Lawmakers remove ‘revenge' tax provision from Trump's big bill after Treasury requests its removal
WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional Republicans agreed to remove the so-called revenge tax provision from President Donald Trump's big bill Thursday after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent asked members of Congress to do so earlier in the day.
The Section 899 provision would allow the federal government to impose taxes on companies with foreign owners, as well as investors from countries judged as charging 'unfair foreign taxes' on U.S. companies.
The measure was expected to lead many companies to avoid investing in the U.S. out of concern that they could face steep taxes.
Bessent said in an X post that he made the request to lawmakers after reaching an agreement with other countries on the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Global Tax Deal. He said that after 'months of productive dialogue,' they would 'announce a joint understanding among G7 countries that defends American interests.'
After he made the request, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, R-Missouri, said 'we will remove proposed tax code Section 899' from the bill and 'Congressional Republicans stand ready to take immediate action if the other parties walk away from this deal or slow walk its implementation.'
The removal of the provision will provide 'greater certainty and stability for the global economy and will enhance growth and investment in the United States and beyond,' Bessent said in his post.
An analysis by the Global Business Alliance, a trade group representing international companies such as Toyota and Nestlé, estimates that the provision would cost the U.S. 360,000 jobs and $55 billion annually over 10 years in lost gross domestic product.
Monday Mornings
The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week.
The Global Business Alliance was among several groups that signed a letter addressed to Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo of Idaho, warning of the consequences of Section 899.
The removal of the provision adds a wrinkle to Republicans' plans to try to offset the cost of the massive package. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the bill would spike deficits by at least $2.4 trillion over the next decade.
Republicans are rushing to finish the package this week to meet the president's Fourth of July deadline for passage.
Earlier Thursday, the Senate parliamentarian advised that a Medicaid provider tax overhaul central to the spending bill does not adhere to the chamber's procedural rules, delivering a crucial blow to Republicans, who are counting on big cuts to Medicaid and other programs to offset trillions of dollars in Trump tax breaks.
___
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
2 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Medicaid changes in Trump's budget bill found to violate Senate rules, sending the GOP scrambling
The Senate parliamentarian has advised that a Medicaid provider tax overhaul central to U.S. President Donald Trump's tax cut and spending bill does not adhere to the chamber's procedural rules, delivering a crucial blow as Republicans rush to finish the package this week. Guidance from the parliamentarian is rarely ignored and Republican leaders are now forced to consider difficult options. Republicans were counting on big cuts to Medicaid and other programs to offset trillions of dollars in Trump tax breaks, their top priority. Additionally, the parliamentarian, who is the Senate's chief arbiter of its often complicated rules, advised against various GOP provisions barring certain immigrants from health care programs. Republicans scrambled Thursday to respond, with some calling for challenging, or even firing, the non-partisan parliamentarian, who has been on the job since 2012. GOP leaders dismissed those views and instead worked to revise the various proposals. Republicans in Congress agree to drop retaliatory proposal to raise taxes for Canadian companies 'We have contingency plans,' said Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota. Friday's expected votes appeared to be slipping, but Thune insisted that 'we're plowing forward.' But Democrats, who are unified against the package as a tax giveaway for the wealthy at the expense of American safety net programs, said the procedural decisions would devastate the GOP package. Senator Ron Wyden, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said the Republican proposals would have meant US$250-billion less for the health care program, 'massive Medicaid cuts that hurt kids, seniors, Americans with disabilities and working families.' The outcome is a setback as Senate Republicans race toward a weekend session to pass the bill and send it back to the House for another vote before Trump's Fourth of July deadline. Trump hosted House Speaker Mike Johnson and other GOP lawmakers in the East Room at the White House, joined by truck drivers, firefighters, tipped workers, ranchers and others that the administration says will benefit from the bill. 'We don't want to have grandstanders,' Trump said of the GOP holdouts. Trump said there are 'hundreds of things' in the emerging package of tax breaks, spending cuts and bolstered money to carry out his mass deportation plans. 'It's so good.' At its core, the big bill, which has passed the House and is now being revised in the Senate, includes US$3.8-trillion in tax breaks that had been approved during Trump's first term but will expire in December, imposing a tax hike if Congress fails to act. To help offset lost revenues, Republicans are relying on steep cuts to health care and food stamps, and imposing new fees on immigrants. GOP leaders were already struggling to rally support for Medicaid changes that some senators said went too far and would have left millions without coverage. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has said more than 10.9 million more people would not have health care under the House-passed bill; Senate Republicans were proposing deeper cuts. After the parliamentarian advised against the Medicaid provider tax change, Republicans said they would try to revise the provision to make it acceptable, perhaps by extending the start date of any changes. They are rushing to come up with similar adjustments to other proposals that have run into violations, including one to change the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps. It's all delaying action on the bill, but Republican leaders have little choice. They are counting on the health care restrictions to save billions of dollars and offset the cost of trillions of dollars in tax cuts. Senator Lindsey Graham, the Budget Committee chairman, rejected calls to fire the parliamentarian, and said in a statement he was working with the office to 'find a pathway forward.' States impose the so-called provider tax on hospitals and other entities as a way to help fund Medicaid, largely by boosting the reimbursements they receive from the federal government. Critics say the system is a type of 'laundering,' but almost every state except Alaska uses it to help provide health care coverage. The House-passed bill would freeze the tax, while the Senate would cut the tax that some states are allowed to impose. Several GOP senators have opposed cutting the Medicaid provider tax, saying it would hurt rural hospitals that depend on the money. Hospital organizations have warned that it could lead to hospital closures. Senator Josh Hawley, among those fighting the change, said he had spoken to Trump late Wednesday and the President told him to revert to the earlier proposal from the House. 'I think it just confirms that we weren't ready for a vote yet,' said Senator Thom Tillis, who also had raised concerns about the provider tax cuts. More than 80 million people in the United States use the Medicaid program, alongside the Obama-era Affordable Care Act. Republicans want to scale Medicaid back to what they say is its original mission, providing care mainly to women and children, rather than a much larger group of people. To help defray lost revenues to the hospitals, one plan Republicans had been considering would have created a rural hospital fund with US$15-billion as backup. Some GOP senators said that was too much; others, including Senator Susan Collins of Maine, wanted at least US$100-billion. The parliamentarian has worked around the clock to assess the legislation and ensure it complies with the so-called Byrd Rule, named for the late Senator Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia. It essentially bars policy matters in budget reconciliation bills. If leaders moved ahead without altering the provisions, the measures could be challenged, requiring a 60-vote threshold to overcome objections. That would be a tall order in a Senate divided 53-47 and with Democrats unified against Trump's bill. 'It's pretty frustrating,' said Senator Rick Scott, who wants even steeper reductions. Overnight Wednesday the parliamentarian advised against GOP student loan repayment plans, and Thursday the parliamentarian cited those that would have blocked access to Medicaid and other health care programs from immigrants who are not citizens. Earlier, plans to gut the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau were also found to violate the rules. But Senator Kevin Cramer said there's no desire to challenge the parliamentarian's advice. 'It's the institutional integrity,' he said. 'Even if I'm convinced 100 per cent she's wrong.' At the same time, Republicans lost another potential revenue source Thursday after agreeing to a request from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to remove the so-called revenge tax provision, Section 899, that would have allowed the government to impose taxes on companies with foreign owners and investors from certain countries. Bessent said he has reached a separate agreement with such countries.
Toronto Star
2 hours ago
- Toronto Star
Carney government's ‘nation-building' bill becomes law despite Senate criticism
OTTAWA — Prime Minister Mark Carney's controversial legislation to fast-track 'nation-building' development projects received royal assent and became law after the rushed passage of Bill C-5 through the Senate on Thursday. But the legislative accomplishment — the first government bill to pass in both chambers under the minority Liberal administration elected April 28 — was marred by expressions of outrage from some senators, who criticized the legislation's creation of 'so-called Henry VIII' powers that allow the federal cabinet to override laws and regulations to approve development projects. Some also condemned what they saw as the bill's lack of consultation and requirements to respect Indigenous rights, suggesting the new process could get bogged down in the very opposition and delay that it is designed to avoid.
National Observer
3 hours ago
- National Observer
'Orwellian': Louisiana redefines natural gas — a planet-warming fossil fuel — as green energy
Louisiana is the latest state to redefine natural gas as green energy under a new law the Republican governor signed this week, even though it's a fossil fuel that emits planet-warming greenhouse gases. Three other states led by Republicans— Indiana, Ohio and Tennessee— have passed similar legislation. In some Democratic-led states, there have been efforts to phase out natural gas. New York and California cities like San Francisco and Berkeley have moved to ban natural gas hookups in new buildings, though some of these policies have been successfully challenged in court. President Donald Trump has signed a spate of executive orders promoting oil, gas and coal, which all warm the planet when burned to produce electricity. The European Union previously designated natural gas and nuclear as sustainable, a move that Greenpeace and the Austrian government are suing over. Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry, a major booster of the state's petrochemical industry, says the new law 'sets the tone for the future' and will help the state 'pursue energy independence and dominance.' Environmental groups say these new laws are part of a broader push by petrochemical industry-backed groups to rebrand fossil fuel as climate friendly and head off efforts to shift electric grids to renewables, such as solar and wind. It's "pure Orwellian greenwashing,' said Tim Donaghy, research director of Greenpeace USA. Globally, the term green energy is used to refer to energy derived from natural sources that do not pollute — solar, wind, hydropower and geothermal energy. Louisiana's law could enable funds slated for state clean energy initiatives to be used to support natural gas. Natural gas has been the top source of electricity generation in the United States for about a decade, since surpassing coal. Coal and natural gas both produce carbon dioxide that warms the planet when burned, but coal produces over twice as much. Switching from coal to natural gas lowers carbon dioxide emissions, but it can increase emissions of methane. The primary component of natural gas, methane is an extraordinarily powerful greenhouse gas, more potent at trapping heat than carbon dioxide and responsible for about 30% of today's global warming. Besides coal, everything else is better than gas for the planet, said Rob Jackson, a Stanford University climate scientist. Building new gas plants locks in fossil fuel emissions for decades, he added. Redefining natural gas Louisiana's law orders state agencies and utilities regulators to 'prioritize' natural gas, along with nuclear power, on the grounds that it will improve the affordability and reliability of the state's electricity. The law's author, Republican Rep. Jacob Landry, runs an oil and gas industry consulting firm. 'I don't think it's anything crippling to wind or solar, but you got to realize the wind don't blow all the time and the sun don't shine every day,' Landry said. The legislation 'is saying we need to prioritize what keeps the grid energized,' he added. Landry told The Associated Press that he used a model bill by the American Legislative Exchange Council as a template. ALEC is a conservative think tank with ties to the oil and gas industry's billionaire Koch family. ALEC helped shape Ohio's 2023 law to legally redefine natural gas as a source of green energy, according to documents obtained by the watchdog group Energy and Policy Institute and first reported by the Washington Post. ALEC spokesperson Lars Dalseide said that just because an Ohio lawmaker left the 2022 ALEC convention with what he described as a model for legislation to define natural gas as clean energy does not mean the group shaped Ohio law. Dalseide said the convention is 'a place where legislators from across the country gather to exchange ideas.' Ohio's legislation was also heavily influenced by an advocacy group led by Republican megadonor Tom Rastin, a now retired gas industry executive. According to Dave Anderson, policy and communications manager for the Energy and Policy Institute, these laws are part of a long-running disinformation campaign by the gas industry to cast their product as clean to protect their businesses and prevent a shift to renewable energy sources that will address the climate crisis. 'The goal is to elbow out competition from renewables from wind and solar, and in some cases preempt localities' ability to choose to pursue 100% truly clean energy,' Anderson said, adding that ALEC's legislation makes natural gas 'eligible for state and local clean energy standards and funding.' Questions over grid reliability Gov. Landry and other proponents of the new law said they want to make sure that residents and businesses have a reliable electric grid. Nearly 80% of Louisiana's grid is already powered by natural gas. Landry said that businesses will come to Louisiana if they know they can count on the state's electric grid. He highlighted Meta's plan to build a massive AI data center powered by three natural gas plants. Louisiana's law orders utilities providers to prioritize nuclear energy as well. Nuclear power does not emit greenhouse gases while producing electricity. However, critics say it is more expensive than solar and wind and the U.S. does not have a sufficient long-term solution for storing the waste. Consumer advocates say states do not need to embrace natural gas at the expense of wind, solar and other technologies to have a reliable grid. Legally mandating that utilities prioritize natural gas is 'blind to innovation, market evolution, and the practical demands of modern electric systems,' Jeffrey Clark, president of the Advanced Power Alliance, a renewable energy advocacy group, wrote in a statement opposing Louisiana's law. It's unclear to what extent Louisiana's utilities regulators will act on the order to prioritize natural gas over renewable energy. While Public Service Commissioner Davante Lewis, a Democrat, called the law 'unenforceable' and pledged to ignore it, his Republican counterpart Jean-Paul Coussan said promoting natural gas 'aligns well' with the state's economic growth.
