South Carolina Republicans propose own ‘no tax on tips' bill
State Sen. Matt Leber (R-Charleston) and Rep. James Teeple (R-Charleston) introduced companion bills in the South Carolina legislature to exclude cash and electronic tips from state income taxes.
'We felt it was incumbent upon ourselves to consider the hospitality sector in our area, who deal with a struggling economy at times,' Leber said, pointing to the high cost of living in the Lowcountry.
'A lot of these guys do work in the hospitality sector, and if we can give them, or you know, allow them to keep more of their own hard-earned money, I think that's just a great idea,' he added.
In addition to helping individuals, Teeple suggested the proposal could benefit small businesses too.
'I think that this will be a great way to help small businesses to retain staff, stay open for folks to be able to enjoy,' he said.
Tipped employees in South Carolina include anyone who regularly receives more than $30 per month in tips, as defined by the Fair Labor Standards Act.
According to the University of South Carolina (UofSC), most tipped employees work in the tourism sector, including the hospitality industry, which comprises about 10% of the state's total workforce.
The minimum wage for these workers is $2.13 per hour, meaning gratuity makes up a large percentage of their income.
For example, a recent analysis by payment platform Square found that 25% of a South Carolina restaurant worker's income comes from tips.
'The wages that we're allowed to pay currently based on the tip credit kind of makes it so restaurant operators, bar operators, hotel operators, in any number of different industries or part of the industry, can hire quite a few employees and pay them honestly nominal wages to have them offset by consumers in tip space, explained Scott Taylor Jr., PhD, an assistant professor in the School of Hospitality and Tourism Management.
Senate confirms Scott Bessent as Trump's Treasury secretary
Even with tips, the average worker may still make so little that they don't meet the gross income threshold required to pay income tax in the first place.
That is why some economists, like those at the Tax Policy Center, argue the proposal would not actually benefit most low-income workers and could potentially lead to employers manipulating the system.
Leber isn't worried about that, however.
'I would probably suggest that because employers won't have to worry about the tax accounting on tips that they may even raise that base level themselves,' he said. 'I don't think even federally or in our state tax system that there's going to be any kind of angle or sort of way to bypass what we're suggesting here.'
Another concern is how eliminating tax on tips could change the tipping culture as a whole.
'As consumers, we're already bogged down with this idea of who do we tip and who don't we tip anymore,' Taylor said. 'I could make an argument as to well, they're not paying taxes anymore, so I can go back to 15, maybe 18%. I'll feel more comfortable about going to 18% instead of 20 or 25.'
So, while the idea of ending taxes on tips is popular nationwide — a recent survey found that more than half of Americans said they 'strongly' or 'somewhat' support it — Scott suggests there are currently too many unknowns from accounting to regulation.
'I think there's just, there's a lot of gaps that haven't really been fully fleshed out of this,' he said, speaking as a former operator. 'I'm not running operations anymore, but my first thought was, how in the world would I do this as a manager? How am I training my people if I owned an operation, what do I need to do differently with my accounting and those things? So there's, there's a lot of other issues at play there that I don't think have really been pushed through.'
'This is a bandage on a very open wound that's been bleeding for decades,' he added, pointing to the struggle within the hospitality industry to retain workers since the COVID-19 pandemic.
Instead, he argues there are better ways to ensure tipped workers pocket more money at the end of the day.
'We have other ways to change this,' he said. 'We could raise the tip credit. We could raise wages. We could do away with the tip credit and stop relying on consumers to basically subsidize the wages of our employees in hospitality and tourism jobs because this is really the one industry where that is the case.'
Leber and Teeple's proposals mirror a campaign promise echoed repeatedly by Trump and his allies, as recently as last weekend in Las Vegas.
'We're going to get it for you — 'no tax on tips,'' Trump told the crowd during a Jan. 25 rally at Circa Resort & Casino.
While congressional Republicans work on federal legislation, state lawmakers hope South Carolina can be among the first states to implement it on a smaller scale.
'We feel like we can work more quickly in the state, at the state level, with our majorities in the Senate, in the House, with a Republican governor, we can probably get this process and passed and both chambers more quickly,' Leber said.
If the bill does not pass as a standalone measure, Leber said it could be included as part of the next state budget.
It is part of a larger effort by state Republicans to implement widespread tax reform in the 2025 legislative session, which they say will include 'historic' income tax cuts.
'I liken it to kind of burning the candle at both ends if you will,' Teeple said. 'We're working to lower the significant tax burden for everyone across the board.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
15 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Newsom fights fire with fire against Republicans and Trump
As Texas Republicans seek to redraw their congressional maps in favor of Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives, Gov. Gavin Newsom has a power play of his own: redraw California's congressional districts to favor Democrats. With a new special election campaign, Newsom is proposing to temporarily scrap California's independently-drawn congressional lines in favor of districts that support Democrats. Could this political gerrymandering be the thing that saves democracy from Trump's increasingly authoritarian impulses? It's a boundary-pushing gamble that will undoubtedly supercharge Newsom's political star in the short-term, my colleague Julia Wick writes. But a ballot-box flop would be brutal for both the California governor and the Democrats. The 'Election Rigging Response Act,' as Newsom has named his ballot measure, would temporarily scrap the congressional districts enacted by the state's voter-approved independent redistricting commission. Under the proposal, Democrats could pick up five seats currently held by Republicans while bolstering vulnerable Democratic incumbent Reps. Adam Gray, Josh Harder, George Whitesides, Derek Tran and Dave Min, which would save the party millions of dollars in costly reelection fights. But first the Democratic-led state Legislature must vote to place the measure on the Nov. 4 ballot and then it must be approved by voters. If passed, the initiative would have a 'trigger,' meaning the redrawn map would not take effect unless Texas or another GOP-led state moved forward with its own gerrymandering effort. For Democrats like Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Glendale), who appeared alongside Newsom to kick off the special election campaign, there is 'some heartbreak' to temporarily shelving their commitment to independent redistricting. California voters have twice rallied for independent redistricting at the ballot box in the last two decades and many may struggle to abandon those beliefs. A POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab poll found that voters prefer keeping an independent panel in place to draw district lines by a nearly two-to-one margin, and that independent redistricting is broadly popular in the state. Still, Friedman told the Times she was hearing overwhelmingly positive reactions to the proposal from all kinds of Democratic groups on the ground. 'The response that I get is, 'Finally, we're fighting. We have a way to fight back that's tangible.'' Newsom isn't using political gerrymandering as his only method of combating Trump and the Republicans. His digital team has resorted to trolling Trump on X, mimicking the president's own social media vernacular. Think petty insults and hyperbole with a heavy reliance on the 'caps lock' key. 'DONALD IS FINISHED — HE IS NO LONGER 'HOT.' FIRST THE HANDS (SO TINY) AND NOW ME — GAVIN C. NEWSOM — HAVE TAKEN AWAY HIS 'STEP,' ' one of the posts read last week. Newsom's actions are notably different from how he spent the first months of the new administration. In an attempt to reshape the California-vs.-Trump narrative, the governor hosted MAGA leaders on his podcast and contradicted the Democratic orthodoxy on the participation of transgender athletes in women's sports. But after the president sent California National Guard troops into Los Angeles amid immigration sweeps and ensuing protests in June, Newsom's MAGA conciliation ended. Now he's making a big gamble with his new special election campaign, the kind of big play that could redefine how voters across the country see him. Read the full story here. Today's great photo is from Times intern Annie Goodykoontz at a vigil honoring a man who died while fleeing an immigration raid at a SoCal Home Depot. Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editorAndrew Campa, Sunday writerKarim Doumar, head of newslettersJim Rainey, staff writerDiamy Wang, homepage internIzzy Nunes, audience intern How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to essentialcalifornia@ Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on
The Hill
15 minutes ago
- The Hill
Swalwell: ‘Putin completely played Trump'
Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) said President Trump was 'completely played' by Russian President Vladimir Putin at the leaders' historic summit in Alaska on Friday. In an interview on 'CNN Newsroom' on Saturday, Swalwell criticized Trump's treatment of Putin at the meeting and said world leaders fear the U.S. is 'shirking its responsibility' to defend democracy globally. 'Putin completely played Trump. This is entirely about Donald Trump refusing to release the Epstein files and putting forward this scripted counterprogramming to that,' Swalwell said in the interview. 'He made America weaker, as perceived by the rest of the world, and he humiliated himself.' Trump greeted Putin on Friday on a red carpet spread across the runway of a U.S. airbase and clapped as the Russian leader approached. The two men shook hands, and Putin joined Trump in his presidential limo as they traveled to the summit to discuss an end to the war in Ukraine. Swalwell said on CNN he would have liked to see Trump greet Putin with a show of strength. 'I want peace in the region, and the best way to achieve peace is to band together and show strength against a bully like Russia. Instead, yesterday, we saw Donald Trump toast Vladimir Putin like he was receiving some lifetime achievement award,' Swalwell said. 'That doesn't make us stronger.' 'And right now, having talked already today and yesterday to leaders over in Europe, they are very worried about what's next — not just for Ukraine, but for democracies across the West — because the United States is shirking its responsibility to stand up and defend democracy everywhere,' he added. The remarks came ahead of Monday's meeting at the White House, where Trump will huddle with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and European leaders to discuss the Putin summit and next steps in peace negotiations. Trump sparked criticism on Saturday when he said after a call with Zelensky and European leaders that 'it was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.'
The Hill
15 minutes ago
- The Hill
The plot to destroy Black political power
Get ready for the rage: The conservative majority on the Supreme Court looks likely to gut the last remaining parts of the Voting Rights Act. Prompted by a Black conservative, Justice Clarence Thomas, the high court will consider in October a question that answers itself — whether it is wrong to stop openly racist tactics in drawing congressional districts. Even if the right-wing justices manage to close their eyes to the racial politics involved, they will feel the heat and hear the explosive impact of the backlash to a one-sided ruling. The fuse will be lit in several Republican-controlled states, largely in the South, as white politicians begin diluting votes in Black-majority districts to silence Black voices in Congress. Deep-red state legislatures — think of South Carolina, Alabama and Mississippi — will be free to demolish their Black-majority congressional districts. Those white-majority, Trump-backing state legislatures aim to bring an end to the careers of several Black Democrats in Congress, such as Reps. Cleo Fields (D-La.), Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), Terri Sewell (D-Ala.) and Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.). As a purely political exercise, Trump and his Republican allies have wanted to eliminate these districts for years, because Black voters are key to the Democratic Party's congressional strength. The Voting Rights Act allows for federal courts to look for racial damage done by gerrymandering districts. In the case now before the high court, involving redistricting in Louisiana, the state was forced to add a second Black-majority district. A federal court ruled that, with 33 percent of the state being Black, it was wrong for only one of its six congressional districts to be majority Black. But that led to a lawsuit over the new map. Along the lines of Thomas's recent call for a total end to the Voting Rights Act, the challengers contend that the law — which was created to protect equal voting rights for Black Americans — now prohibits the court from stopping white Republicans from playing politics and crushing Black power as a proportional representation of a state's racial makeup. Thomas makes the case that attention to 'race-based' construction of congressional districts is out of touch with recent history. He argues that 'specific identified instances' of racial bias, including violent voter suppression, are now distant and amount to relics of the nation's past. Last week, a federal appeals court disagreed. The Fifth Circuit ruled that Louisiana's congressional district map 'packed' and 'cracked' Black populations to limit their political power. The ruling stated there are 'decades of binding precedent' under the 15th Amendment allowing Congress to contest racial bias in redistricting. The 1965 Voting Rights Act was written in response to the nation's long history of keeping political power in white hands. Even after Black men gained the right to vote, it was common for that vote to be suppressed through violence. For perspective, South Carolina is 26 percent Black and 67 percent white. But white-majority Republican congressional districts are 86 percent of South Carolina's seven congressional districts. Only one of seven districts has a majority of Democrats and Black voters — Clyburn's district. The Supreme Court plans to hear arguments on racial redistricting on Oct. 15 — early enough for a decision that could affect the 2026 midterms. If the Black vote is diluted, the Democratic Party's ability to win seats in Congress shrinks, increasing Republican chances of retaining majorities in the House and Senate in 2026. That would keep Trump from becoming a lame duck facing a divided Congress. The Republicans' goal is to maintain majorities in Congress for Trump's last two years in the White House. Then Republicans can appoint more judges to issue more rulings that further weaken Democrats. The downward spiral for Black political power will go on and on. Trump is not hiding his interest in the outcome of gerrymandering efforts in Texas. 'We have an opportunity in Texas to pick up five seats,' Trump told CNBC earlier this month. 'We have a really good governor, and we have good people in Texas. I got the highest vote in the history of Texas … and we are entitled to five more seats.' Excuse me, Mr. President? Neither you nor the Republican Party is entitled to any seats. Those seats belong to Americans of all colors and parties. Texas Republicans' threats to send law enforcement to forcibly return Texas Democratic legislators to the state capitol to provide a quorum for passing gerrymandered maps are a sideshow. They distract from the real effect that racially-designed gerrymandering can have on race relations and politics for decades to come. Comedian Dave Chappelle famously called Trump 'an honest liar.' In the fight over Texas redistricting, the 'honest liar' is saying that the people looking at redistricting's racial impact are themselves racist. Don't let Trump or his partisans on the high court fool you. Racial justice in Congress is at stake. Democrats will have to fight fire with fire to prevent Trump from diminishing Black voting power. Democrats owe that much to Black voters, who have carried them to electoral victories over the last 60 years. They owe it to the memory of the brave people who marched, were beaten and even died to demand voting rights only 60 years ago.
