logo
What's Comes Next For The One Big Beautiful Bill Act

What's Comes Next For The One Big Beautiful Bill Act

Forbes7 hours ago

WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 9: U.S. Senate Majority Leader Sen. John Thune (R-SD) (C) walks to the Senate floor at the U.S. Capitol Building on June 9, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by) Getty Images
The clock is ticking towards July 4—the date President Trump insists he wants to sign the Republicans' big tax and budget cutting bill. The House passed its version of the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' (OBBBA) last month and Senate Republicans are hashing out their version now, with a vote possible at the end of the week. But the two Houses must pass the exact same legislation before it can head to Trump's desk.
OBBBA proposes tax and policy changes that could significantly impact how people and businesses plan, invest and grow—and importantly, it's considered the signature legislation of Trump's second term. In other words, it's something Republicans feel they must pass. As with any major legislation, the path forward is shaped as much by politics as by policy.
The Honorable Dave Camp, a senior policy advisor within PwC's Washington National Tax Services practice, and former Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, knows a little something about the process. In March 2014, the Michigan Republican introduced the Tax Reform Act of 2014, the most comprehensive tax reform proposal since the mid-1980s. Prior, he was a member of the Joint Committee on Taxation for six years, serving as Chairman in 2011 and 2013 and Vice Chairman in 2012 and 2014.
In a webinar for Forbes members last week, Camp said that Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), who chairs the current Senate Finance Committee, 'really delivered on things that he was talking about.' Camp noted that permanent tax policy was a goal of Crapo's committee and it made it into the Senate version of the bill. That's true, as the House and Senate versions of the bill would make permanent a number of the expiring tax cuts in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) passed in 2017, during Trump's first term. It would also sweeten some of those cuts.
The beneficiaries of the most recent proposal are largely individuals. But that's because in the TCJA, many of the tax benefits for individuals were set to expire at the end of 2025, while the corporate tax breaks were largely permanent.
That doesn't mean that all business tax breaks under the TCJA were permanent. Among the provisions set to expire at the end of this year: One that allowed the owners of 'passthrough' structures like limited liability companies (LLCs) or S corporations, who pay tax on business income on their individual tax returns (instead of at the corporate level), to deduct 20% of that business-related income, thus lowering their tax rate. The House and Senate versions of the bill would make the deduction permanent (and expand it).
(You can read more about the House version of the bill here.)
The Senate version of the bill would also permanently extend and modify the depreciation deduction for businesses. (Under current law, bonus depreciation is only available through 2026, subject to phasedowns, reductions in the deduction as the years pass.) Scoring and Budget Resolutions
While these provisions are more or less what was expected in the bill, Camp noted that we don't yet have a final score on the Senate version. We do have a score on the House version—The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated it would increase the federal deficit by $2.8 trillion over the next decade.
The lack of scoring on the Senate side is largely because the bill is still being finalized—the Senate hasn't passed a version yet and the Parliamentarian is still reviewing it. That score will make a difference, as Camp stressed that revenue scores often drive policy.
Dean Zerbe, National Managing Director of alliantgroup, who served as senior counsel and tax counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance from 2001 to 2008, under then-Chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), also participated in the webinar. He noted the importance of scoring—the overall fiscal impact of the bill. That is a huge driver, he says. You can be a fan of part of the bill, he explains, but still not be able to push it forward without considering the expense. 'I love the shoes, love the purse, love the hat, Senator,' Zerbe deadpanned, "but tell me how we are paying for this.'
Scoring is typically performed by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) for spending and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) for revenue—both are nonpartisan and work to figure the potential changes to the budget as a result of spending and revenues that result from a particular bill. Zerbe joked that it's "a combination of both a dartboard and a magic eight ball.'
That's when House and Senate members could look to revenue raisers, for example—items in the bill that can offset spending and tax cuts. There aren't very many in the Senate version—items like a tax on carried interest or stock buybacks that had been mentioned in earlier whispers are noticeably absent in the bill.
Complicating the process, Camp noted, is that the Senate and House are working under different budget resolutions, which is out of the ordinary for big 'reconciliation' bills like this one. Typically, he explained, when it comes to a reconciliation bill, there's one concurrent budget resolution. A concurrent budget resolution is a non-binding agreement between the House and Senate that sets the tone for spending and revenue levels. Hashing that out in advance can help avoid some of the potential roadblocks and conflicts later. It's a common step—we saw a concurrent budget resolution before other significant reconciliation bills like the TCJA and the Democrats' American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. Reconciliation and The Byrd Rule
So what are reconciliation bills? Reconciliation is used in the Senate when one party has the majority (more than 50 votes, as here) but not a filibuster-proof majority (60 votes). The process can be complicated, but generally, under reconciliation, the goal is to combine spending and revenue provisions into a single bill.
Reconciliation bills are subject to special rules in the Senate. First, debate is limited to 20 hours, which can help a reconciliation bill get to a vote quickly. More importantly, the bill cannot be filibustered—the 60 votes necessary to stop a filibuster are not required.
Thanks to the Byrd Rule, named after the late Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV), there are limits to reconciliation. For example, under the Byrd Rule, you can't tack on policy changes that are unrelated to the budget or have only 'incidental' effects on the budget. Also notable, any bill under reconciliation cannot increase the deficit beyond the fiscal years covered—that's usually limited to 10 years (and why tax cuts rarely last forever). Key Drivers In the Bill
Sorting out some of the differences between the House and Senate plans can be tricky, but Camp said he believes the Senate also has to 'find a way to negotiate with itself.' That's key because Senators can release amendments on the floor, pushing the process out even further if they don't agree on key points (that can't happen in the House since bills are typically not amendable in the House once they hit the floor unless the House Rules Committee agrees). That said, Camp expects a big push to get to a final bill that will have enough votes to pass.
Zerbe agreed, noting, 'This bill is critical to this administration.'
Camp noted that historically, 'The rule of thumb is the House has to accept what the Senate can pass,' but that the thin margins in the House make that tenuous. The bill passed in the House with a squeaky close 215-214 vote. That makes issues like the state and local tax (SALT) deduction paramount—a few members of the House from high-tax states have threatened to derail the bill if the cap (currently sitting at $10,000) doesn't go higher. The Senate doesn't have any Republican members who feel pressure to raise the cap—which is why their version kept it as $10,000. While that's largely thought of as a placeholder during negotiations, it shows that the House won't necessarily just accept a version of the bill from the Senate.
As for any surprises? Camp noted that the Senate leaning in heavily on Medicaid reforms was a surprise—especially considering the more modest changes proposed in the House. The Senate also struck a more business-friendly tone and addressed some of the international provisions that the House skipped over.
What wasn't a surprise: Both versions included Trump's campaign promises on items like no tax on tips and no tax on overtime (Zerbe noted that these provisions were temporary, unlike those individual TCJA provisions which were made permanent). Next Steps
The next step in the process is the Parliamentarian review—which has been lengthy, as expected with a bill of this size. The Parliamentarian advises on procedural matters and guides precedent. The job, which is deliberately nonpartisan, was created to navigate the complex rules and procedures of the Senate, especially as they apply to the budget reconciliation process.
The Parliamentarian's job isn't always popular. If a provision is flagged as a result of the review, it has to be removed from the bill if the bill is to proceed under reconciliation. Despite the politics, both Camp and Zerbe expect the Parliamentarian's decisions to be respected.
(You can see what's in and what's out as a result of the 'Byrd bath' here.)
When do we expect to hear the final word on the Senate version? That's still up in the air. But Zerbe said to keep your eyes and ears open on Thursday (June 26)—that's the day that follows the Senate caucus lunches (those happen on Tuesday and Wednesday) where they will taking the temperature of members. If that's favorable, the bill could move to the floor on Thursday.
But if it doesn't, is that the end of the bill? Not by a long shot. Camp said at the end of the day, the question is 'Does the President's agenda move forward or does it not move forward?' That, he said, will weigh heavily on a lot of the members. 'They're not done yet,' he said, adding, 'Small tweaks make kind of a big difference at this stage of the game."
(The replay of the webinar is available for members here.) Forbes Watch Taxes In The Political Crosshairs: How To Prepare For One Big Beautiful Bill By Forbes Membership Forbes As The Byrd Bath Continues, Here's A Look At What Will Likely Be Out Of The One Big Beautiful Bill (Updated) By Kelly Phillips Erb Forbes A Guide To The Tax Cuts In (And Out) Of Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' By Kelly Phillips Erb Forbes This Woman Could Block Some Controversial Parts Of Trump's Big Bill By Kelly Phillips Erb

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Grid battery installations may plunge 29% due to Congress, Trump — report
Grid battery installations may plunge 29% due to Congress, Trump — report

E&E News

time14 minutes ago

  • E&E News

Grid battery installations may plunge 29% due to Congress, Trump — report

The utility-scale energy storage market is at risk of plunging 29 percent next year because of 'policy uncertainty' from tariffs and potential rollbacks of key tax credits in Congress, according to a new report. The analysis from Wood Mackenzie and the American Clean Power Association found that energy storage — which is dominated by lithium-ion batteries — experienced record growth in the first quarter of 2025, adding 2 gigawatts. Utility-scale battery installations alone increased 57 percent in comparison to the same quarter last year. But federal policy could cause a sharp reversal in 2026, with implications for renewables tied to batteries and grid stability in regions with surging power demand. Among the threats is the end of some Biden-era clean energy tax credits, as outlined in the House and Senate versions of President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' Advertisement The industry's quarterly results 'demonstrate the demand for energy storage in the US to serve a grid with both growing renewables and growing load. However, the industry stands at a crossroads, with potential policy changes threatening to disrupt this momentum,' Allison Weis, global head of energy storage at Wood Mackenzie, said in a statement.

US Allies Wary of Buying American as They Plan Defense Buildup
US Allies Wary of Buying American as They Plan Defense Buildup

Yahoo

time14 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

US Allies Wary of Buying American as They Plan Defense Buildup

(Bloomberg) — For European countries that just approved the biggest increase in military spending in decades, 'Buy American' is looking a lot less appealing than it once was. They may have no choice. As the allies rush to rebuild their fighting forces, leaders are confronting the reality that they'll have to rely on the US for many of the new weapons they're planning to buy, a sales pitch driven home by President Donald Trump on his visit to Europe this week. They fret that they may be put at greater risk if they deepen their dependence on a US whose president has embraced their main enemy - Russia - and rattled some with threats to annex their territory. Those deeper ties have become an increasingly hard sell at home, with electorates cautious about a closer embrace with the US. Allied leaders like French President Emmanuel Macron have pushed for relying on European companies to provide the weapons and the EU fast-tracked a €150 billion facility for just that purpose after Trump was elected. Canada is considering pulling out of the US-led F-35 fighter program and buying Swedish planes instead. 'We should no longer send three-quarters of our defense capital spending to America,' Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said earlier this month. When a group of US legislators went to Copenhagen this spring to encourage Danish officials to buy more US weapons, the message they got was clear: we like your arms, but Trump's very public threats to take over Greenland, a Danish territory, were making buying them politically difficult, according to a person familiar with the meeting. Some Danish politicians have gone further. 'Buying American weapons is a security risk that we cannot run,' Rasmus Jarlov, a conservative lawmaker who heads the defense committee in parliament, said in a post on social media platform X in March. Trump's abrupt decision to briefly suspend intelligence sharing with Ukraine earlier this year alarmed allies, according to officials, fueling fears that the US might hobble American-made weapons in a crisis. The worries got so bad that the Pentagon had to issue a public reassurance that the F-35 fighter didn't have a 'kill switch.' But the planned buildup - worth as much as €14 trillion ($16 trillion) over the next decade if related infrastructure is included, according to Carlyle - is far beyond the current capabilities of a fragmented European defense sector that's been hollowed out by decades of cuts since the end of the Cold War. And the US lead in key areas, especially missiles and other high-tech weapons, means there's often no real alternative to buying American. 'Europe and the defense industry is not, at the moment, ready to take the load by itself,' said Tuure Lehtoranta, a senior executive at Finnish defense-tech firm Insta Group Oy. 'There's not enough production, there's not enough design in some areas.' German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, whose government is planning to nearly double spending on core defense items this year, said the European industry needs an overhaul to meet the demand. 'We have far too many systems in Europe, we have far too few units, and what we produce is often far too complicated, and therefore too expensive as a result,' he said this week. At the Paris Air Show last week, executives from Airbus SE and Dassault Aviation SA sparred openly over who should take charge of their next-generation fighter jet project. European allies will have no alternative but to buy American weapons to meet alliance targets, especially with stocks depleted by supplies given to Ukraine, a senior NATO official said, asking not to be identified discussing a sensitive issue. Allies also lack key technologies. 'Who is the European Palantir? Who is the European Planet?' asked Pierre Vandier, a top NATO commander, referring to the US technology and satellite companies that the alliance recently signed contracts with. 'It's a huge stimulus for Europeans to do all they can. If they don't get started now they can't cry if there are violent power struggles later.' Europe has no rivals as advanced as Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 fighter or RTX Corp's Patriot anti-missile, which has been critical to protecting Ukraine from Russian attacks. Allies have no competitors for key capabilities like ballistic-missile defense and air-to-air refueling. While simpler weapons like howitzers are easier for allies to produce, they still require US satellite systems for precision targeting. The UK said this week it would buy at least a dozen new F-35As, which Prime Minister Keir Starmer hopes will help curry favor with Trump. European defense companies are hopeful. They've seen share-price increases of 50% or more this year, ahead even of the big gains of their US competitors, as investors anticipate the huge boost in business. 'More urgency is there now,' Micael Johansson, chief executive officer of Saab AB, which makes Gripen fighters, said in an interview. 'I wouldn't say we have seen a dramatic shift now to buy more European, but I think that's the trend.' US defense contractors are lining up cooperation deals with European counterparts to hedge against any shift away from American weapons. 'As these European defense budgets increase, that's where we're spending our time,' Stephen O'Bryan, president of Northrop Grumman Corp's international business, said in an interview, referring to partnerships in Norway, Germany and Denmark. Lehtoranta of Insta said his company already partners with big US manufacturers like Lockheed Martin, including by providing avionics maintenance and other support for F-35 jets. But they see American companies are even hungrier to join forces now. 'I can see in the US that it might be a little bit of a fear in the air. US companies think that they might lose opportunities if they don't find the right partners,' he said. 'There will be change, there will be probably more European investments in European factories and European acquisitions, but still we cannot survive without the US industries.' —With assistance from Wojciech Moskwa, Thomas Seal, Matthew Boesler, Michael Nienaber, Sanne Wass and Alex Wickham. America's Top Consumer-Sentiment Economist Is Worried How to Steal a House Inside Gap's Last-Ditch, Tariff-Addled Turnaround Push Apple Test-Drives Big-Screen Movie Strategy With F1 Luxury Counterfeiters Keep Outsmarting the Makers of $10,000 Handbags ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. 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

Free Money from 23andMe's Data Breach Settlement: Here's How to File Your Claim
Free Money from 23andMe's Data Breach Settlement: Here's How to File Your Claim

CNET

time15 minutes ago

  • CNET

Free Money from 23andMe's Data Breach Settlement: Here's How to File Your Claim

Hackers used a credential stuffing attack to gain access to 23andMe accounts in October 2023. Getty Images/Viva Tung/CNET Ever used 23andMe? Well, now you may be able to get paid as part of the company's ongoing class-action settlement, but you'll have to move quickly. It's been a tough few years for the once-popular ancestry-tracking service, which in 2023 was struck by a prolonged data breach that allowed hackers to gain personal data for about half of the company's 14 million customers. The company has struggled ever since then and filed for bankruptcy in March 2025. It is now being acquired by TTAM Research Institute, a nonprofit led by 23andMe co-founder Anne Wojcicki, which outbid Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. The San Francisco-based company, which allows people to submit genetic materials and get a snapshot of their ancestry, announced in October 2023 that hackers had accessed customer information in a data breach. A January 2024 lawsuit accused the company of not doing enough to protect its customers and not notifying certain customers with Chinese or Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry that their data had been targeted specifically. It later settled the lawsuit for $30 million. "We have executed a settlement agreement for an aggregate cash payment of $30 million to settle all US claims regarding the 2023 credential stuffing security incident," a 23andMe spokesman told CNET. "We continue to believe this settlement is in the best interest of 23andMe customers, and we look forward to finalizing the agreement." A few months after that decision, there's now an official method available to make a claim and potentially get paid by 23andMe, in some cases as much as $10,000. Keep reading to get all the details you need, and for more, find out why T-Mobile settlement checks have been delayed and discover whether you can claim a piece of Apple's Siri privacy settlement. How many people did the 23andMe data breach hit? The settlement could cover roughly 6.9 million 23andMe customers whose data was targeted. To qualify, 23andMe customers must also have been US residents as of Aug. 11, 2023. That 6.9 million number includes around 5.5 million customers of 23andMe's DNA Relatives profiles, which lets people find and connect with genetic relatives. The other 1.4 million people affected by the breach used another service known as Family Tree, which predicts a family tree based on the DNA users share with relatives, 23andMe said. How much money could I get from the settlement? At the top end, 23andMe has said it would pay out up to $10,000 with an "Extraordinary Claim" to each customer who can verify that they suffered hardships as a direct result of their information being stolen in the data breach that resulted in unreimbursed costs. This includes costs from "identity fraud or falsified tax returns," acquiring physical security systems, or receiving mental health treatment. Residents of Alaska, California, Illinois and Oregon who were affected by the data breach can also apply for a payment as part of the proposed settlement, since those states have genetic privacy laws with damages provisions. The payments for these individuals are expected to be around $100, depending on how many people file for them, a settlement document said. Also, a smaller subset of affected users whose personal health information was impacted by the breach will be able to apply for a payment of $100. Infographic: Gianmarco Chumbe/CNET. Photo:Will the 23andMe settlement include anything else? Beyond those payments, 23andMe will also offer impacted users three years of a security monitoring service called Privacy Shield, which filings described as providing "substantial web and dark web monitoring." How can I file a claim for the 23andMe settlement? To file a claim electronically, you can use this official online portal from the Kroll Restructuring Administration. An additional online form is available if you would like proof of your claim sent to you. Potential claimants can also download and print out hard copies of the claim form and proof of claim form if they wish to submit them by mail. If you plan to use this method, send your forms to one of the addresses listed on the claims website. The deadline to make a claim is July 14. For more, you can read about how class action lawsuits work.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store