Trump wins broad economic policy shift as House passes tax bill
The 218-214 vote in the House Thursday sends the legislation to Trump, in time for a July 4 deadline he set. House leaders had to keep earlier procedural votes open for hours to convince a small band of holdouts to support the legislation.
The president leveraged his sway over the Republican party through threats of primary challenges, White House lobbying sessions and golf-course socialising to overcome resistance from both conservative hardliners concerned about the measure's debt impact and swing-state GOP moderates worried about the scale of Medicaid cuts.
In the end, only two Republicans, Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, joined with Democrats to oppose the bill.
Earlier in the week, Vice-President JD Vance had to break a tie vote to get the massive tax and spending package through the Senate.
Trump's victory followed an all-night vote wrangling session in the House, beset by numerous delays as the president railed on social media against Republican lawmakers who declined to quickly back the legislation.
BT in your inbox
Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox.
Sign Up
Sign Up
House Republican Leader Steve Scalise credited Trump with breaking the logjam, impressing upon holdouts overnight that there would be no further changes to the bill.
'When the president is done negotiating, the game is up — it's time to vote,' he said.
House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith extolled the bill for its populist appeal, calling it legislation for 'people who don't have lobbyists' in Washington.
'It's about restoring sanity in a town that's lost it, cutting waste and reining in reckless spending,' Smith said. 'It demands that if you're able to work, you should. It stops asking working families to foot the bill for Washington's bad decisions.'
Democrats, in contrast, say the bill will strip health care for millions of people who depend on Medicaid to fund tax cuts for the wealthy.
Political clash
The fierce partisan battle to shape public perceptions of the measure is likely to intensify in the coming months, with Democrats hoping a voter backlash will return them to power in next year's midterm elections.
They portray the president's signature legislation as a Robin Hood-in-reverse scheme to take safety-net benefits away from the poor to pay for tax cuts skewed toward the rich.
'This legislation will end Medicaid as we know it,' House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said Thursday during a marathon speech right before bill passage. 'Rural hospitals will close, nursing homes will close.'
It will 'provide tax breaks for the wealthy, well-off, well-connected,' he added, during a speech that ran for more than eight hours and broke a record for the longest House floor address in history.
Trump and his Republican allies are counting on the measure's US$4.5 trillion in tax cuts to bolster economic growth.
The legislation delays many of the spending reductions while front-loading levy reductions with populist appeal, including a permanent increase in the child tax credit and temporary four-year tax breaks for the elderly and for tip and overtime pay that Trump promised in his presidential campaign.
Early reviews
Democrats start with an advantage in polls. A Pew Research survey last month found 49 per cent of Americans opposed the bill, while just 29 per cent supported it. Some 21 per cent weren't sure.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects the legislation will add US$3.4 trillion to US deficits over the next decade, adding to investors' concerns about the US fiscal trajectory.
DoubleLine Capital's Jeffrey Gundlach, one of the most high-profile names in the bond market, warned last month that the federal debt burden has become 'untenable' and the US dollar has dropped about 9 per cent in part on those concerns this year against major world currencies.
But a US$5 trillion increase in the US debt limit in the package eliminates the risk of a market-rattling payment default the Treasury had forecast could come as soon as mid-August without congressional action.
The final legislation is more costly than an earlier version the House passed primarily because Senate Republicans decided to make permanent a series of business tax breaks covering interest expensing, research and development spending and bonus depreciation of certain assets, including machinery and factories. The tax breaks had been temporary in the earlier version.
Medicaid cuts
The Senate also imposed deeper cuts in Medicaid health insurance for the poor and disabled, reducing spending on the programme by nearly US$1 trillion over the next decade, according to the CBO.
That includes restraints on federal funding matches for state Medicaid programmes, new work requirements for able-bodied recipients without children under 14 years old, and new cost-sharing requirements for beneficiaries who received coverage through President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act.
The package also cuts spending for federal food stamps and college student loans.
Most clean-energy tax breaks passed under Biden are phased out and a popular US$7,500 consumer tax credit for electric vehicles is eliminated for purchases made after Sept 30.
The core of the bill is an extension of 2017 Trump tax cuts for individuals and pass-through businesses that were set to expire at the end of 2025. It also provides new resources for Trump's crackdown on illegal immigration and for military spending including the president's 'Golden Dome' missile defense plan.
A group of House Republicans from high-tax states such as New York, New Jersey and California won a temporary increase in the limit on the state and local tax deduction to US$40,000. After five years, the cap will snap back to the current US$10,000 limit originally imposed under Trump's 2017 tax law. BLOOMBERG
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Straits Times
28 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Singapore shares slip on concerns that tariff pause would end soon, but STI still up for the week
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox Despite the decline, the STI still rose 1.2 per cent over the week and has closed above 4,000 points for three days straight. SINGAPORE – Local shares retreated on July 4 over concerns that Asia's export-driven economies will be hit when the 90-day pause in US tariffs ends. The unease left the Straits Times Index (STI) down 0.2 per cent or 5.95 points at 4,013.62 with decliners beating gainers 282 to 192, while 1.3 billion securities worth $1.1 billion were transacted. Despite the decline, the STI still rose 1.2 per cent over the week and has closed above 4,000 points for three days straight. SPI Asset Management managing partner Stephen Innes said Asian markets slipped into Friday 'like someone entering a dark alley with one eye over their shoulder'. He noted that US equities might have 'danced higher on a sweet spotted post-payroll sugar rush', given the buoyant jobs data, but Asian economies are facing the tariff threat with President Donald Trump saying he will be sending trading partners letters about the levies. 'Asian equities pulled back as traders braced for impact. It's not panic yet – but it's certainly not confidence either. No one wants to be holding risk when that first letter gets sent.' All but one property player on the STI closed in the red after the Government announced that Seller's Stamp Duty rates will raised for residential properties. The holding period governed by the duty has also been extended to four years. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore $3b money laundering case: 9 financial institutions handed $27.45m in MAS penalties over breaches Singapore Seller's stamp duty hike will curb short-term speculation; market effect likely minimal: Analysts Singapore NTUC says some foreigners taking on platform work illegally, calls for work group to address issue World Trump says countries to start paying tariffs on Aug 1, floats range of 10% to 70% Singapore Sengkang murder: Man accused of killing elderly mother escorted back to crime scene Singapore Tourism bump from Lady Gaga concerts raked in up to estimated $150m for Singapore economy Singapore Jail for man who recruited 2 Japanese women for prostitution at MBS Life Book review: OB Markers sequel Ink And Influence makes catch-22 proposal for The Straits Times Only CapitaLand Investment was spared the rout, with the real estate investment manager's shares ending unchanged at $2.71. Frasers Centrepoint Trust was the worst performing STI developer, sliding 2.2 per cent to $2.22, despite not operating in the residential property sector. The uncertainty here was in stark contrast to Wall Street, which had a shortened session overnight before the July 4 holiday.

Straits Times
42 minutes ago
- Straits Times
US Supreme Court liberals increasingly marginalized as conservatives flex muscles
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court's three liberal justices exerted waning influence during its recently concluded term, and their frustrations with the conservative majority spilled into public view in major cases involving President Donald Trump and issues such as transgender rights. In five of the biggest cases of the term, which wrapped up with its final rulings on June 27, the court's six conservative justices were in the majority and liberal Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson were in dissent. Top among these was the ruling on the term's final day that curbed the ability of judges to impede Trump's policies through nationwide injunctions. The other four came in cases at the heart of the American "culture wars." Those included rulings that upheld a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for transgender minors, backed a Texas law requiring pornographic websites to verify the age of users in an effort to protect minors, let parents opt children out of public school classes with LGBT themes and allowed South Carolina to strip abortion provider Planned Parenthood of Medicaid funding. The ideological divide was abundantly clear in cases in which the justices acted on an emergency basis, sometimes called the "shadow docket," which produced a string of orders permitting Trump to enact policies impeded by lower courts. Trump's appointment of three justices - Amy Coney Barrett in 2020, Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 and Neil Gorsuch in 2017 - during his first term in office gave the court its 6-3 conservative majority, and the nation's top judicial body has since moved American law decisively rightward, as it did again this term. "The three liberals are out of cards at the table," said George Mason University law professor Robert Luther III, using a card-game analogy. "They just don't have the numbers to make an impact." Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore $3b money laundering case: 9 financial institutions handed $27.45m in MAS penalties over breaches Singapore Seller's stamp duty hike will curb short-term speculation; market effect likely minimal: Analysts Singapore NTUC says some foreigners taking on platform work illegally, calls for work group to address issue World Trump says countries to start paying tariffs on Aug 1, floats range of 10% to 70% Singapore Sengkang murder: Man accused of killing elderly mother escorted back to crime scene Singapore Tourism bump from Lady Gaga concerts raked in up to estimated $150m for Singapore economy Singapore Jail for man who recruited 2 Japanese women for prostitution at MBS Life Book review: OB Markers sequel Ink And Influence makes catch-22 proposal for The Straits Times Their lack of sway was particularly evident in "core culture war cases," added Luther, who has advised Trump on judicial nominations. "These are the kinds of cases that brutal confirmation fights like Kavanaugh's are all about," Luther said, referring to the Republican-led Senate's narrow confirmation of Trump's nominee following allegations of sexual misconduct dating back decades that Kavanaugh denied. "These are the kind of cases that prove the right is winning the war for the courts." THE ROBERTS COURT The court has been under the guidance of conservative Chief Justice John Roberts since 2005. But it was after Trump appointed Barrett to replace the late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg five years ago that the liberal bloc's influence sank to a low point. "I think it's a mistake to think the liberals ever had serious sway on the Roberts Court since they've been winnowed down to three members," said Georgia State University law professor Anthony Michael Kreis. "The only question is this: can the liberals convince their colleagues, on occasion, that they're wildly out of step with the public and need to pull back on some decisions? And do two of their conservative colleagues even care?" Kreis asked. If the liberal justices remain united, they need two conservatives to join them in a case in order to prevail. In the emergency docket cases, which reach the justices on a condensed timeline that leaves little time for consensus-building, the six justices appointed by Republican presidents gave a green light to several Trump policies. Endorsing his expansive view of presidential authority, they let him move forward with mass deportations, fire the heads of independent federal agencies and ban transgender people from the military. In the June 27 ruling authored by Barrett in the birthright citizenship case, the Supreme Court did not address the legality of a Trump directive blocked by three federal judges. Trump had directed federal agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the United States who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also called a "green card" holder. Instead, the court curbed the ability of federal judges to issue "universal" injunctions to block the Republican president's policies nationwide. Sotomayor, the most senior of the liberal justices, read her entire dissent from the bench, signaling her strong disagreement with the conservative majority's ruling. Over the course of 20 minutes, Sotomayor denounced the decision, saying "no right is safe in the new legal regime the court creates." "Today, the threat is to birthright citizenship," Sotomayor wrote in her dissent. "Tomorrow, a different administration may try to seize firearms from law-abiding citizens or prevent people of certain faiths from gathering to worship." 'POLITICAL WHIMS' Sotomayor similarly read a scathing dissent from the bench on June 18 after the court allowed Tennessee to restrict gender-transition medical care for people under age 18. Sotomayor said with the ruling the court "abandons transgender children and their families to political whims." Jackson wrote in a dissent that the ruling authored by Barrett on nationwide injunctions posed an "existential threat to the rule of law." Barrett's ruling, Jackson asserted, is "profoundly dangerous since it gives the executive the go-ahead to sometimes wield the kind of unchecked, arbitrary power the (nation's) founders crafted our Constitution to eradicate." Barrett countered that "Justice Jackson decries an imperial executive while embracing an imperial judiciary" and "would do well to heed her own admonition: 'Everyone, from the president on down, is bound by law.'" Sotomayor, who told a Harvard University audience last year that she sometimes cries in her office after rulings, is writing her dissents to an audience of future generations of lawyers, according to George Washington University law professor Paul Schiff Berman. "Dissenting opinions do have an impact on the law over time," Berman said. Sotomayor's approach resembles one employed by the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, according to Trinity College historian Kevin McMahon. Scalia often found himself in the minority in important rulings and sometimes was criticized by other conservatives for not making more of an effort to build consensus with his liberal colleagues, McMahon said. But years later, Scalia's dissents are serving as the foundation for rulings now that the court has moved decidedly to the right, McMahon said. Scalia's death in 2016 left the court with four liberal justices and four conservative justices. Trump's three appointments in the next four years created a conservative super majority. "Scalia often wasn't willing to compromise. He was more interested in writing that powerful, powerful dissent," McMahon said. "And, in the long run, those dissents have become law." Kagan is regarded as the liberal justice most willing to moderate her positions to build consensus with the conservatives. McMahon said Kagan's approach resembles that of the late liberal Justice William Brennan, who would tell his clerks: "Five votes can do anything around here." Kagan's willingness to compromise has allowed her to author rulings in some major cases in recent years such as a 2024 decision that clarified how the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment protections against government abridgment of freedom of speech apply to social media companies. "When you're a Supreme Court justice, you know you're going to be there for a long time, and you know things are going to change," McMahon said. "Sometimes, you take a little win. And then, maybe a couple years later you can expand your thinking." REUTERS

Straits Times
43 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Kremlin says it pays close attention to Trump statements after he voices disappointment with Putin call
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump and Russia's President Vladimir Putin are seen during the G20 leaders summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina November 30, 2018. REUTERS/Marcos Brindicci/File Photo MOSCOW - The Kremlin said on Friday that Russia closely follows all of Donald Trump's statements after the U.S. president said he was "very disappointed" with his latest conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin about the war in Ukraine. Trump, who had confidently stated last week that Putin was "looking to settle" the conflict, said after Thursday's phone call that he did not think the Russian leader was looking to stop it. Asked about the comments, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters: "Of course, we are paying very close attention to all of President Trump's statements." He did not address Trump's implied criticism of Putin. Trump, who returned to the White House in January with a promise to swiftly end the "bloodbath" in Ukraine, said after Thursday's call: "I didn't make any progress with him at all." Peskov said Putin had told Trump that Russia would prefer to achieve its goals in Ukraine by political and diplomatic means, but in the meantime would continue what it calls its "special military operation". He said the Kremlin leader had told Trump that Russia expects to agree a date for a third round of peace talks with Ukraine, following earlier talks in May and June. REUTERS Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore $3b money laundering case: 9 financial institutions handed $27.45m in MAS penalties over breaches Singapore Seller's stamp duty hike will curb short-term speculation; market effect likely minimal: Analysts Singapore NTUC says some foreigners taking on platform work illegally, calls for work group to address issue World Trump says countries to start paying tariffs on Aug 1, floats range of 10% to 70% Singapore Sengkang murder: Man accused of killing elderly mother escorted back to crime scene Singapore Tourism bump from Lady Gaga concerts raked in up to estimated $150m for Singapore economy Singapore Jail for man who recruited 2 Japanese women for prostitution at MBS Life Book review: OB Markers sequel Ink And Influence makes catch-22 proposal for The Straits Times