New draft of U.S. law cuts remittance tax to 1%, exempts bank and card transfers
U.S. legislators have significantly diluted the provision in the proposed legislation to tax remittances to other countries, including to India. The latest version of the Bill, released on Friday (June 27, 2025), reduces the tax on remittances to 1% from the earlier proposal of 3.5%, and excludes remittances made from bank accounts and other financial institutions and those made via debit or credit cards from the tax.
The 1% tax will now apply only on remittances made in cash, a money order, or a cashier's check. According to international tax experts, this will come as a significant relief to the non-resident Indian (NRI) community in the U.S.
The 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in May 2025. It is now up for debate in the U.S. Senate, following which it will be voted upon.
'There is hereby imposed on any remittance transfer a tax equal to 1 percent of the amount of such transfer,' the latest version of the Act says. 'The tax imposed by this section with respect to any remittance transfer shall be paid by the sender with respect to such transfer.'
However, the latest draft also inserts additional paragraphs to the section on the tax on remittances.
'The tax imposed under subsection (a) shall apply only to any remittance transfer for which the sender provides cash, a money order, a cashier's check, or any other similar physical instrument (as determined by the Secretary) to the remittance transfer provider,' the draft Bill said.
In addition, the Bill now says that remittances made from 'an account held in or by a financial institution' and 'funded with a debit card or a credit card which is issued in the United States' are exempt from the tax.
'Senate Republicans released their updated draft of the proposed One Big Beautiful Bill Act on June 27 and have a self imposed deadline of July 4 to try to pass this bill,' Lloyd Pinto, Partner - U.S. Tax at Grant Thornton Bharat said. 'The updated Senate version significantly changes the remittance transfer provisions that were passed by the House Republicans. In the latest Senate draft, the remittance transfer tax has been reduced to 1% from the erstwhile proposal of 3.5%.'
The 3.5% tax proposal itself was a reduction brought into the Act in May from the original proposal of 5%.
'This (the latest relaxations) should come as a huge relief to the NRI community in the US as they will not be subject to this remittance tax if the remittances are made through accounts held with designated US banks and financial institutions or funded via debit or credit cards issued in the U.S.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Bunker-buster bombs ‘ineffective' against Iran's Isfahan nuclear facility; Top US general reveals why
The U.S. military deliberately avoided using bunker-buster bombs on Iran's Isfahan nuclear complex because the site's extreme depth rendered the weapons ineffective, Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Dan Caine confirmed in a classified Senate briefing. Isfahan's underground facilities reportedly store 60% of Iran's enriched uranium, critical for bomb development, buried beyond the reach of America's GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs). Instead, submarines launched Tomahawk missiles to strike surface structures. The disclosure, first reported by CNN, underscores tactical limitations against Iran's fortified sites. While B-2 stealth bombers dropped 14 bunker-busters on the shallower Fordow and Natanz facilities, Isfahan's geology demanded alternative tactics. CIA Director John Ratcliffe noted that most of Iran's nuclear material remains concentrated at Isfahan and Fordow, amplifying strategic concerns about untouched uranium reserves. The decision highlights a stark gap between military capabilities and presidential rhetoric. Despite President Trump's claims that strikes "obliterated" Iran's nuclear program, an early Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) assessment concluded core facilities survived, setting back enrichment only "by months." Satellite imagery analyzed by weapons expert Jeffrey Lewis showed vehicles near Isfahan's tunnels days before the strike, with entrances reopened by June 27, suggesting uranium may have been moved. Technical analyses further indicate bunker-busters would have failed: Fordow's 90-meter depth exceeds the MOP's 25-meter penetration in medium-strength rock. At Isfahan, even 30,000-pound bombs couldn't reach chambers housing centrifuges. "Annihilated is too strong," conceded IAEA chief Rafael Grossi, though he acknowledged "enormous damage" to above-ground infrastructure. Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy told CNN on Thursday night, after receiving the briefing, that some of Iran's facilities 'are so far underground that we can never reach them. So they have the ability to move a lot of what has been saved into areas where there's no American bombing capacity that can reach it.' Republican lawmakers emerged from briefings acknowledging uranium stocks likely endure but defended the mission's scope. 'There is enriched uranium in the facilities that moves around, but that was not the intent or the mission,' Republican Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas was quoted as telling CNN. 'My understanding is most of it's still there. So we need a full accounting. That's why Iran has to come to the table directly with us, so the (International Atomic Energy Agency) can account for every ounce of enriched uranium that's there. I don't think it's going out of the country, I think it's at the facilities,' McCaul continued. However, White House assertions clash with intelligence: Trump insisted "nothing was moved" pre-strike, despite DIA evidence of relocations and Israel's assessment of a "significant hit" (not total destruction).
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
What's in the latest version of Trump's big bill now before US Senate
At some 940-pages, the legislation is a sprawling collection of tax breaks, spending cuts and other Republican priorities, including new money for national defense and deportations. Now it's up to Congress to decide whether President Donald Trump's signature's domestic policy package will become law. US Senators were working through the weekend to pass the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' and send it back to the House for a final vote. (Getty Images via AFP) Trump told Republicans, who hold majority power in the House and Senate, to skip their holiday vacations and deliver the bill by the Fourth of July. Senators were working through the weekend to pass the bill and send it back to the House for a final vote. Democrats are united against it. Here's the latest on what's in the bill. There could be changes as lawmakers negotiate. Tax cuts are the priority Republicans say the bill is crucial because there would be a massive tax increase after December when tax breaks from Trump's first term expire. The legislation contains roughly $3.8 trillion in tax cuts. The existing tax rates and brackets would become permanent under the bill. It temporarily would add new tax breaks that Trump campaigned on: no taxes on tips, overtime pay or some automotive loans, along with a bigger $6,000 deduction in the Senate draft for older adults who earn no more than $75,000 a year. It would boost the $2,000 child tax credit to $2,200 under the Senate proposal. Families at lower income levels would not see the full amount. A cap on state and local deductions, called SALT, would quadruple to $40,000 for five years. It's a provision important to New York and other high tax states, though the House wanted it to last for 10 years. There are scores of business-related tax cuts. The wealthiest households would see a $12,000 increase from the legislation, which would cost the poorest people $1,600 a year, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office analysis of the House's version. Middle-income taxpayers would see a tax break of $500 to $1,500, the CBO said. Money for deportations, a border wall and the Golden Dome The bill would provide some $350 billion for Trump's border and national security agenda, including $46 billion for the U.S.-Mexico border wall and $45 billion for 100,000 migrant detention facility beds, as he aims to fulfill his promise of the largest mass deportation operation in U.S. history. Money would go for hiring 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, with $10,000 signing bonuses and a surge of Border Patrol officers, as well. The goal is to deport some 1 million people per year. The homeland security secretary would have a new $10 billion fund for grants for states that help with federal immigration enforcement and deportation actions. The attorney general would have $3.5 billion for a similar fund, known as Bridging Immigration-related Deficits Experienced Nationwide, or BIDEN, referring to former Democratic President Joe Biden. To help pay for it all, immigrants would face various new fees, including when seeking asylum protections. For the Pentagon, the bill would provide billions for ship building, munitions systems, and quality of life measures for servicemen and women, as well as $25 billion for the development of the Golden Dome missile defense system. The Defense Department would have $1 billion for border security. How to pay for it? Cuts to Medicaid and other programs To help partly offset the lost tax revenue and new spending, Republicans aim to cut back some long-running government programs: Medicaid, food stamps, green energy incentives and others. It's essentially unraveling the accomplishments of the past two Democratic presidents, Biden and Barack Obama. Republicans argue they are trying to rightsize the safety net programs for the population they were initially designed to serve, mainly pregnant women, the disabled and children, and root out what they describe as waste, fraud and abuse. The package includes new 80-hour-a-month work requirements for many adults receiving Medicaid and food stamps, including older people up to age 65. Parents of children 14 and older would have to meet the program's work requirements. There's also a proposed new $35 co-payment that can be charged to patients using Medicaid services. Some 80 million people rely on Medicaid, which expanded under Obama's Affordable Care Act, and 40 million use the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program. Most already work, according to analysts. All told, the CBO estimates that under the House-passed bill, at least 10.9 million more people would go without health coverage and 3 million more would not qualify for food stamps. The Senate proposes a $25 billion Rural Hospital Transformation Program to help offset reduced Medicaid dollars. It's a new addition, intended to win over holdout GOP senators and a coalition of House Republicans warning that the proposed Medicaid provider tax cuts would hurt rural hospitals. Both the House and Senate bills propose a dramatic rollback of the Biden-era green energy tax breaks for electric vehicles. They also would phase out or terminate the various production and investment tax credits companies use to stand up wind, solar and other renewable energy projects. In total, cuts to Medicaid, food stamps and green energy programs would be expected to produce at least $1.5 trillion in savings. Trump savings accounts and so, so much more A number of extra provisions reflect other GOP priorities. The House and Senate both have a new children's savings program, called Trump Accounts, with a potential $1,000 deposit from the Treasury. The Senate provided $40 million to establish Trump's long-sought 'National Garden of American Heroes.' There's a new excise tax on university endowments. A $200 tax on gun silencers and short-barreled rifles and shotguns was eliminated. One provision bars money to family planning providers, namely Planned Parenthood, while $88 million is earmarked for a pandemic response accountability committee. Another section expands the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, a hard-fought provision from Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, for those impacted by nuclear development and testing. Billions would go for the Artemis moon mission and for exploration to Mars. The bill would deter states from regulating artificial intelligence by linking certain federal AI infrastructure money to maintaining a freeze. Seventeen Republican governors asked GOP leaders to drop the provision. Also, the interior secretary would be directed to sell certain Bureau of Land Management acreage to provide for housing, but senators said that measure could be stripped out during the amendment process. Additionally, a provision would increase the nation's debt limit, by $5 trillion, to allow continued borrowing to pay already accrued bills. What's the final cost? Altogether, keeping the existing tax breaks and adding the new ones is expected to cost $3.8 trillion over the decade, the CBO says in its analysis of the House bill. An analysis of the Senate draft is pending. The CBO estimates the House-passed package would add $2.4 trillion to the nation's deficits over the decade. Or not, depending on how one does the math. Senate Republicans are proposing a unique strategy of not counting the existing tax breaks as a new cost because those breaks are already 'current policy.' Senators say the Senate Budget Committee chairman has the authority to set the baseline for the preferred approach. Under the Senate GOP view, the tax provisions cost $441 billion, according to the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. Democrats and others say this is 'magic math' that obscures the true costs of the GOP tax breaks. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget puts the Senate tally at $4.2 trillion over the decade.
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
Debate heats up, but apex court always upheld Preamble amendment
THE political debate on the Emergency-era inclusion of the expressions 'secular' and 'socialist' to the Preamble of the Constitution is once again heating up, but court rulings and parliamentary debates in the past have always upheld the 42nd Constitutional amendment. Over the past few days itself, several key leaders — from Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar, RSS leader Dattatreya Hosabale to Union ministers Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Jitendra Singh — have questioned the Emergency-era amendment of the Preamble. In 1976, the Preamble was amended by the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act to add the expressions. The chapter on Fundamental Duties was also introduced in the same amendment. In 2019, the Narendra Modi-led NDA government launched the Citizens' Duties Awareness Programme aimed at increasing awareness of the Constitution with a focus on Fundamental Duties The Janata Party-led government that came to power in 1977 reversed several Emergency-era constitutional amendments with the 44th Constitutional amendment in 1978, thereby restoring civil liberties, reinstating judicial review powers, and protecting press freedom. It, however, retained the changes to the Preamble and inclusion of fundamental duties. Just six months ago, in November 2024, a two-judge bench led by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna dismissed writ petitions challenging the amendment. The bench said that the 'terms have achieved widespread acceptance, with their meanings understood by 'We, the people of India' without any semblance of doubt.' 'The additions to the Preamble have not restricted or impeded legislation or policies pursued by elected governments, provided such actions did not infringe upon fundamental and constitutional rights or the basic structure of the Constitution. Therefore, we do not find any legitimate cause or justification for challenging this constitutional amendment after nearly 44 years,' the ruling said. Even before the 42nd amendment introduced 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble, a 13-judge bench in the landmark 1973 Kesavananda Bharati ruling held that secularism is a basic feature of the Constitution that cannot be done away with. 'The secular character of the state, according to which the state shall not discriminate against any citizen on the ground of religion only, cannot likewise be done away with,' the ruling states. In another landmark ruling in 1980, Minerva Mills v Union of India, which also debated more constitutional amendments made during the Emergency, the Court recognised 'socialism' was a constitutional ideal for the framers. It cited Part IV of the Constitution, which deals with Directive Principles of State Policy, a non-enforceable policy outline for the state that has several socialist ideas. 'We resolved to constitute ourselves into a Socialist State which carried with it the obligation to secure to our people justice —social, economic and political. We, therefore, put part IV into our Constitution containing directive principles of State policy which specify the socialistic goal to be achieved,' the ruling said. Apurva Vishwanath is the National Legal Editor of The Indian Express in New Delhi. She graduated with a B.A., LL. B (Hons) from Dr Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow. She joined the newspaper in 2019 and in her current role, oversees the newspapers coverage of legal issues. She also closely tracks judicial appointments. Prior to her role at the Indian Express, she has worked with ThePrint and Mint. ... Read More
