House GOP passed trillions in tax cuts. How Trump's 'big bill' could change in the Senate
House Republicans passed a multi-trillion-dollar tax and spending package after months of debate, which included many of President Donald Trump's priorities.
Now, policy experts are bracing for Senate changes as GOP lawmakers aim to finalize the "big bill" by the Fourth of July.
If enacted as currently drafted, the House's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" would make permanent Trump's 2017 tax cuts, while adding new tax breaks for tip income, overtime pay and older Americans, among other provisions.
More from Personal Finance:What the House GOP budget bill means for your moneyHouse bill calls for bigger 'pass-through' business tax breakWhat Medicaid and SNAP cuts in House bill mean for benefits
The House bill also approved historic spending cuts to programs for low-income families, including Medicaid health coverage and SNAP, formerly known as food stamps.
"Overall, the [Senate] bill is not going to be that much different," said Howard Gleckman, senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.
But there will be "a lot of debate" about the Medicaid provision, as well as other changes, he said.
Here are some other issues to watch during negotiations, policy experts say.
With control of Congress, Republicans are using a process called "budget reconciliation," which bypasses the Senate filibuster and only needs a simple majority vote to clear the upper chamber.
But some GOP senators have cost concerns about the House-approved bill.
"We have enough to stop the process until the president gets serious about spending reduction and reducing the deficit," Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., said last week on CNN's 'State of the Union.'
An earlier version of the House package could raise the deficit by an estimated $3.8 trillion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office. However, the agency hasn't released an updated score to reflect the bill's last-minute changes.
Other cost estimates for the House-passed reconciliation bill have ranged between $2 to $3 trillion over 10 years.
Under reconciliation, the Senate bill also must follow the "Byrd Rule," which bans anything unrelated to federal revenue or spending.
After the Senate vote, House lawmakers must approve changes to the bill, which could be tricky with a slim Republican majority.
"That's where the fight is really going to happen," Gleckman said.
One sticking point during the House debate was the current $10,000 limit on the federal deduction for state and local taxes, known as "SALT," which is scheduled to sunset after 2025.
Enacted by Trump via the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or TCJA, of 2017, the $10,000 cap has been a key issue for certain lawmakers in high-tax states like New York, New Jersey and California.
Before TCJA, filers who itemized tax breaks could claim an unlimited deduction on state and local income taxes, along with property taxes. But the so-called alternative minimum tax reduced the benefit for some higher earners.
After lengthy debate, House Republicans approved a $40,000 SALT limit. If enacted, the higher cap would apply to 2025 and phase out for incomes over $500,000.
But the SALT limit is likely to be lower than $40,000 after Senate negotiations, experts say.
Staying closer to the current $10,000 cap "seems like a very natural place to start," but the final number could be higher, said Alex Muresianu, senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation.
The Senate could also expand the child tax credit further, policy experts say.
If enacted in its current form, the House bill would make permanent the maximum $2,000 credit passed via the TCJA, which will otherwise revert to $1,000 after 2025.
The House measure would also make the highest child tax credit $2,500 from 2025 through 2028. After that, the credit's top value would revert to $2,000 and be indexed for inflation.
But some senators, including Josh Hawley, R-Mo., have called for a bigger tax break. Vice President JD Vance also floated a higher child tax credit during the campaign in August.
With the House-approved tax breaks favoring higher earners, "there's some recognition that they need to do a little more" for families, Gleckman said.
"That's going to be a fun one to watch," he said of the upcoming Senate debate.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate GOP leaders face spending squeeze on Trump's big bill: From the Politics Desk
Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, an evening newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail. Happy Monday and welcome to our first edition of June! The Senate is back this week and will begin the process of taking up the 'big, beautiful bill' the House passed. Sahil Kapur breaks down the challenges facing GOP leaders as they try to send the legislation to President Donald Trump's desk by July 4. Plus, Scott Bland digs into the archives for a quote from the 2016 campaign trail from a Republican that provides a guide for Democrats today. Sign up to receive this newsletter in your inbox every weekday here. — Adam Wollner The House-passed legislation for President Donald Trump's domestic agenda is moving to the Senate, where Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., is facing a squeeze from opposing party factions about how to modify it. Spending and the debt: Some Republicans say they want steeper spending cuts to offset the debt increase as a result of the tax breaks and funding bumps for immigration enforcement and the military. That includes Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., both of whom have said they cannot support the bill in its current form as it adds an estimated $2.3 trillion to the debt. 'It's wrong. It's immoral. It has to stop,' Johnson said Sunday on Fox News. 'My loyalty is to the American people, to my kids and grandkids. We cannot continue to mortgage their future.' Medicaid: On the other hand, Thune must navigate worries and political considerations from senators about the existing spending cuts in the legislation — particularly on Medicaid, SNAP and clean energy funding. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, voted for the Senate's initial budget blueprint to begin work on the bill, but later objected to a revised version, citing concerns that it could impact her constituents who rely on Medicaid coverage. Collins is up for re-election in 2026, along with Sens. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., and Joni Ernst, R-Iowa. All are likely to face attacks from Democrats about the stricter burdens for Americans to stay on the health care program. And at least one solid Trump ally from a red state is warning against rolling back Medicaid. 'I've got some concerns,' Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., told reporters recently. 'I continue to maintain my position; we should not be cutting Medicaid benefits.' Hawley notably told NBC News last month he's fine with 'coverage losses' resulting from the work requirements and anti-fraud measures. So he may ultimately get in line with the bill, as Trump and Republican leaders are portraying the Medicaid provisions as program integrity measures, instead of cuts to rescind coverage. Regardless, Hawley's vocal support for preserving Medicaid benefits creates a potential land mine for Republicans to maneuver around, making it harder to cut deeper than the House bill if they want more savings to appease spending hawks. Clean energy: As part of the spending caution, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, says there is a faction of GOP senators who opposes the 'termination' of the clean energy tax credits passed by Democrats in 2022, which Republican leaders have put on the chopping block to finance their bill. Getting technical: And there's a procedural hurdle Thune must navigate: The so-called 'Byrd bath.' Senate rules limit bills under the 'reconciliation' process — which Republicans are using here to bypass Democrats in the Senate — to budgetary measures that are primarily about dollars and cents, not policy changes. Democrats are preparing to challenge a host of provisions in the package. In the end, the three-vote margin for defection may give Thune the breathing room he needs to pass the bill. But any changes the Senate makes need to go back to the House for another vote in the paper-thin majority. And Thune is on deadline, as the Treasury Department has said Congress needs to pass a debt ceiling increase — which is part of the broader package — no later than July in order to prevent a catastrophic default. Up until now, the GOP's deadlines have all been fuzzy. But this one is real. Related read: Thune says Senate on track to pass GOP megabill by July 4, by Frank Thorp V Democrats are in regroup mode after losing the 2024 election, acutely aware of the party's low standing with the American public and thinking through everything from their policy platform to where and how they talk to voters — like the $20 million pitch reported by The New York Times for a research project titled 'Speaking with American Men: A Strategic Plan.' More power to them, if someone wants to fund it. And Democrats desperately want to do something to move forward right now. They might want to consider some long-ago advice from one Marco Rubio about what really matters for a political party's viability — and why it could take an excruciatingly long time to get there. When Rubio — currently President Donald Trump's secretary of state — was running for president in August 2015, he gave a prescient response to questions about then-candidate Donald Trump's rhetoric about immigration. Asked by CNBC whether the way Trump and others were talking about immigrants would hurt the Republican Party in the 2016 general election, Rubio said, 'This is not the Republican Party. These are individual candidates who are responsible for their own rhetoric and what they say,' adding, 'The face of the Republican Party is going to be our nominee.' Rubio hit a similar theme days later, speaking to Bloomberg News in New Hampshire: 'Ultimately the Republican Party will reach out to all voters based on who our nominee is. And I don't believe Donald Trump will be our nominee.' Don't be distracted by the admittedly big thing that Rubio got wrong. The broader point is that American political parties are shaped and defined by their candidates. The biggest and best thing that the Democratic Party can do to change voter perceptions of itself is to nominate a national candidate that voters see more favorably. The party can't just erase former President Joe Biden's struggles and former Vice President Kamala Harris' loss to Trump — especially among the slice of Democrats fed up with their own party right now, a big contributor to those record-low poll numbers. That's just stuck to the Democratic brand right now. Of course, Democrats aren't going to nominate another presidential candidate for three years or so. Perhaps that's why some are itching to get that contest started sooner rather than later. Even formally nominating the party's next slate of congressional or Senate contenders is a year or so away. It's no wonder that research and investment efforts are getting a lot of attention — on the long road to fixing a party brand, that's what's available right now. ⚫ Boulder attack: A man who shouted 'free Palestine' and used a 'makeshift flamethrower' on demonstrators marching in support of Israeli hostages held by Hamas was charged with a federal hate crime and first-degree murder in Colorado. Follow live updates → ⚖️ SCOTUS watch: Trump's agenda is shaping the Supreme Court's traditional monthlong ruling season, as consequential emergency cases flood the docket. Read more → ⚖️ SCOTUS watch, cont.: The high court decided not to hear two big gun cases, a decision that allows restrictions on assault-style weapons in Maryland and large-capacity magazines in Rhode Island to remain in effect. Read more → ⚕️ Obamacare wars: Congressional Republicans are facing new pressure to extend expiring tax credits under the Affordable Care Act. If the money lapses this year, 5 million Americans would be expected to lose coverage and others would face premium hikes. Read more → 🍎 Big Apple battle: New York Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado launched a primary challenge against Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul. Read more → 💰 2028 watch: Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., launched a new national political action committee to fight back against Trump and the GOP. Read more → 🤖 Conspiracy corner: Over the weekend, Trump reposted a baseless claim on Truth Social that former President Joe Biden was executed in 2020 and replaced with clones or robots. Read more → Follow live politics coverage → That's all From the Politics Desk for now. Today's newsletter was compiled by Adam Wollner and Ben Kamisar. If you have feedback — likes or dislikes — email us at politicsnewsletter@ And if you're a fan, please share with everyone and anyone. They can sign up here. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Defendants accused in death of developmentally disabled woman to appear in court
BERNALILLO — Two caregivers charged in connection with the death of a disabled woman found clinging to life in the back of a van at the U.S.-Mexico border now stand accused of violating the conditions of their release, prompting prosecutors to ask a judge to lock them up until their trial. Angelita Chacon and Patricia Hurtado appeared before 13th Judicial District Judge Christopher Perez for a hearing Monday on allegations they removed their GPS ankle monitors and were in communication with each other, but the judge did not issue a ruling. Instead, Perez granted their attorneys' request to delay the hearing, which he said will probably be set within two weeks. Both women hurried out of the courtroom afterward, and neither one of their attorneys returned a message seeking comment. The alleged violations of Chacon and Hurtado's conditions of release is the latest twist in a caretaker abuse case that shook New Mexico and the state's Developmental Disability Waiver program after Mary Melero, who was under Chacon's care, was discovered unresponsive and wrapped in a blanket in the back of a passenger van after an inspection at the Bridge of the Americas Port of Entry in El Paso in February 2023. 060225_GC_ChaconHurtadoHearing_02rgb.jpg Patricia Hurtado is shown in the state District Court in Sandoval County on Monday for a hearing on the conditions of her release. The incident triggered a sweeping review of the so-called DD Waiver program and in-person wellness checks on everyone in the program across New Mexico. Melero, who had autism and was in a state-run program for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, was severely dehydrated and drugged when she was found by U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents. She also had numerous open wounds, including chronic bedsores with exposed bone, bruises and lacerations on various parts of her body, as well as ligature marks consistent with prolonged restraint, according to court documents. After Melero was transported to a hospital in El Paso, medical staff determined her wounds were at different stages, suggesting Melero was a victim of chronic abuse. After spending more than a month in the hospital, Melero was removed from life support and died. Chacon, who was Melero's primary caregiver, was charged with five criminal counts, including abuse or neglect of a resident resulting in death. Hurtado, who was Chacon's live-in girlfriend at the time, also was charged with abuse of a resident resulting in death. Supplemental indictments allege the women made fraudulent claims to receive Medicaid benefits for the Customized Community Support program for caring for Melero, as well as Chacon's special-needs son. After they were arrested, an order setting their conditions of release required both, among other provisions, to be placed on electronic monitoring and not to have direct or indirect contact with each other, which prosecutors alleged they violated. "The defendants were alleged to have violated their conditions of release by taking off their ankle monitor and communicating with each other — very clear disregard for the judge's order — so we had requested that the conditions of release be revoked and that that they be remanded into custody," Joseph Martinez, acting director of the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit at the New Mexico Department of Justice, said in an interview outside the courtroom. "The judge granted the defense's continuance request to have the hearing very shortly, so we will be prepared at that hearing to request that both defendants be remanded into custody," he said. 060225_GC_ChaconHurtadoHearing_03rgb.jpg State District Judge Chris Perez speaks Monday during a hearing for Angelita Chacon and Patricia Hurtado on Monday. A motion to revoke Hurtado's conditions of release alleges she "admitted to having removed her GPS ankle monitor to leave the county" after an informant alerted authorities. "The informant stated ... she was concerned for her safety because defendant had been sending her 'threatening text messages' after she had witnessed defendant's violations of her conditions of release," documents state. "Pretrial Services also claims that Patricia admitted to remaining in physical and telephonic contact with her co-defendant and even giving Ms. Chacon money ... to pay her bills." The state's motion to revoke Chacon's conditions of release alleges Hurtado told authorities Chacon had removed her ankle monitor to leave the state. "The defendant's conduct of removing her GPS monitor and leaving her county of residence so close to her trial setting highlights the degree to which she represents a risk of flight," documents state. Martinez called the allegations against Chacon and Hurtado "horrific." "Our job at the New Mexico Department of Justice is to hold bad actors accountable," he said. "That's why we are doing our absolute best to bring justice to the vicim in the case and to make sure that everything is investigated and prosecuted thoroughly."
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Judge Blocks Trump's Union-Busting Plan At TSA
The Trump administration faced another legal setback on Monday when a judge temporarily blocked their plan to dissolve labor unions at a federal agency. The White House moved in March to revoke collective bargaining rights at the Transportation Security Administration, aiming to nullify the union contract for some 47,000 airport security officers. But U.S. District Judge Marsha J. Pechman in Seattle, Washington, granted an injunction Monday at the request of the union, the American Federation of Government Employees. Pechman, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, determined that the union was likely to prevail in its argument that the administration ran afoul of the law. She said Trump's homeland security secretary, Kristi Noem, offered only a 'threadbare justification' for stripping workers of their union rights, and the move appeared purely retaliatory. 'The Noem Determination appears to have been undertaken to punish AFGE and its members because AFGE has chosen to push back against the Trump Administration's attacks [on] federal employment in the courts,' she wrote. AFGE President Everett Kelley called Pechman's order 'a crucial victory for federal workers.' 'We remain committed to ensuring our members' rights and dignity are protected, and we will not back down from defending our members' rights against unlawful union busting,' Kelley said in a statement. The order means that the Trump administration must honor the union's collective bargaining agreement for now. But the White House could still win the underlying case and succeed in having the contract tossed out. The union-busting efforts are a key piece of President Donald Trump's broader plan to decimate the federal workforce and end longstanding civil-service protections. In addition to trying to kill unions at TSA, Trump has tried to nullify collective bargaining rights for hundreds of thousands of other workers at a slew of federal agencies, all in the name of 'national security.' The White House has said explicitly that it's taking such actions at least in part because federal labor groups have stood up to the president. It noted in a 'fact sheet' on revoking collective bargaining rights that federal labor groups had 'declared war on President Trump's agenda,' a statement Pechman noted in her order Monday. 'The First Amendment protects against retaliation for engaging in litigation and public criticism of the government,' she wrote.
