The Senate Version of Trump's Massive Tax Bill Is Even More Costly Than The House's
Senate Republicans' version of President Donald Trump's expansive tax bill is poised to add even more to the debt than the one proposed by their House counterparts, according to an estimate from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
The Senate bill, which could still change, would add approximately $3.3 trillion to the debt over the next ten years, the CBO announced in an analysis released on Sunday. That surpasses the $2.4 trillion the House version was estimated to add to the debt in the same timeframe.
A significant reason for this discrepancy is the approach to certain tax cuts in the Senate legislation compared to those in the House's. The Senate bill, like the House version, is also set to slash funding for social programs, including Medicaid and SNAP. The CBO finds that it would leave 11.8 million people uninsured if it were to go into effect, compared to the House bill, which would leave 10.9 million people uninsured.
In both measures, Republicans are attempting to pay for sizable tax cuts, including breaks for corporations, by reducing spending on key social programs.
Sunday's CBO estimate is likely to exacerbate Republican divide over the cost of the legislation, which has been a sore spot for fiscal hawks like Sens. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who have expressed concerns about the amount it would bloat deficits.
'I've been trying to interject reality. I've been trying to interject facts and figures. They're on my side,' Johnson previously said while the House was weighing the bill.
Despite this opposition, however, the Senate narrowly voted to begin debate on the bill on Saturday evening, with just two Republicans—Paul and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)—voting against doing so. Senators will spend the coming evening debating and then voting on amendments, with a final vote on the measure to come after potential tweaks.
Any amended version of the legislation will also have to pass the House again, where vocal critics of its cost, like Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), have already voiced their concerns.
The White House has long sought to downplay the effects the legislation is expected to have on the national debt, claiming that it wouldn't balloon deficits even though repeated CBO analyses have suggested otherwise.
Senate To Hold Marathon Session Of Votes On Trump's Massive Tax Bill
5 Big Changes Senators Made To Trump's Massive Tax Bill
Senate Advances Trump's Massive Tax Bill After Key Holdouts Flip To Yes
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
13 minutes ago
- CNN
Senate kicks off marathon voting session on Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'
The Senate has kicked off its marathon voting session on President Donald Trump's sweeping domestic policy bill after a weekend of negotiations and delays. As Senate Majority Leader John Thune went to the floor Monday morning, he told reporters that 'hopefully we'll know soon enough' if Republicans' have the votes to pass the bill. 'This may take a little while,' he noted. The vote-a-rama – an open-ended, hourslong series of votes on amendments, some political, some substantive – provides an opportunity for Republicans to make any eleventh-hour adjustments to the package and Democrats to push on GOP weak points in the bill and put their colleagues on the spot. Those politically tough votes are likely to provide fodder for campaign ads down the line. Trump's multitrillion-dollar bill would lower federal taxes and infuse more money into the Pentagon and border security agencies, while downsizing government safety-net programs including Medicaid. Democrats are expected to zero in on Medicaid and other safety-net programs as they message against the president's agenda. Monday's exercise in stamina comes after Senate Democrats employed a major delay tactic over the weekend that forced clerks to spend more than a dozen hours reading aloud the entire bill. Senators then debated the bill into the early hours Monday before adjourning and returning to the chamber at 9 a.m. ET to begin offering amendments. Lawmakers are up against an extremely tight timeline to pass the legislation. The president has demanded Congress deliver the bill to his desk by the Fourth of July, but the measure must still go back to the House if it passes the Senate. A number of Republicans are closely watching any changes made to Medicaid provisions in the bill. The Senate version of the megabill would leave 11.8 million more people without health insurance in 2034, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis released over the weekend. That's more than the 10.9 million more people projected to be left uninsured by the House-passed version of the bill. Both chambers are calling for historic spending cuts to Medicaid, which provides coverage to more than 71 million low-income Americans, including children, senior citizens, people with disabilities and other adults. The package would also enact changes to the Affordable Care Act that are projected to reduce enrollment in the landmark health reform law that Trump and Republicans have long sought to dismantle. But the Senate version calls for even deeper cuts to the Medicaid, leading to the larger estimate. It would slash federal support for Medicaid by $930 billion over a decade, Sen. Ron Wyden, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said over the weekend, citing a CBO estimate. The House version is projected to reduce federal spending on the program by about $800 billion, according to the CBO. Both chambers would require certain able-bodied adults ages 19-64 to work to maintain their Medicaid benefits for the first time in the program's 60-year history. But the Senate version would impose the work requirement on parents of children ages 14 and older, while the House version would exempt parents of dependent children. The Senate version would also lower the cap on the taxes that states levy on health care providers to help fund the program and increase reimbursement rates for providers. However, that provision would apply only to the 40 states and the District of Columbia that have expanded Medicaid to low-income adults. The House bill would put a moratorium on the states' existing provider taxes. The first vote taken by senators Monday dealt with a procedural argument over the so-called current policy baseline and how to calculate the costs of the bill. While it may seem dry, Republicans' use of current policy baseline in their calculations will set a precedent allowing both parties to be much more generous when calculating costs of tax bills going forward. Trump and some GOP leaders, including Senate Finance Chairman Mike Crapo, pushed the alternative 'current policy baseline' scoring method, which seemingly greatly minimizes the deficit impact of the bill because it would not include the cost of extending the expiring 2017 tax provisions. The CBO, however, calculated the cost of the bill using its traditional scoring method, known as 'current law baseline,' which assumed the expiring provisions of the 2017 Trump tax cuts lapse as scheduled at the end of the year. It projected the Senate's bill would also cost far more than the House-approved bill, adding nearly $3.3 trillion to the deficit over a decade. The Senate version is costlier in large part because it contains bigger tax cuts, while shrinking some of the spending cuts and revenue raisers, said Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a watchdog group. For instance, the Senate bill would make permanent three corporate tax breaks that were part of the 2017 law and would lessen the cuts to the food stamp program. 'They expand the giveaways and shrink the takeaways,' Goldwein told CNN. Using the current policy baseline, the Senate version would cost roughly $508 billion over the next decade, according to a separate CBO estimate released Saturday night.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bond yields and U.S. dollar to continue moving lower: JPM
-- Bond yields and the U.S. dollar are likely to continue their downward trajectory as markets increasingly price in interest rate cuts by the Federal Reserve, according to JPMorgan analysts. In their latest equity strategy note, the bank said investor attention has shifted toward the timing and implications of expected monetary easing in the second half of 2025. 'Judging from the incoming queries, investors are refocusing on the timing and the likely impact of the potential Fed cuts in 2H,' JPMorgan wrote. The bank explains that the Fed futures market now reflects more than 64 basis points of cuts, roughly two full rate reductions, by year-end, with September and December as the likely windows. The note added, 'The pricing in of cuts has accelerated in the past couple of weeks, during which an extra 18bp of easing was added.' JPMorgan sees the most constructive scenario for markets as one where the Fed cuts rates amid 'resilient growth [and] subdued inflation,' calling it a 'Goldilocks' environment. In this case, they added, 'USD might be unexciting.' However, the bank's base case is a mix of two less favorable outcomes: economic slowdown coupled with inflation pressure driven by tariffs. In such a scenario, 'bond yields are likely to keep moving lower,' and 'our call is to stay bearish USD.' JPMorgan believes this setup should favor emerging market equities, reiterating its overweight stance. It also noted that sectors such as Utilities, Staples, Healthcare, and IT tend to outperform during easing cycles, while Financials typically lag. The firm continues to advise caution in Europe, maintaining a more defensive regional allocation strategy. Related articles Bond yields and U.S. dollar to continue moving lower: JPM Should you buy or sell the U.S. dollar over a three-to-six month period? Asia FX slides as Israel attacks Iran, dollar jumps on safe-haven demand 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
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
TJX's Q1 EPS Down Slightly: Is FY26 Profit Target Still in Reach?
The TJX Companies, Inc. TJX is leaning on disciplined execution after reporting a modest 1-cent year-over-year decline in first-quarter fiscal 2026 earnings to 92 cents, but ahead of internal expectations. Despite the minor decline, the company maintained its full-year fiscal 2026 EPS guidance of $4.34 to $4.43, implying 2-4% growth over the prior year's $4.26. The central question: Can TJX bridge the year-over-year gap and still hit its profit target?The fiscal first quarter EPS softness stemmed from a 50-basis-point (bps) gross margin contraction, caused by unfavorable inventory hedge adjustments. Additionally, SG&A expenses rose 20 bps, impacted by higher wage and payroll costs. Interest income also weighed slightly, trimming 20 bps from pre-tax margin due to lower cash balances and interest maintains that much of the margin pressure is front-loaded. Mitigation efforts, including expense controls, productivity initiatives and sourcing flexibility, are expected to gain traction in the second half. Moreover, some unfavorable hedging impacts are forecasted to reverse in future quarters as inventory is recognized at previously locked-in exchange the first quarter's year-over-year EPS decline indicates some near-term pressures, TJX's decision to maintain its full-year guidance indicates management's expectation of a recovery through the year. The outcome will depend on the effectiveness of planned mitigation efforts and the broader operating environment. If those factors evolve unfavorably, achieving the fiscal 2026 EPS target may prove more challenging. While The TJX Companies reported a modest EPS decline, Burlington Stores BURL relied on cost discipline and operational planning to deliver earnings growth in the face of external pressures. In the first quarter of fiscal 2025, the company reported adjusted EPS of $1.67, an 18% increase over the prior year, even as comparable store sales remained flat. Management pointed to favorable timing of merchandise receipts between the fiscal first and second quarters, as well as early cost-saving initiatives, as key contributors to the performance. Despite rising supply-chain and asset-protection costs, Burlington Stores maintained its full-year adjusted earnings guidance of $8.70 to $ General DG focused on inventory control and margin improvement to support earnings growth amid cost headwinds. In the first quarter of fiscal 2025, the company reported EPS of $1.78, a 7.9% increase over the prior year. Lower shrink and stronger inventory markups contributed to gross margin expansion, while operational challenges persisted on the expense side. Dollar General did flag higher SG&A, including incentive compensation, as a headwind for the fiscal second quarter. Still, Dollar General raised the lower end of its full-year EPS guidance to a range of $5.20 to $5.80, despite tariff-related uncertainties. Shares of The TJX Companies have lost 3.9% in the past month compared with the industry's decline of 4.5%. Image Source: Zacks Investment Research From a valuation standpoint, TJX trades at a forward price-to-earnings ratio of 26.52X, down from the industry's average of 32.3X. Image Source: Zacks Investment Research The Zacks Consensus Estimate for The TJX Companies' current fiscal-year sales and earnings per share implies year-over-year growth of 4.4% and 4.7%, respectively. Image Source: Zacks Investment Research TJX currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today's Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report The TJX Companies, Inc. (TJX) : Free Stock Analysis Report Dollar General Corporation (DG) : Free Stock Analysis Report Burlington Stores, Inc. (BURL) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research 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
