Latest news with #JointCommitteeonTaxation
The Hill
9 hours ago
- Business
- The Hill
GOP leaders face internal pushback, doubts on ‘big beautiful bill' vote
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) is moving full speed ahead toward a planned vote this week on his chamber's version of President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill,' despite pushback from GOP colleagues and serious doubts about his prospects. Republicans say Thune and other Senate GOP leaders have told them the bill is on track for a vote before the July 4 recess in the face of misgivings from colleagues about the impact on Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and renewable energy projects across the country. Thune is also coming under strong pressure from a trio of conservatives led by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) to cut significantly more from the budget. Fiscal hawks including Sens. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) want to slash the federal share of Medicaid spending in states that expanded the program under the Affordable Care Act and to speed up the phaseout of renewable energy tax breaks. The cross-cutting criticisms from different parts of Thune's conference, combined with the tight timetable, has many observers doubting the Senate will get to the promised vote this week. 'I think it's highly unlikely at this point that we vote on this thing by July 4. I think there is too much work to do. Too many people have to many ideas to come to the finish line to this process. I don't see a way to hold a vote that gets 51 before the Fourth of July,' a Senate GOP aide told The Hill. Senate Republicans crossed an important hurdle Saturday when they received a report from Joint Committee on Taxation scoring the extension of 26 provisions of the expiring 2017 Trump tax cuts as a continuation of 'current policy' that should not be counting as adding to future deficits. If the score survives review by the Senate parliamentarian, it would allow Republicans to make Trump's 2017 marginal tax cuts permanent. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), the ranking member of the Budget Committee, accused Republicans of using a 'budget gimmick' and 'smoke and mirrors' to obscure what he said would be $4 trillion in new debt created by extending the 2017 tax provisions. Senate Republicans and Democratic aides were scheduled to present arguments to the parliamentarian over the weekend on the portion of the bill that covers the extension of the 2017 tax cuts, new tax relief, renewable energy tax credits and Medicaid cuts. Democrats scored a victory Sunday when Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ruled against a provision tucked into the bill by House Republicans that would severely limit the ability of courts to find Trump administration officials in contempt for failing to comply with injunctions or other court orders. The language would have required a plaintiff seeking an emergency court order or preliminary injunction against the administration to pay a costly bond up front, limiting the scope of legal action against Trump's executive actions. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) hailed the ruling Sunday, asserting the language would have let Trump 'ignore court orders with impunity' if it became law. Democrats have had success knocking several other key provisions out of the bill, such as a proposal to cut funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which would have eliminated the agency Democrats set up in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. Democrats also got the parliamentarian to rule against language cutting pay and benefits at the Federal Reserve and eliminating the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Over the weekend, changes to the SNAP program designed to make states pay for more costs were also ruled out, a decision that could actually help the bill with centrist GOP senators like Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine. Another wildcard is opposition from House Republicans from New York, New Jersey and California over language in the Senate bill to permanently set the cap at state and local tax (SALT) deductions at $10,000. House GOP lawmakers in the SALT caucus say the Senate's disdain for a deal they struck with Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to raise the cap to $40,000 is a deal-breaker. Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) told reporters last week that many items in the bill remain under discussion. He said that Senate Republican leaders want to negotiate a deal on the SALT cap with House Republicans before the legislation comes to the floor so they can be assured that whatever passes the Senate could also pass the House. Sen. Jon Husted (R-Ohio) said Friday that the bill appears on track to 'get accomplished next week.' 'Everybody should become prepared to get the job done,' he said. He said that Senate GOP negotiators 'are working through the rural hospital issues' and have a 'goal to make sure that those issues are addressed.' But a Senate GOP source familiar with the talks to resolve the Medicaid issue said they're making slow progress. 'They know that this is a problem and it's a live wire,' the source said of the impasse over Medicaid funding cuts. Collins says she wants to make 'many changes' to the bill and has floated the idea of creating a health-care-provider relief fund to help rural hospitals, nursing homes and community health centers that would be affected by funding cuts. Even so, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has raised concern about requiring lower-income Americans to pay higher copays for medical treatments and Murkowski has warned that stricter work and eligibility requirements will be difficult to implement in Alaska. Republican senators and aides are expressing strong skepticism that Thune will be able to round up the 50 votes he needs to pass the bill by the end of this week. Senate Republicans control a 53-seat majority and can afford only three defections and still pass the bill as Vice President JD Vance would cast a tie-breaking vote. Johnson, the Wisconsin fiscal hawk, told reporters this week there's 'no way' the Senate bill gets done by July 4. He said that he, Scott and Lee are willing to hold up the bill into they get concessions on bigger spending cuts. Johnson wants Thune to commit to moving a second package of spending cuts using the budget reconciliation process before the 2026 midterm elections. And he is demanding a 'forcing mechanism' to force such a bill to the floor. One proposal would be to split up the $5 trillion debt-limit increase into two smaller expansions of borrowing authority to force GOP lawmakers to debate another round of spending cuts next year. 'What's going to force us to come back and do this again?' Johnson said. 'They're starting to talk about it,' referring to the latest talks with Thune about additional deficit reduction. Johnson said Thune 'at this point' needs his vote because he hasn't locked down the votes of senators concerned about Medicaid cuts, such as Collins, Hawley and Murkowski. 'This is too soon,' he said of a vote on the bill next week. 'The ball's been in the Senate's court for two weeks… . We need time to look at this.'
The Hill
a day ago
- Business
- The Hill
Republicans order key panel to score extension of Trump tax cuts as budget neutral
Senate Republicans have directed the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) to score the cost of extending the 2017 Trump tax cuts as a continuation of current policy that would not add significantly to federal deficits, which would allow them to make those tax rates permanent. The joint panel on taxation, which projects the deficit impact of all tax bills, scored the extension of 26 provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as a continuation of 'current policy' and therefore budget neutral, which dramatically lowers the project cost of President Trump's megabill. In a score released Saturday, the JCT projects tax-related provisions of the Republican bill as adding $441.5 billion to the deficit over the next decade, instead of the $4 trillion that Democrats say would be the projected cost of the tax provisions if they were scored on a 'current law' baseline. Much of the 2017 tax law, including the reduction in individual income tax rates, is due to expire at the end of 2025. 'Republicans finally showed their hand, and it's completely dishonest. 'Current policy baseline' in a budget gimmick that is nothing more than smoke and mirrors instead of honest accounting. This bill will add trillions upon trillions of dollars to the national debt to fund tax breaks for billionaires — while Republicans want everyone to think it adds zero,' said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), the ranking member of the Budget Committee. 'Republicans who claim to care about fiscal responsibility should be outraged and doing everything they can to stop it. This is the Great Betrayal of working families where families lose, and billionaires win,' Merkley said. Senate Republicans have argued for months that Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has authority under the 1974 Budget and Impoundment Control Act to determine the baseline for scoring the budget reconciliation bill. Republicans argue that Congress has used an asymmetrical system for scoring spending bills and tax bills in recent decades, as extensions of spending reauthorizations are often scored as extensions of current policy and therefore as budget neutral while extensions of expiring tax law are scored as adding to the deficit. Democrats could challenge the Republicans' use of a 'current policy' baseline to score the extension of the expiring 2017 tax cuts as a violation of the Byrd Rule. The Byrd Rule states that changes in law that increase the deficit for fiscal years beyond the 10-year budget window are subject to a 60-vote point-of-order objection. If the parliamentarian rules that scoring the extension of the 2017 tax cuts as largely budget neutral in the years beyond 2034 as a violation of the Byrd Rule, Republicans may have to vote to override the parliamentarian or rewrite the bill.
Yahoo
09-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - Only the Senate can stop the largest wealth transfer in US history
Last week, the House Republican majority passed what can only be called their 'Big Billionaire Bill' — a budget reconciliation measure that amounts to one the largest transfers of wealth in American history. This measure literally steals from the poor and the working class to give to the ultra-rich. As a member of the Ways and Means Committee, I know firsthand how this bill would take from working people and give to the ultra-wealthy. The consequences will be staggering if it becomes law. Republicans promised tax cuts for all. But under their bill, families making $30,000 or less will actually pay approximately $20 billion more in taxes cumulatively over the next decade, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. That's not even counting the impact of losing Medicaid or the higher cost of living caused by Trump's tariffs. Meanwhile, billionaires will pocket an average tax break of $255,000 a year. I grew up working class, working jobs at Target and Subway. Republicans want to make people like me believe that they're helping while raising taxes on them, cutting Medicaid and SNAP, and then telling them to have more babies. That's insulting. My Republican colleagues moved their second attempt at a House Budget Committee hearing to the dead of night — after a failed first try and following late-night markups in several committees the previous week. Alongside my Democratic colleagues, we spent nearly 30 hours grinding their agenda nearly to a halt, from Wednesday at 1 a.m. to to 11 p.m. in the Rules Committee and on the floor. The fact that they had to move their last hearing before it could move to the floor at 1 a.m. tells me they're ashamed of themselves. And they should be. Working families want billionaires to pay their fair share, not to lose their health care and nutrition programs for their kids. I hear it from Americans at town halls, on social media, and even at the grocery store. Millions across the country could lose Medicaid coverage: 3.4 million in California, 400,000 in North Carolina, 250,000 in Minnesota, 380,000 in Texas, 390,000 in Virginia, and 1.2 million in New York — moms, kids, and seniors who could be left without health care. These are real people in every district, many represented by Republicans who voted for this bill. Nearly half of new moms and their babies in California rely on Medicaid and could lose their care. Seniors who can't get enough coverage through Medicare will lose. Sons and daughters who can't afford their parents' nursing home care will lose. People in rural communities, where hospitals are already closing, will lose too. Republicans claim to be the party of families. But their bill makes it harder for working people to get by — harder to welcome a new child, get postpartum care, or afford basic medical needs. Worse, Republicans will make it harder for millions of families to afford groceries every month thanks to cuts to nutrition assistance programs. When billionaires can get richer at the expense of working families, what does that say about us as a nation? I fear America's promise of hope and opportunity will dim if this administration keeps pushing us to the point where no one sees a future here anymore. But I refuse to accept a future where America's greatness is measured by the size of its tax breaks for billionaires instead of the strength of our working families. I call on the Senate to reject this bill and protect the American Dream for everyone. Jimmy Gomez, a Democrat, represents California's 34th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
09-06-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Only the Senate can stop the largest wealth transfer in US history
Last week, the House Republican majority passed what can only be called their 'Big Billionaire Bill' — a budget reconciliation measure that amounts to one the largest transfers of wealth in American history. This measure literally steals from the poor and the working class to give to the ultra-rich. As a member of the Ways and Means Committee, I know firsthand how this bill would take from working people and give to the ultra-wealthy. The consequences will be staggering if it becomes law. Republicans promised tax cuts for all. But under their bill, families making $30,000 or less will actually pay approximately $20 billion more in taxes cumulatively over the next decade, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. That's not even counting the impact of losing Medicaid or the higher cost of living caused by Trump's tariffs. Meanwhile, billionaires will pocket an average tax break of $255,000 a year. I grew up working class, working jobs at Target and Subway. Republicans want to make people like me believe that they're helping while raising taxes on them, cutting Medicaid and SNAP, and then telling them to have more babies. That's insulting. My Republican colleagues moved their second attempt at a House Budget Committee hearing to the dead of night — after a failed first try and following late-night markups in several committees the previous week. Alongside my Democratic colleagues, we spent nearly 30 hours grinding their agenda nearly to a halt, from Wednesday at 1 a.m. to to 11 p.m. in the Rules Committee and on the floor. The fact that they had to move their last hearing before it could move to the floor at 1 a.m. tells me they're ashamed of themselves. And they should be. Working families want billionaires to pay their fair share, not to lose their health care and nutrition programs for their kids. I hear it from Americans at town halls, on social media, and even at the grocery store. Millions across the country could lose Medicaid coverage: 3.4 million in California, 400,000 in North Carolina, 250,000 in Minnesota, 380,000 in Texas, 390,000 in Virginia, and 1.2 million in New York — moms, kids, and seniors who could be left without health care. These are real people in every district, many represented by Republicans who voted for this bill. Nearly half of new moms and their babies in California rely on Medicaid and could lose their care. Seniors who can't get enough coverage through Medicare will lose. Sons and daughters who can't afford their parents' nursing home care will lose. People in rural communities, where hospitals are already closing, will lose too. Republicans claim to be the party of families. But their bill makes it harder for working people to get by — harder to welcome a new child, get postpartum care, or afford basic medical needs. Worse, Republicans will make it harder for millions of families to afford groceries every month thanks to cuts to nutrition assistance programs. When billionaires can get richer at the expense of working families, what does that say about us as a nation? I fear America's promise of hope and opportunity will dim if this administration keeps pushing us to the point where no one sees a future here anymore. But I refuse to accept a future where America's greatness is measured by the size of its tax breaks for billionaires instead of the strength of our working families. I call on the Senate to reject this bill and protect the American Dream for everyone. Jimmy Gomez, a Democrat, represents California's 34th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Yahoo
07-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
How Trump's big bill could affect your taxes
President Trump's bill to cut taxes and spending centers on an extension of his previous round of tax cuts, which Republicans slated for expiration at the end of this year back in 2017. As such, it will preserve the status quo on many big parts of the code so that taxpayers won't see any change in things like the amount of money the government takes out of their paychecks. Other tax cuts in the legislation now moving through Congress will be brand new, though most of the new additions are scheduled to end after a few years. Here's a look at some of the big-ticket items in the latest round of GOP tax cuts. Trump's 2017 tax law cut many individual income tax rates, and those would continue into the future through the current legislation. Under current law and moving up the income spectrum, marginal rates are 10 percent, 12 percent, 22 percent, 24 percent, 32 percent, 35 percent, and 37 percent. The new GOP law will lock those rates in place. The extension of those rates will reduce federal revenues by $2.2 trillion through 2034, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT). If they were allowed to lapse, rates would change to 10 percent, 15 percent, 25 percent, 28 percent, 33 percent, 35 percent, and 39.6 percent. Only the 10-percent and 35-percent rates were left alone by the 2017 tax cuts. Trump in recent weeks floated letting the top rate go back to 39.6 percent from 37 percent as a way to lower the $3.8 trillion cost of the bill's tax portion, but he has since backed away from that idea. The law preserves — and temporarily boosts — the higher standard deduction, which was nearly doubled back in 2017. The new boost is $1,000 for individuals and $2,000 for couples filing jointly and will last for four years. This is paired with getting rid of personal exemptions, making tax filing simpler for many taxpayers. In 2024, the standard deduction was $14,600 for individuals and $29,200 for married couples. The higher standard deduction is projected to reduce revenues by $1.3 trillion through 2034. The loss of personal exemptions will add $1.9 trillion to federal revenues, resulting in a net revenue gain between the two measures. The bill creates a temporary full deduction for tips and overtime pay, allowing taxpayers to avoid paying taxes on those types of compensation. Taken together, the tax breaks will reduce revenues by about $164 billion through 2028 when they expire. People who work in the restaurant industry say they're concerned that the tax break will motivate customers to pay fewer gratuities, since tipping is left to the discretion of individual shoppers and diners as opposed to being a component of the employer-paid wage. 'I'm afraid that people are going to want to tip less with that income not being taxed,' one New York City bartender, who asked not to be named, told The Hill. The person also expressed concern that the no-tips rule could add to tensions in his restaurant between the front-of-house staff, who work for tips, and the kitchen staff, who do not. 'In the industry, the bigger concern is, why would the front-of-house not pay taxes when the back-of-house will still be paying taxes because they don't get tips?' the person said. Tax experts told The Hill the measures could add to the amount of paperwork that tax filers — both employers and employees — need to fill out, depending on how the IRS interprets the law and modifies its regulations and forms. The law gives an additional $4,000 tax break to seniors below a certain income threshold, which would be added to the $15,000 standard deduction and an already existing $2,000 deduction for seniors. Trump promised while campaigning to remove taxes on Social Security, which is funded through a payroll tax and then taxed again, above an income threshold, upon disbursal to bolster the Social Security fund along with Medicare. The enhanced deduction for seniors is a close substitute for the Social Security tax cancellation promised by Trump but is technically a different tax. According to congressional rules, the Social Social program cannot be altered through budget reconciliation, which is the legislative workaround Republicans are using to allow a party-line vote on their bill and avoid a Democratic filibuster in the Senate. Republicans haven't agreed on the most controversial provision of their tax bill — the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap — but they're getting close. The initial proposal from the Ways and Means Committee raised the cap to $30,000, but members of the SALT caucus shot it down. Another proposal floated late Tuesday would bump the SALT deduction cap up to $40,000 — four times the current $10,000 cap — for people making $500,000 or less in income, three sources told The Hill. That level would increase by 1 percent a year over 10 years, according to one of the sources. Whatever they agree to, it will be expensive. Various estimates from the JCT put the cost of canceling the cap — which is a top priority for many blue-state Republicans — at around $1 trillion over 10 years. The SALT cap interacts with different parts of the tax code, including the higher standard deduction and the extended effective repeal of the alternative minimum tax (AMT), which costs more than $1.4 trillion in revenues. 'Even if you live in a place like New York, the combination of repealing the AMT and the $10,000 SALT cap was actually still positive for you. You were better off with the SALT cap because you lost the AMT than you would have been if the law hadn't happened at all,' Tax Policy Center senior fellow Howard Gleckman told The Hill. 'It was actually a good deal for people,' Gleckman said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
