More On The Tips And Overtime Deductions In One Big Beautiful Bill
What we have in the final language about tips and overtime illustrates Reilly's Third Law of Tax Planning - "Any clever idea that pops into your head probably has (or will have) a corresponding rule that makes it not work". If you had an idea about how to game the "No tax on tips" of "No tax on overtime", let's see if Congress has already knocked it out even before any regulations have been issued.
Deductions Subject To Limitations And Phase Outs
First of all, the benefits are only about income tax, not Social Security and Medicare as the "no tax" monikers might imply. Further, the final bill puts limits and phaseouts in place. And the benefits are structured as deductions. It you want to know more about what that means, read the next paragraph, but feel free to skip it.
It is worth looking at Form 1040 to understand where the deduction fits in. If you clicked on the link, you will see that your total income is on Line 9. Then on LIne 10, there are adjustments to income. There are a lot of those so they are totaled up on Part II of Schedule 1. Subtracting Line from Line 11 gives you your adjusted gross income (AGI). This is an important number because many thresholds and limitations are keyed to AGI including those of the tips and overtime deductions. Next on line 12 you get either your standard deduction or the total of certain itemized deductions from Schedule A. The tips and overtime will not be among them, so you don't need to be an itemizer. On Line 13 you will see the qualified business income deduction which will be added to the amount on line 12 to arrive at line 14 which is subtracted from AGI to arrive at taxable income. That's where the tips and overtime deductions will go along with the automobile interest deduction included in the bill. I don't know if they will add more lines to the form or give us another schedule. If it is another schedule I hope that they call it Schedule A PLUS.
Do you remember all the talk about a postcard tax return in 2017? Still not happening.
UNITED STATES - NOVEMBER 14: Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., holds up a postcard tax return ... More form during the press conference following the House Republican Conference meeting in the Capitol on Tuesday, Nov. 14, 2017. Ryan is flanked from left by House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., Republican Conference Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., and Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va. (Photo By Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call)Both the tip deduction and the overtime deduction require that married taxpayers file joint returns to claim the deduction. There are dollar limitations. The limitation is $25,000 for the tip deduction and $12,500 for the overtime deduction on a single return and $25,000 for the overtime deduction on a joint return. The phaseout is the same - $100 for every $1,000 that modified adjusted gross income exceeds $150,000 on a single return or $300,000 on a joint return. The modification to adjusted gross income is an add back of income excluded because it was earned while living abroad or in Puerto Rico on one of the U.S. possessions. I have to wonder if the $150,000 threshold is an echo of the proposal to totally eliminate income taxes on those earning less than $150,000.
Qualified Tips
Unlike earlier proposals, "qualified tips" are not just tips received by employees. The deduction also applies to tips received in the course of a trade or business. The thing that comes to mind there is food delivery people or Uber drivers who are considered independent contractors. I also recall that adult entertainers can be independent contractors. The deduction will be allowed only to the extent that the gross income from the business exceeds the allocable deductions. This could present some planning issue for how capital assets might be written off. The tip deduction will reduce the amount of income counted as qualified business income for that deduction.
What exactly are the "tips" that are the subject of the deduction? First of all, they have to be received by an individual in an occupation which "customarily and regularly received tips on or before December 31, 2024". There is a call for a list to be created. Next the amount involved has to be paid voluntarily, without consequence in the event of nonpayment, not the subject of negotiation and determined by the payor. So that amount that large parties have to pay in a restaurant seems to not qualify. There are excluded fields of business- health, law, accounting, actuarial science, performing arts, consulting, athletics, financial services, brokerage services, or any trade or business where the principal asset of such trade or business is the reputation or skill of 1 or more of its employees. I have to wonder if the "performing arts" exclusion knocks out the adult entertainers. There is some litigation in the sales tax area that might help them.
Overtime
For the definition of "qualified overtime compensation" you really need to look at the bill's language and meditate for a while. Here it is "... the term 'qualified overtime compensation' means overtime compensation paid to an individual required under section 7 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 that is in excess of the regular rate (as used in such section) at which such individual is employed". That language triggered some back and forth in the twitterverse, about whether they mean the total amount paid for overtime or just the premium.
If you search for what the median hourly wage for Americans is, there are a variety of answers but they seem to be between $20 and $30 per hour, so let's use $25 for illustrative purposes. With that as the base hourly wage you get $1,000 per week for 40 hours, $52,000 per year. At time and half for overtime the $37.50 premium rate would max out the $12,500 limit at 6.5 hours a week. That is how I think of overtime and how I initially read, probably misread, the statute. The consensus seems to be that the deduction is only for the premium. Tom Gorczynski EA pointed out something from the White House website that supports that interpretation. I found that quite persuasive. Kelly Erb also writes that it is just the premium, which seals the deal for me. It still bugs me though.
So if it is just the premium it takes 1,000 hours to max out the benefit if you are single in my example. Call it a 60 hours work week. If you are married and your spouse does not work overtime it would be 2,000 hours. At $50 per hour you will hit the maximum at 500 hours of overtime if you are single or 1,000 hours if you are married with a spouse that does not get overtime. Absent a lot else going on, you won't be having to deal with the phaseout.
I won't comment on the equity or sense behind this particular deduction other than to remark that back when I used to work more than forty hours a week mostly without overtime pay, I found it a lot harder when I was doing that by working two jobs rather than longish hours on one job. So I am puzzled as to what makes an overtime premium worthy of special tax treatment.
Gaming The Overtime Deduction
I don't know much about the Fair Labor Standards Act, which is the key to the deduction. It is clear however that whether people are exempt employees not subject to the overtime premium requirement can be debatable. Employers will generally prefer to not have that requirement. I don't think this deduction will change that, but I can't resist coming up with a way to game it. Here is the idea. I have a bunch of salaried employees and I want to help them out. So what I do is cut everybody's pay to below $684 per week so that I have to pay them time and a half over forty hours. Then I guarantee them overtime hours which will include overtime hours when they are "on-call". That will bring them up to whatever their previous salary was. And a third of that amount will be deductible. This is actually a terrible idea when it comes to actually executing it, but I felt I had to come up with something if I could.
I haven't thought of a way to game the tips deduction, but I am sure they will be coming.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
36 minutes ago
- Washington Post
What does Trump's tax law mean for your health insurance?
RFK Jr. has big plans for your food. Here are the facts. May 2, 2025
Gizmodo
37 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
Trump Tries to Bury Epstein Scandal, but Elon Musk Won't Let Him
Elon Musk seems convinced he's finally found Donald Trump's Achilles' heel, the one issue that could fracture the unshakable loyalty of the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement: the infamous Epstein files and their handling by the Trump administration. For years, the unsealing of Jeffrey Epstein's records has been a holy grail for many on the right. The belief, fanned by influencers now in seats of power, was that the files contained a secret 'client list' that would expose widespread corruption and depravity among powerful Democrats and 'deep state' figures. It was seen as the ultimate political weapon. FBI Director Kash Patel, in his former life as a right-wing media personality, told Glenn Beck in 2023 that Trump should 'on Day 1, roll out the 'black book'.' This long-held anticipation is what made the administration's recent announcement so explosive. On July 7, the Department of Justice and the FBI released a joint memo concluding their review found no mythical client list and no new information that could lead to charges. The long-awaited bombshell was a dud, and the fallout has been swift, creating deep fissures within the administration itself. According to multiple reports, a major fracture has emerged between the leadership of the DOJ and the FBI over the handling of the case files. The infighting boiled over when conservative commentator Dan Bongino, now the Deputy Director of the FBI, reportedly criticized Attorney General Pam Bondi's handling of the review in a White House meeting. Reports from Fox News and other outlets suggest Bongino distanced himself from the findings and is considering resigning in protest. Amid the chaos, FBI Director Kash Patel posted a carefully worded statement on X. 'The conspiracy theories just aren't true, never have been,' Patel wrote on July 12, without clarifying if he was denying reports about the feud or a potential Bongino resignation. 'It's an honor to serve the President of the United States @realDonaldTrump — and I'll continue to do so for as long as he calls on me.' The conspiracy theories just aren't true, never have been. It's an honor to serve the President of the United States @realDonaldTrump — and I'll continue to do so for as long as he calls on me. — Kash Patel (@Kash_Patel) July 12, 2025This internal revolt prompted President Trump to intervene. In a lengthy message on Truth Social, he attempted to shut down the controversy by framing the entire Epstein affair as a conspiracy orchestrated by his political enemies. 'They created the Epstein Files, just like they created the FAKE Hillary Clinton/Christopher Steele Dossier,' Trump wrote, urging his allies to stop 'playing right into their hands.' He ordered his team to refocus on his own political grievances and to 'not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about.' 'LET PAM BONDI DO HER JOB — SHE'S GREAT!' the president concluded. But where Trump saw a political inconvenience, Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla and founder of SpaceX, saw a profound moral failure. In a direct reply on X, Musk ignored Trump's entire political narrative. Instead, he zeroed in on the core injustice of the scandal, amplifying the outrage that Trump sought to extinguish. 'This is a very big deal,' Musk posted to his hundreds of millions of followers. 'What the hell kind of system are we living in if thousands of kids were abused, the government has videos of the abusers and yet none of the abusers are even facing charges!?' This is a very big deal. What the hell kind of system are we living in if thousands of kids were abused, the government has videos of the abusers and yet none of the abusers are even facing charges!? — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 13, 2025The rebuke was immediate and powerful. While Trump tried to control his political universe, Musk used his immense platform to declare that justice for abused children was more important than political games. The split highlights a fundamental difference between the two men: Trump views the world through the lens of political power, while Musk, in this instance, has positioned himself as a champion for basic justice. This public disagreement marks one of the most significant moments of dissent from within Trump's orbit and appears to be the latest flashpoint in a rapidly escalating political divorce. Their once-tight alliance, which saw Musk lead a government efficiency task force (DOGE), has fractured in recent weeks over fundamental disagreements on policy. The rift burst into public view over Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' a sweeping tax and spending package that Musk lambasted as a 'disgusting abomination.' I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 3, 2025That policy disagreement quickly morphed into a direct political challenge. In early July, Musk announced the formation of 'America Party,' a third-party movement aimed at challenging the political establishment. The move was a clear signal that Musk was no longer content to be a Trump ally. While their previous fights were over fiscal policy and political strategy, this latest clash over Jeffrey Epstein is different. By refusing to let the Epstein story be swept under the rug, Musk is using his platform to force a conversation that Trump desperately wants to end, proving he is one of the few figures on the right willing and able to defy the president so directly.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion: How the Trump tax cut law will hurt the working class
Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said it was 'agonizing' to vote for the tax cut bill President Trump signed on July 4. As details of the legislation come into focus, it's obvious why it might cause heartburn even for Republicans who passed it, with no Democratic votes. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, as the law is clumsily known, will literally make the rich better off and the poor worse off. Some conservatives who want to pare the 'welfare state' may not care. But imposing austerity on millions of working-class voters is a stunning political risk for a party that is supposedly following President Trump's populist instincts. The law has two main elements. The first is a sweeping series of tax cuts and tax cut extensions that will generally benefit everybody but add trillions of dollars to the national debt. The second is a set of benefit cuts that are meant to reduce the overall cost of the bill. Those will hit working-class Americans and make the net effect of the bill punishing to them. The biggest part of the OBBBA is an extension of the tax cuts Trump signed into law in 2017. Those were due to expire at the end of this year. The OBBBA makes the current individual income tax rates permanent. Those are not 'tax cuts' per se, since tax rates will be the same in future years as they are in 2025. But the law does prevent what would have been a de facto tax hike if the 2017 rates expired and the higher 2016 rates went back into effect. The law also includes some new tax breaks, such as the elimination of tax on income from tips and overtime pay, up to certain limits. There's also a new tax break for some seniors and a much higher cap for deducting state and local taxes, which will mostly benefit wealthy homeowners who itemize deductions on their tax returns. The tax provisions generally benefit everybody, but the wealthy will gain the most. The average savings for all taxpayers will be about $2,900, compared with what the tax bill would have been if current rates expired, according to the Tax Policy Center. Those with incomes above $1 million would save nearly $60,000 on average. But the savings for workers with incomes below $30,000 would be less than $200 per year. Those provisions, at least, do no harm to most taxpayers. But the harm arrives when factoring in cuts to Medicaid, subsidies for people to buy health insurance through the Affordable Care Act, and food aid known as SNAP. The healthcare cutbacks will leave an additional 16 million people without coverage by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Cutbacks to the SNAP program could reduce or eliminate food aid going to 22 million families, according to the Urban Institute. Those changes will leave millions of Americans worse off. When accounting for the tax changes and benefit cuts combined, people in the lowest income quintile, with incomes below $13,500, will lose an average of $600 per year, according to the Yale Budget Lab. The next quintile will lose $65 per year. The healthcare and food aid cuts will have little impact on top earners, for obvious reasons. The top quintile will gain $6,500 in after-tax savings from all of the law's provisions, while the top 1% will net more than $30,000. This is what economists call a 'regressive' policy change because the economic burden falls more heavily on those with lower incomes. 'The bill has four overriding characteristics,' Howard Gleckman of the Tax Policy Center wrote recently. 'It is regressive, expensive, complicated, and it treats people who make roughly the same amount of money in very different ways.'Tax cut defenders often point out that the wealthy typically get the biggest tax cuts because they pay the most taxes in the first place. That's generally true. But the wealthy are a distinct minority, which means a regressive law such as the OBBBA dis-serves millions of voters, and possibly a majority of them. The bottom two income quintiles, for instance, include roughly 92 million taxpaying units, whether singles, married couples, or other designations. There are only 26 million taxpaying units in the top quintile. Maybe that's what Murkowski found so agonizing. 'Do I like this bill? No,' she told a reporter on July 2. 'I know in many parts of the country there are Americans that are not going to be advantaged by this bill.' Trump can point to working-class provisions such as the elimination of taxes on tip income and overtime pay, with limitations based on the type of work and the amount of income. Some workers will in fact benefit from those carve-outs. But tax analysts argue that favoring certain types of work in that manner violates the principle of 'horizontal equity,' the idea that similar incomes should be taxed in similar ways. To use the example of a restaurant, a waiter earning tip income would get a tax break that a cook paid hourly would not. That distorts the tax code, creates incentives to cheat, and generates legitimate grievances among the unlucky workers not gifted a tax break. The OBBBA is already unpopular, with 64% of Americans disapproving and just 35% approving, in one poll. The real vote will come in the 2026 midterm elections, when Americans will express whether they feel better off or worse off under unified Republican control of government. Getting Americans to like this law might be a more agonizing ideal than passing it. Rick Newman is a senior columnist for Yahoo Finance. Follow him on Bluesky and X: @rickjnewman. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices.
