
The stealth Senate dealmaker who could deliver Trump's tax cuts
Some of the most critical components of President Donald Trump's agenda are in the hands of a soft-spoken senator from Idaho who behind closed doors is one of Capitol Hill's most calculating dealmakers.
Senate Finance Chair Mike Crapo is rushing to finalize his panel's portion of his party's massive legislative centerpiece. He could begin briefing colleagues on bill text as soon as Monday, according to a person granted anonymity to share an evolving schedule —while three people aware of the state of negotiations say a full tax package may not be ready for release until early next week.
That package needs to unite 51 Republicans in the Senate without alienating more than three GOP members of the House. The fate of vast Republican tax cuts enacted in 2017, and set to expire at the end of this year, hangs in the balance.
In interviews throughout the past several weeks in the halls of the Senate, as he shuffled between meetings and votes flanked by trusted advisers, Crapo played his cards close to his vest.
Asked about how he planned to make sure a trio of expiring business tax cuts are made permanent, he replied, 'I'm just not going to comment.'
On whether the Senate would make tweaks to controversial House Medicaid language: 'We're working that right now. I'm not going to get into the details.'
On how negotiations were going over whether to lower the House agreement to increase the cap on the state-and-local-tax deduction to $40,000: 'We're looking at the entire bill.'
Crapo is known for his spare words, but also for his history of landing deals — and squashing ones he doesn't like, such as last year when he tanked a bipartisan tax bill negotiated by then-Finance Chair Ron Wyden and the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, Jason Smith. At the same time, longtime colleagues and aides say Crapo can sometimes play the role of committee consensus-builder to his detriment — and he may have to put that tendency aside as the clock ticks down to the GOP's self-imposed July 4 deadline to send Trump his 'big, beautiful bill.'
The question is now whether Crapo can help broker an agreement at this political moment when he has never presided over a policy battle with such high stakes.
'Mike Crapo is probably one of the three most well-respected members of the Republican caucus. People trust him. He listens. He tells you the truth. He tries to be inclusive, sometimes to a fault,' said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) in an interview. 'He's quiet. He's really, really smart.'
People who have worked closely with Crapo say he likes to slowly build agreement among his committee members, has seemingly infinite patience to work out issues and most likely won't take a position with Senate leadership until he feels like all of his fellow panel Republicans are on board.
'Crapo is a very thoughtful and deliberate lawmaker who has strong views on tax policy himself, but also who cares about what his committee members want,' said Joe Boddicker, a former tax counsel for Senate Finance Republicans under Crapo, now of the law firm Alston & Bird. 'He will try to incorporate the feedback from them, and he puts a high premium on that feedback … so it'll be a group product, one that reflects the viewpoints of the committee membership.'
He has previously walked political tightropes to pull off difficult legislative wins. Among the most notable was in 2018, when, as chair of the Senate Banking Committee, Crapo crafted a rare bipartisan deal with red-state Democrats to loosen Dodd-Frank regulations on banks — the most significant overhaul of the rules since they were first created after the 2008 financial crisis.
'[He] puts the time in on it. He's low-key, but he is a connector, a facilitator,' said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), who worked closely with Crapo on the banking overhaul. 'He doesn't need the spotlight, but he is very, very effective.'
But Crapo is getting an earful from his members right now about what the tax portion of the GOP megabill should look like. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) wants to make the 'no tax on tips' proposal — a Trump campaign promise — more fair for blue-collar workers in certain industries. Meanwhile, Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) wants to scale back a tier of new endowment taxes on private universities, a favorite proposal from House Ways and Means Republicans.
Crapo is fielding a host of concerns from an ideologically diverse group of Senate Republicans, from moderate Susan Collins of Maine to conservative Josh Hawley of Missouri, who say they won't vote for a bill that could result in people losing Medicaid coverage.
And then there's Sen. Ron Johnson, a Finance member who has warned he could vote against the megabill if Republicans don't commit to massive reductions in spending.
At the same time, Crapo has shown in the past he's not afraid to stand up for his own interests. He surprised his House counterparts last year when he quietly killed the bipartisan tax deal crafted by Smith and Wyden. He opposed many of the policies, including an expansion of the Child Tax Credit. But while he didn't know then how the 2024 elections would shake out, stymying that deal also left the door open for the scenario in which Crapo now finds himself: able to run point on a more sweeping, and wholly partisan, tax overhaul exercise under a GOP governing trifecta.
The fallout, however, also soured the relationship between Crapo and Smith. Yet the two men have found a new way to work closely together over the last few months to deliver Trump's biggest legislative priorities through the filibuster-skirting budget reconciliation process.
'I think part of the problem is that Wyden and Smith got together and Crapo didn't feel like he was a full partner,' said Finance Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas regarding the prior episode.
Cornyn added that the current political conditions have necessitated an accord between the two lawmakers.
They'll have to work together. Their two committees differ on the questions of business tax permanence — which would cost around half a trillion dollars to implement — and how high to cap the SALT deduction — which all Finance Republics want lowered. And there's continued disagreement over using an accounting tactic to essentially paper over around $3.8 trillion of extensions of Trump's tax cuts.
Smith says he's in favor of the maneuver, but House hard-liners are extremely skeptical of the idea. Senate Republicans, including Crapo, want to keep it in place.
'We've been communicating very closely so we each know what the other is thinking,' 74-year-old Crapo, who has served in the Senate for more than three decades, said in an interview of his working relationship now with 44-year-old Smith, who was elected to the House in 2013 and has a reputation for being more outwardly pugnacious.
'We each know what the other's politics are in their caucus,' Crapo continued, 'and we're trying to keep ourselves in a situation where there are as few differences as possible.'
A spokesperson for Smith did not respond to a request for comment about the House member's rapport with the senator.
The partnership will come in handy as Crapo faces enormous pressure from other members of House GOP leadership, who are urging the Senate not to make so many changes to the House-passed bill that it will slow down the bill's final passage — if not derail the effort altogether.
'Mike Crapo is a brilliant senator and he's instrumental on the tax stuff and everything else. You got to respect his opinion. But at the end of the day, I hope they leave it right where it's at,' said House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) in an interview last week.
Crapo, meanwhile, has expressed quiet confidence he will deliver a viable product — even as he deals with the competing demands of House leaders like Emmer, his fellow Finance Republicans and even the Senate parliamentarian, whose rulings could complicate his efforts.
Asked recently about an anticipated parliamentary ruling on the accounting tactic, he managed to sum up his whole approach: 'I never declare victory until the game is over.'
Jordain Carney and Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.
Hashtags

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


Newsweek
37 minutes ago
- Newsweek
2024 Election Results Under Scrutiny as Lawsuit Advances
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A legal case questioning the accuracy of the 2024 election is moving forward. The lawsuit, brought by SMART Legislation, the action arm of SMART Elections, a nonpartisan watchdog group, filed the lawsuit over voting discrepancies in Rockland County, New York. Judge Rachel Tanguay of the New York Supreme Court ruled in open court in May that the allegations were serious enough for discovery to proceed. Newsweek has contacted SMART Elections for comment via email. People cast their ballots on the last day of early voting for the general election in Michigan at the Livingston Educational Service Agency in Howell on November 3, 2024. People cast their ballots on the last day of early voting for the general election in Michigan at the Livingston Educational Service Agency in Howell on November 3, 2024. Jeff Kowalsky/AFP via Getty Images Why It Matters The lawsuit could renew debate about the 2024 election, though it won't change the outcome since Congress has certified the results declaring President Donald Trump the winner. It comes amid unconfirmed reports that voting machines were secretly altered before ballots were cast in November's election. The federally accredited testing lab, Pro V&V, that signed off on "significant" changes to ES&S voting machines—which are used in over 40 percent of U.S. counties—"vanished from public view" after the election, according to the Dissent in Bloom Substack. What To Know According to the complaint, more voters have sworn in legal affidavits that they voted for independent U.S. Senate candidate Diane Sare than the Rockland County Board of Elections counted and certified, contradicting those results. The complaint also cited numerous statistical anomalies in the presidential election results. They include multiple districts where hundreds of voters chose the Democratic candidate Kirsten Gillibrand for Senate, but none voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic candidate for president. Max Bonamente, a professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and the author of the Statistics and Analysis of Scientific Data, said in a paper that the 2024 presidential election results were statistically highly unlikely in four of the five towns in Rockland County when compared with 2020 results. What People Are Saying Lulu Friesdat, the founder and executive director of SMART Legislation, said in a statement: "There is clear evidence that the Senate results are incorrect, and there are statistical indications that the presidential results are highly unlikely. "If the results are incorrect, it is a violation of the constitutional rights of each person who voted in the 2024 Rockland County general election. The best way to determine if the results are correct is to examine the paper ballots in a full public, transparent hand recount of all presidential and Senate ballots in Rockland County. We believe it's vitally important, especially in the current environment, to be absolutely confident about the results of the election." Max Bonamente said in a paper on the voting data from Rockland County: "These data would require extreme sociological or political causes for their explanation, and would benefit from further assurances as to their fidelity." Costas Panagopoulos, a professor of political science at Northeastern University, told Newsweek: "Statistical irregularities in elections should always be investigated, but the sources of such inconsistencies, which can include error or miscalculation, are not always nefarious. Still, scrutinizing election results can strengthen confidence in elections. Mistakes can happen. "In this case, the drop-off inconsistencies could reflect the idiosyncratic nature of the 2024 presidential election cycle. Alone, statistical comparisons to previous cycles cannot provide definitive proof of wrongdoing. "In any case, it does not appear that any of these inconsistencies would be sufficient to change the outcomes of any of the elections in question in New York state. That does not mean they should not be scrutinized, and any errors, if verified, should be corrected for the historical record. But there is not necessarily any need to invalidate any of these elections in these jurisdictions." What's Next The lawsuit is seeking a full, hand recount of ballots cast in the presidential and U.S. Senate races in Rockland County. A hearing has been scheduled for September 22.

USA Today
43 minutes ago
- USA Today
Congress introduces bill addressing national guidelines for college sports
Congress introduces bill addressing national guidelines for college sports With the settlement of three athlete-compensation antitrust cases against the NCAA and the Power Five conferences having received final approval from a federal district judge on June 6, members of the U.S. House of Representatives have moved into action with new legislative proposals regarding national rules for college sports. On Wednesday, June 10, Reps. Lisa McClain, R-Mich., and Janelle Bynum, D-Ore., introduced a bill that comes shortly after Reps. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., and Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., circulated a discussion draft of a bill that would largely put into federal law the terms and new rules-making structure of the settlement. The discussion draft is set to be the centerpiece of a hearing June 11 by a subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Bilirakis, who has been involved in previous college-sports bill efforts, chairs the subcommittee. Guthrie chairs the full committee. The bill – in addition to being a bi-partisan presentation – continues recent work related to college sports from McClain, who is the current House Republican Conference chair. That makes her the GOP's No. 4-ranking member in the House. In April, McClain introduced a bill that would prevent college athletes from being employees of their schools, conferences or an athletic association. The discussion draft – as posted on Congress' general resource site, - includes language that specifically would allow the NCAA, and potentially the new Collegiate Sports Commission, to make rules in areas that have come into legal dispute in recent years and in areas that the NCAA wants to shield from legal dispute. The discussion draft, first reported on by The Washington Post, also includes language that would require most Division I schools to provide a series of benefits for athletes that are currently called for under NCAA and some conferences' rules but do not have the force of federal law. In addition, the discussion draft includes a 'placeholder' section for language that likely would be connected to providing antitrust or other legal protection for various provisions. According the discussion draft, an 'interstate collegiate athletic association' would be able to 'establish and enforce rules relating to … the manner in which … student athletes may be recruited' to play sports; 'the transfer of a student athlete between institutions'; and 'the number of seasons or length of time for which a student athlete is eligible to compete, academic standards, and code of conduct'. The NCAA's rules regarding when recruits can be offered money in exchange for the use of their name, image and likeness; athletes' ability to freely transfer; and the number of seasons in which they are eligible to compete all of have been – or currently are being – addressed in federal and state courts across the country. That has raised concerns for NCAA officials about the future of rules such as those concerning academic eligibility requirements The discussion draft also includes language that would require most Division I schools to provide a series of benefits for athletes that are currently called for under NCAA and some conferences' rules but do not have the force of law. These include medical coverage for athletically related injuries for at least two years after the conclusion of an athlete's career; guaranteed financial aid that would allow an athlete to complete an undergraduate degree; and 'an administrative structure that provides independent medical care and affirms the unchallengeable autonomous authority of primary athletics health care providers (team physicians and athletic trainers) to determine medical management and return-to-play decisions related to student athletes.'


CNBC
43 minutes ago
- CNBC
Trump's 'big beautiful' spending bill could make it harder to claim this low-income tax credit
As Senate Republicans debate President Donald Trump's "big beautiful bill", a lesser-known provision from the House-approved package could make it harder to claim a low-income tax credit. If enacted as written, the House measure in the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" would require precertification of each qualifying child for filers claiming the so-called earned income tax credit, or EITC, starting in 2028. Under current law, taxpayers claim the EITC on their tax return — including Schedule EIC for qualifying children. The provision aims to "avoid duplicative and other erroneous claims," according to the bill's text. But policy experts say the new rules would burden eligible filers, who may forgo the EITC as a result. The measure could also delay tax refunds for those filers, particularly amid IRS cutbacks, experts say. More from Personal Finance:Job market is 'trash' right now, career coach says — here's whyWhat a 'revenge tax' in Trump's spending bill could mean for investorsWhat Trump's plan to slash Pell Grant to lowest level in a decade means for you "You're going to flood the IRS with all these [EITC] documents," said Janet Holtzblatt, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. "It's just not clear how they're going to process all this information." Holtzblatt, who has pushed to simplify the EITC for decades, wrote a critique of the proposed precertification last week. "This is not a new idea, but was previously considered, studied and rejected for very good reasons," Greg Leiserson, a senior fellow at the Tax Law Center at New York University Law, wrote about the proposal in late May. Studies during the George W. Bush administration found an EITC precertification process reduced EITC claims for eligible filers, Leiserson wrote. During the study, precertification also yielded a lower return on investment compared to existing EITC enforcement, such as audits, he wrote. One of the key benefits of the EITC is the tax break is "refundable," meaning you can still claim the credit and get a refund with zero taxes owed. That's valuable for lower earners who don't have a tax bill, experts say. To qualify, you need "earned income," or wages from work. The income phase-outs depend on your "qualifying children," based on four IRS tests. "Eligibility is complicated," and residency requirements for qualifying children often cause errors, said Holtzblatt with the Tax Policy Center. For 2025, the tax break is worth up to $8,046 for eligible families. You can claim the maximum EITC with adjusted gross income up to $61,555 for single filers and $68,675 for married couples filing jointly. These phase-outs apply to families with three or more children. As of December 2024, about 23 million workers received the EITC for tax year 2022, according to the IRS. But 1 in 5 eligible taxpayers don't claim the tax break, the agency estimates. Nine Democratic Senators last week voiced concerns about the House-approved EITC changes in a letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. If enacted, the updates would "further complicate the EITC's existing challenges and make it more difficult to claim," the lawmakers wrote. Higher earners are more likely to face an audit, but EITC claimants have a 5.5 times higher audit rate than the rest of U.S. filers, partly due to improper payments, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center. The proposed EITC change, among other House provisions, still need Senate approval, and it's unclear how the measure could change. However, under the reconciliation process, Senate Republicans only need a simple majority to advance the bill.