safe haven asset.
