Latest news with #MichaelLynn
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
How GOP bill's new tax rules for tips and overtime could impact you
The massive Republican-backed budget bill — called "one big, beautiful bill" by President Trump — includes several new tax rules that could have a big financial impact on millions of workers who earn tips or overtime pay. While the heart of the bill is an extension of Mr. Trump's 2017 tax cuts, the legislation also includes several provisions that were part of the president's campaign last year, such as his vow to eliminate taxes on tipped income. The bill could deliver savings of about $1,700 for each tipped worker as well as employees who earn overtime, the House Ways and Means Committee said on May 20. But there are some restrictions in the bill that could limit the financial boon for these workers, with some policy experts saying that the tax breaks may not be as useful as they first appear. For instance, almost 4 in 10 tipped workers earn so little that they pay no federal income tax, according to the Brookings Institution. Consequently, the tax break is likely to provide a bigger helping hand to higher-paid tipped workers, while leaving some low-income workers behind. "If your goal is to help the poorest service workers, this is probably not the way to do it," said Michael Lynn, a professor of services marketing at Cornell University whose research largely focuses on tipping and other consumer behavior. The 1,100-page bill, which squeaked through the House on Thursday by a single vote, will now go to the Senate, where more changes are likely. Here's what to know about the provisions as they now stand. How would the "No Tax on Tips" provision work? Called the "No Tax on Tips" provision within the House bill, the rule would create a new tax deduction that eliminates federal income taxes on tips for people who work in jobs that have traditionally received them. There are about 4 million people in the U.S. who work in tipped occupations, or about 2.5% of all U.S. workers, according to the Yale Budget Lab. The tax break includes some restrictions: Only those who earn less than $160,000 in 2025 would qualify. Only workers with Social Security numbers can qualify, and if they are married, their spouse must also have a Social Security must be reported to the employer and included on the worker's W-2 tax provision would go into effect in 2025, but expire after 2028, making it a short-term tax break. The deduction would only apply to certain jobs: The Trump administration must publish a list of occupations that qualify for the provision within 90 days of the bill's passage. "The tip exemption will significantly increase take-home pay for most tipped workers, many of whom are low- to middle-income taxpayers," the White House's Council of Economic Advisers (CEA), a group that advises the president on economic issues, said in a report published earlier this month. The CEA's report estimates that the average take-home pay for tipped workers would increase by $1,675 per year under the provision. Would it help all tipped workers? No, because 4 in 10 tipped workers earn too little to pay federal income taxes, which means they wouldn't see any benefit. There's also a concern that some employers could reclassify some workers as tipped workers by arguing they would receive a tax break, according to Brookings. The minimum wage for tipped workers is $2.13 per hour, versus $7.25 an hour for non-tipped workers. One Fair Wage, an advocacy group representing service workers, criticized the measure, noting that the GOP bill also includes cuts to social safety net programs that many tipped workers rely on. "It also slashes Medicaid, putting 1.2 million restaurant workers at risk of losing health care," One Fair Wage posted on social media. What about the Senate's No Tax on Tips Act? A separate, standalone bill called the No Tax on Tips Act, which is solely focused on giving a tax break to tipped workers, was passed by the Senate on May 20, with bipartisan support. That bill will now move to the House for a vote. The Senate bill offers similar benefits and restrictions as the "one big, beautiful bill" when it comes to taxes and tips, but with one major difference: The bigger GOP bill requires workers, as well as their spouses, to have a Social Security number. That requirement appears to be aimed at excluding some immigrants from tapping the tax break, while the Senate bill doesn't stipulate that taxpayers who claim this break, or their spouses, must have a Social Security number. Senator Jackie Rosen, a Democrat from Nevada, urged lawmakers to pass the Not Tax on Tips Act arguing in a statement that the bigger GOP bill combines the tax break with cuts to vital programs like Medicaid and food stamps. "We shouldn't be forcing working families to choose between keeping their health care or keeping their tips, which is why we want this bipartisan bill on its own — on its own — not part of a harmful, extreme budget bill," Rosen said on the Senate floor on Wednesday. How does the "No Tax on Overtime" provision work? The GOP bill includes a tax break for workers who receive overtime, another one of Mr. Trump's campaign promises. About 8% of hourly workers and 4% of salaried workers receive overtime pay on a regular basis, according to the Yale Budget Lab. About 70% of salaried workers don't qualify for overtime pay, it noted. The legislation would enable workers to claim a deduction on their taxes for the amount they earned in overtime pay during the tax year, although there are some restrictions: Workers would need a Social Security number to claim the tax break, and if married, their spouses would also need a Social Security tax break would go into effect in 2025 but expire after the 2028 tax year. But more guidelines about the provision would still need to be determined by the Treasury Department, according to tax firm Wolters Kluwer in a May 22 publication about the tax bill. The average overtime worker would see a tax cut between $1,400 to $1,750 per year through the new break, according to the Council of Economic Advisers. Here's how much Qatar's plane gifted to Trump administration will cost to retrofit Biggest takeaways from RFK Jr.'s MAHA report Trump signs new executive orders, comments on tariffs threats for EU, Apple
CBS News
23-05-2025
- Business
- CBS News
Do you get paid overtime or tips? Here's how the GOP tax bill could impact your money.
The massive Republican-backed budget bill — called "one big, beautiful bill" by President Trump — includes several new tax rules that could have a big financial impact on millions of workers who earn tips or overtime pay. While the heart of the bill is an extension of Mr. Trump's 2017 tax cuts, the legislation also includes several provisions that were part of the president's campaign last year, such as his vow to eliminate taxes on tipped income. The bill could deliver savings of about $1,700 for each tipped worker as well as employees who earn overtime, the House Ways and Means Committee said on May 20. But there are some restrictions in the bill that could limit the financial boon for these workers, with some policy experts saying that the tax breaks may not be as useful as they first appear. For instance, almost 4 in 10 tipped workers earn so little that they pay no federal income tax, according to the Brookings Institution. Consequently, the tax break is likely to provide a bigger helping hand to higher-paid tipped workers, while leaving some low-income workers behind. "If your goal is to help the poorest service workers, this is probably not the way to do it," said Michael Lynn, a professor of services marketing at Cornell University whose research largely focuses on tipping and other consumer behavior. The 1,100-page bill, which squeaked through the House on Thursday by a single vote, will now go to the Senate, where more changes are likely. Here's what to know about the provisions as they now stand. How would the "No Tax on Tips" provision work? Called the "No Tax on Tips" provision within the House bill, the rule would create a new tax deduction that eliminates federal income taxes on tips for people who work in jobs that have traditionally received them. There are about 4 million people in the U.S. who work in tipped occupations, or about 2.5% of all U.S. workers, according to the Yale Budget Lab. The tax break includes some restrictions: Only those who earn less than $160,000 in 2025 would qualify. Only workers with Social Security numbers can qualify, and if they are married, their spouse must also have a Social Security number. Tips must be reported to the employer and included on the worker's W-2 tax form. The provision would go into effect in 2025, but expire after 2028, making it a short-term tax break. The deduction would only apply to certain jobs: The Trump administration must publish a list of occupations that qualify for the provision within 90 days of the bill's passage. "The tip exemption will significantly increase take-home pay for most tipped workers, many of whom are low- to middle-income taxpayers," the White House's Council of Economic Advisers (CEA), a group that advises the president on economic issues, said in a report published earlier this month. The CEA's report estimates that the average take-home pay for tipped workers would increase by $1,675 per year under the provision. Would it help all tipped workers? No, because 4 in 10 tipped workers earn too little to pay federal income taxes, which means they wouldn't see any benefit. There's also a concern that some employers could reclassify some workers as tipped workers by arguing they would receive a tax break, according to Brookings. The minimum wage for tipped workers is $2.13 per hour, versus $7.25 an hour for non-tipped workers. One Fair Wage, an advocacy group representing service workers, criticized the measure, noting that the GOP bill also includes cuts to social safety net programs that many tipped workers rely on. "It also slashes Medicaid, putting 1.2 million restaurant workers at risk of losing health care," One Fair Wage posted on social media. What about the Senate's No Tax on Tips Act? A separate, standalone bill called the No Tax on Tips Act, which is solely focused on giving a tax break to tipped workers, was passed by the Senate on May 20, with bipartisan support. That bill will now move to the House for a vote. The Senate bill offers similar benefits and restrictions as the "one big, beautiful bill" when it comes to taxes and tips, but with one major difference: The bigger GOP bill requires workers, as well as their spouses, to have a Social Security number. That requirement appears to be aimed at excluding some immigrants from tapping the tax break, while the Senate bill doesn't stipulate that taxpayers who claim this break, or their spouses, must have a Social Security number. Senator Jackie Rosen, a Democrat from Nevada, urged lawmakers to pass the Not Tax on Tips Act arguing in a statement that the bigger GOP bill combines the tax break with cuts to vital programs like Medicaid and food stamps. "We shouldn't be forcing working families to choose between keeping their health care or keeping their tips, which is why we want this bipartisan bill on its own — on its own — not part of a harmful, extreme budget bill," Rosen said on the Senate floor on Wednesday. How does the "No Tax on Overtime" provision work? The GOP bill includes a tax break for workers who receive overtime, another one of Mr. Trump's campaign promises. About 8% of hourly workers and 4% of salaried workers receive overtime pay on a regular basis, according to the Yale Budget Lab. About 70% of salaried workers don't qualify for overtime pay, it noted. The legislation would enable workers to claim a deduction on their taxes for the amount they earned in overtime pay during the tax year, although there are some restrictions: Workers would need a Social Security number to claim the tax break, and if married, their spouses would also need a Social Security number. The tax break would go into effect in 2025 but expire after the 2028 tax year. But more guidelines about the provision would still need to be determined by the Treasury Department, according to tax firm Wolters Kluwer in a May 22 publication about the tax bill. The average overtime worker would see a tax cut between $1,400 to $1,750 per year through the new break, according to the Council of Economic Advisers. Aimee Picchi Aimee Picchi is the associate managing editor for CBS MoneyWatch, where she covers business and personal finance. She previously worked at Bloomberg News and has written for national news outlets including USA Today and Consumer Reports. contributed to this report.
Sunday World
14-05-2025
- Sunday World
Ex-solicitor Michael Lynn fails in appeal to cut five-and-a-half year sentence
'ARROGANCE' | Michael Lynn was jailed for obtaining multiple mortgages on the same properties in a situation where banks were unaware that other institutions were also providing finance. Former solicitor Michael Lynn. Photo: Colin Keegan In a lengthy judgement delivered at the Court of Appeal on Tuesday, Mr Justice John Edwards said the thefts were perpetrated 'cynically, knowingly and intentionally', and Lynn's culpability was aggravated by the breaches of trust involved in how he dealt with the banks. He noted Lynn had brought his profession 'into disrepute' and had effectively 'leveraged' his status as a solicitor to facilitate his crimes. He said Lynn had displayed 'arrogance' and 'hubris', traces of which were evident 'even to this day' in the way in which he had met this case and the suggestion that because the victims were institutions rather than individuals who may have been insured against theft and fraud, the harm done by him was somehow 'less significant'. He said the trial judge was correct to approach the sentencing on the basis that there was a 'high level of premeditation' on Lynn's part in respect of the offending. Former solicitor Michael Lynn. Photo: Colin Keegan News in 90 Seconds - May 14th The former solicitor had displayed 'limited insight' into the harm done and there was no finding of 'sincere remorse', Mr Justice Edwards said. Lynn was jailed for obtaining multiple mortgages on the same properties in a situation where banks were unaware that other institutions were also providing finance. These properties included 'Glenlion', Lynn's €5.5 million home in Howth, and multiple investment properties. He had to be extradited from Brazil in 2018 after spending years resisting attempts to have him face charges. As part of the extradition agreement with Brazil, Lynn was to be given credit for the prison time he had already served. Lynn (56), of Millbrook Court, Redcross, Co. Wicklow, pleaded not guilty to theft contrary to section 4 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud offences), but he was found guilty by a jury of ten of the 21 theft counts against him following a second Dublin Circuit Criminal Court trial after the jury in his first trial in 2022 failed to reach a verdict. The former solicitor was originally sentenced by Judge Martin Nolan to five and a half years in prison having been convicted of stealing €18.1 million from six financial institutions. Judge Nolan fixed the headline sentence at 16 years, before discounting three years for mitigation. He subtracted a further seven and a half years because of time spent by Lynn in a Brazilian prison while awaiting extradition, and also because of the conditions of the prison in Brazil. The judge also took into consideration 105 days Lynn spent in Cloverhill, with the sentence backdated to December 20, 2023. At the appeal hearing last November, Paul Comiskey O'Keefe BL, representing Lynn, argued that not enough weight was given to the mitigating factors in the case, including the recovery by financial institutions of certain losses and the asset disposal by the former solicitor for the repayment of losses. Read more He also suggested that insufficient weight was given to Lynn's PTSD from his time in a Brazilian prison, despite being acknowledged by the sentencing judge. Delivering judgment on behalf of the three-judge court yesterday, Mr Justice Edwards noted that 'regrettably', the single biggest potential mitigating factor – a plea of guilty – was absent in this case. He said that while the conditions Lynn faced while in prison in Brazil were 'harsh', the former solicitor was, to some extent, 'the author of his own misfortune' by consciously relocating to a country with which Ireland does not have an extradition treaty. 'It is an entirely reasonable inference on the evidence in this case that his relocation to Brazil was expressly for the purpose of avoiding an anticipated future request for his rendition to Ireland from Portugal,' he said. The judge said appropriate allowances were made for the time spent on remand while in prison in Brazil and rejected the contention that not enough weight had been given to the mitigating factors in the case. Mr Justice Edwards went on to say there was no error in the headline sentence set by the trial judge or in the overall global approach taken. However, the court found the sentence imposed had been 'inappropriately structured' in respect of how credit for time served on remand in an Irish prison was treated. The court therefore quashed the original sentence and reduced the amount of credit being given for time spent in custody in Ireland by three months, leaving a final sentence of five years and nine months in prison. He imposed the same five years and nine months on each of the ten counts, to run concurrently, dating from December 20, 2023. This will effectively leave Lynn's sentence unchanged if the prison authorities apply the full three months' credit for remission. During his trial, Lynn took the stand and claimed the banks were aware he had multiple loans on the same properties and that this was custom and practice among bankers in Celtic Tiger Ireland. He was extradited from Brazil in 2018 after spending four and a half years in a 'hellhole' prison there. In the first trial, Lynn told the jury the jail was essentially run by prisoners, and he witnessed the beheading of a young gay prisoner.
The Journal
13-05-2025
- The Journal
Disgraced ex-solicitor Michael Lynn fails to have five-and-a-half year sentence reduced on appeal
DISGRACED FORMER SOLICITOR Michael Lynn has failed to have his five-and-a-half-year sentence reduced on appeal for stealing more than €18 million from six financial institutions during the Celtic Tiger era. In a lengthy judgement delivered at the Court of Appeal today, Mr Justice John Edwards said the thefts were perpetrated 'cynically, knowingly and intentionally', and Lynn's culpability was aggravated by the breaches of trust involved in how he dealt with the banks. He noted Lynn had brought his profession 'into disrepute' and had effectively 'leveraged' his status as a solicitor to facilitate his crimes. He said Lynn had displayed 'arrogance' and 'hubris', traces of which were evident 'even to this day' in the way in which he had met this case and the suggestion that because the victims were institutions rather than individuals who may have been insured against theft and fraud, the harm done by him was somehow 'less significant'. He said the trial judge was correct to approach the sentencing on the basis that there was a 'high level of premeditation' on Lynn's part in respect of the offending. The former solicitor had displayed 'limited insight' into the harm done and there was no finding of 'sincere remorse', Mr Justice Edwards said. Lynn was jailed for obtaining multiple mortgages on the same properties in a situation where banks were unaware that other institutions were also providing finance. These properties included 'Glenlion', Lynn's €5.5 million home in Howth, and multiple investment properties. He had to be extradited from Brazil in 2018 after spending years resisting attempts to have him face charges. As part of the extradition agreement with Brazil, Lynn was to be given credit for the prison time he had already served. Lynn (56), of Millbrook Court, Redcross, Co. Wicklow, pleaded not guilty to theft contrary to section 4 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud offences), but he was found guilty by a jury of ten of the 21 theft counts against him following a second Dublin Circuit Criminal Court trial after the jury in his first trial in 2022 failed to reach a verdict. The former solicitor was originally sentenced by Judge Martin Nolan to five and a half years in prison having been convicted of stealing €18.1 million from six financial institutions. Judge Nolan fixed the headline sentence at 16 years, before discounting three years for mitigation. He subtracted a further seven and a half years because of time spent by Lynn in a Brazilian prison while awaiting extradition, and also because of the conditions of the prison in Brazil. The judge also took into consideration 105 days Lynn spent in Cloverhill, with the sentence backdated to 20 December 2023. Advertisement At the appeal hearing last November, Paul Comiskey O'Keefe BL, representing Lynn, argued that not enough weight was given to the mitigating factors in the case, including the recovery by financial institutions of certain losses and the asset disposal by the former solicitor for the repayment of losses. He also suggested that insufficient weight was given to Lynn's PTSD from his time in a Brazilian prison, despite being acknowledged by the sentencing judge. Delivering judgment on behalf of the three-judge court today, Mr Justice Edwards noted that 'regrettably', the single biggest potential mitigating factor – a plea of guilty – was absent in this case. He said that while the conditions Lynn faced while in prison in Brazil were 'harsh', the former solicitor was, to some extent, 'the author of his own misfortune' by consciously relocating to a country with which Ireland does not have an extradition treaty. 'It is an entirely reasonable inference on the evidence in this case that his relocation to Brazil was expressly for the purpose of avoiding an anticipated future request for his rendition to Ireland from Portugal,' he said. The judge said appropriate allowances were made for the time spent on remand while in prison in Brazil and rejected the contention that not enough weight had been given to the mitigating factors in the case. Mr Justice Edwards went on to say there was no error in the headline sentence set by the trial judge or in the overall global approach taken. However, the court found the sentence imposed had been 'inappropriately structured' in respect of how credit for time served on remand in an Irish prison was treated. The court therefore quashed the original sentence and reduced the amount of credit being given for time spent in custody in Ireland by three months, leaving a final sentence of five years and nine months in prison. He imposed the same five years and nine months on each of the ten counts, to run concurrently, dating from 20 December 2023. This will effectively leave Lynn's sentence unchanged if the prison authorities apply the full three months' credit for remission. During his trial, Lynn took the stand and claimed the banks were aware he had multiple loans on the same properties and that this was custom and practice among bankers in Celtic Tiger Ireland. He was extradited from Brazil in 2018 after spending four and a half years in a 'hellhole' prison there. In the first trial, Lynn told the jury the jail was essentially run by prisoners, and he witnessed the beheading of a young gay prisoner. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
Irish Times
13-05-2025
- Irish Times
Disgraced former solicitor Michael Lynn fails to have sentence for stealing over €18 million reduced on appeal
Disgraced former solicitor Michael Lynn has failed to have his five-and-a-half-year sentence for stealing more than €18 million from six financial institutions during the Celtic Tiger era reduced on appeal. In a lengthy judgement delivered at the Court of Appeal on Tuesday, Mr Justice John Edwards said the thefts were perpetrated 'cynically, knowingly and intentionally', and Lynn's culpability was aggravated by the breaches of trust involved in how he dealt with the banks. He noted Lynn had brought his profession 'into disrepute' and had effectively 'leveraged' his status as a solicitor to facilitate his crimes. He said Lynn had displayed 'arrogance' and 'hubris', traces of which were evident 'even to this day' in the way in which he had met this case, and the suggestion that because the victims were institutions rather than individuals who may have been insured against theft and fraud, the harm done by him was somehow 'less significant'. READ MORE He said the trial judge was correct to approach the sentencing on the basis that there was a 'high level of premeditation' on Lynn's part in respect of the offending. The former solicitor had displayed 'limited insight' into the harm done and there was no finding of 'sincere remorse', Mr Justice Edwards said. Lynn was jailed for obtaining multiple mortgages on the same properties in a situation where banks were unaware that other institutions were also providing finance. These properties included 'Glenlion', Lynn's €5.5 million home in Howth, and multiple investment properties. He had to be extradited from Brazil in 2018 after spending years resisting attempts to have him face charges. As part of the extradition agreement with Brazil, Lynn was to be given credit for the prison time he had already served. Lynn (56), of Millbrook Court, Redcross, Co. Wicklow, pleaded not guilty to theft contrary to section 4 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud offences), but he was found guilty by a jury of 10 of the 21 theft counts against him following a second Dublin Circuit Criminal Court trial after the jury in his first trial in 2022 failed to reach a verdict. The former solicitor was originally sentenced by Judge Martin Nolan to five and a half years in prison, having been convicted of stealing €18.1 million from six financial institutions. At the appeal hearing last November, Paul Comiskey O'Keefe BL, representing Lynn, argued that not enough weight was given to the mitigating factors in the case, including the recovery by financial institutions of certain losses and the asset disposal by the former solicitor for the repayment of losses. He also suggested that insufficient weight was given to Lynn's PTSD from his time in a Brazilian prison, despite being acknowledged by the sentencing judge. Delivering judgment on behalf of the three-judge court on Tuesday, Mr Justice Edwards noted that 'regrettably', the single biggest potential mitigating factor – a plea of guilty – was absent in this case. The judge said appropriate allowances were made for the time spent on remand while in prison in Brazil and rejected the contention that not enough weight had been given to the mitigating factors in the case. Mr Justice Edwards went on to say there was no error in the headline sentence, of 16 years, set by the trial judge or in the overall global approach taken. However, the court found the sentence imposed had been 'inappropriately structured' in respect of how credit for time served on remand in an Irish prison was treated. The court therefore quashed the original sentence and reduced the amount of credit being given for time spent in custody in Ireland by three months, leaving a final sentence of five years and nine months in prison. He imposed the same five years and nine months on each of the 10 counts, to run concurrently, dating from December 20th, 2023. This will effectively leave Lynn's sentence unchanged if the prison authorities apply the full three months' credit for remission. During his trial, Lynn took the stand and claimed the banks were aware he had multiple loans on the same properties and that this was custom and practice among bankers in Celtic Tiger Ireland. He was extradited from Brazil in 2018 after spending four and a half years in a 'hellhole' prison there. In the first trial, Lynn told the jury the jail was essentially run by prisoners, and he witnessed the beheading of a young gay prisoner.
