Latest news with #SALTCaucus
Yahoo
05-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
House Republicans warn Senate not to touch SALT deal
Moderate House Republicans from high-tax blue states are warning senators that they will not give the 'big, beautiful bill' a final stamp of approval if the Senate changes their proposal for the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap. The shot across the Capitol came shortly after Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) told reporters the upper chamber would likely tweak the SALT provision in the mammoth measure in one of several alterations. The House bill raises the SALT deduction cap to $40,000 — quadruple the $10,000 deduction cap in current law. Several moderates in the House from New York, New Jersey and California have said they would not support the package unless it included substantial SALT relief. Those members are now warning that any changes to the provision could prevent the bill from passing the House once it is sent back from the Senate. 'If the Senate unwinds the House's $40K SALT deal, it's like digging up buried radioactive waste—reckless and sure to contaminate the whole One Big Beautiful Bill,' Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) wrote on social platform X. 'Best to leave it alone.' He elaborated on his comments later, telling reporters he would encourage the Senate to keep their deal in place. 'The reason I've chosen that analogy is because the House took four months to get to where we could finally compromise, negotiate and settle on bill language as it relates to SALT and other interlocking and related provisions. So the Senate to disrupt that is to undo a lot of that painful work, to rip off some scabs, and to essentially restart the very painful process that we went through for four months,' he said. 'I would advise them to keep the bill intact. I respect the senators' prerogatives to exercise their constituents' priorities, but we worked really hard to get to the compromise bill that we got to, and it'd be a shame to have to restart.' Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), another member of the group, was more concise: 'Let's be clear — no SALT, no deal.' 'If the Senate changes the negotiated number of $40,000 — it will derail final passage of the bill,' Lawler wrote on X. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who was a key player in brokering a SALT deal in the House, said he spoke with members of the caucus on Wednesday, shortly after Thune signaled changes to their provision, and plans to make their case to the Senate. 'I just talked to my SALT Caucus on the floor and I'm going to go communicate to the Senate, again, it's a very delicate thing, we have to maintain the equilibrium point that we reached in the House,' Johnson told reporters. 'And it took almost a year to get to that point, so I don't think we can toss that off.' Asked if there is wiggle room around the $40,000 deduction cap, the Speaker was coy: 'I'm about to find out; we'll see.' The SALT deduction cap was always expected to be a battle in the Senate. While a number of vulnerable Republicans in the House care deeply about SALT, Senate Republicans don't even have members from New York, New Jersey or California. The issue came up for Senate Republicans at a conference-wide meeting Wednesday, where some were itching to lower the cap but wary of gumming things up for Johnson. 'Our goal isn't to create a problem for the House, but we also know the Senate will put its mark on the bill,' Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said. One Senate Republican indicated that some senators favor forcing the House SALT backers into supporting a lower ceiling but believe the easiest path is for the upper chamber to swallow its pride and defer to Johnson. 'It may be easier to say than do,' the Senate GOP member said. 'It would just screw the whole bill.' This senator said even lowering the ceiling from $40,000 to $30,000 could be risky since it might lead some of the House Republicans to vote against the bill. But the senator also suggested the SALT Republicans in the House could be bluffing. 'Is that enough to get you, because otherwise you say, 'I'm going to vote against the bill and for a $4 trillion tax increase as a Republican,'' the member continued. 'That's original sin there.' While Thune is signaling that the chamber will likely change the SALT provision, Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) — a former House member and key liaison between the two chambers — is saying the opposite. 'It was a hard fight over there,' Mullin said, pointing to its roughly $300 billion cost. 'It's a big number, but it was something they had to do to try to get the bill passed. We don't want to do something that would cause it not to pass.' 'The body here is going to work its will,' he continued. 'I would be a little [skeptical] about doing too much with SALT.' House Republicans in the SALT Caucus are warning they aren't bluffing. 'I wouldn't bet against a couple of salty Republicans, including a couple of salty New Yorkers,' LaLota said. 'I wouldn't bet against us.' Pressed on if the Senate should take the SALT Caucus's comments as a signal that the House will not pass a bill with a lower deduction cap, LaLota responded: 'That would be reasonable for them to consider that.' Rep. Young Kim (R-Calif.), another member of the SALT Caucus, expressed confidence. 'The leadership is working and talking to the Senate on a regular basis, and I'm very confident much of what we passed in the House will still be there,' Kim said. 'So I'm not going to comment on how I'll be voting for it till I see the package that comes back to us.' 'We're already working to ensure that everything that we pass in the House is still kept in the Senate version,' she added. Asked if there was any wiggle room on their SALT deal, LaLota said: 'I'm eager to see what they actually come back with. I don't know why anybody would logically want to disrupt something that was the result of a lot of hard work, pain, heartache and ultimately compromise,' he added. When a reporter pointed out that his comments were not a firm no, he responded: 'I would love them to increase it. That would be a great idea if they came to us with $50,000, I would endorse it right away.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
House Republicans warn Senate GOP against watering down Trump agenda bill
House Republicans are sending a clear and early warning to their Senate allies as the bill encompassing President Trump's domestic priorities heads to the upper chamber: Don't water it down. House GOP leaders spent weeks in delicate talks with Republican holdouts before cobbling together a fragile agreement that could thread the needle between conservatives' demands for more spending cuts and moderates' insistence on a controversial tax break. As the massive package heads to the Senate, the critical voices of the House debate — blue-state Republicans, hardliners and party leaders — are cautioning their upper-chamber counterparts not to alter their design too severely, or it will never get through the House on its return. The warnings forecast a coming clash between Republicans in the two chambers, since many senators are already saying they can't support the package without substantial changes. House conservatives would be fine with some changes — if they shift the bill to the right with more spending cuts and deficit reduction. At the bare minimum, they're demanding that the Senate keep in place hard-fought provisions to limit Medicaid eligibility and roll back green-energy subsidies adopted by the Biden administration. 'They've got a lot they still need to do to make it better, and they can't unwind what we achieved. And those are going to be red lines,' said Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas). 'If the SALT guys think they've got red lines, just wait until you see what's coming out of us.' Blue-state Republicans have their own concerns. They went to the mats to lift the $10,000 cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction, and they don't want Senate Republicans to nibble away at their hard-earned victory. Their agreement included not only an increase in the cap — to $40,000 for those making up to $500,000 — but also commitments on how to handle the threat of any Senate changes. Unlike in the House, Senate Republicans do not represent regions where constituents are greatly impacted by the SALT deduction cap. For that reason alone, many Senate Republicans are cold to the notion of giving a bigger tax break to those who primarily have higher incomes and live in blue states. Under the terms of the SALT Caucus deal, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) committed to holding the line against any Senate changes. And the SALT Caucus members agreed to go to the Senate, at the Speaker's request, to advocate for the higher deduction. Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), one of those core SALT Caucus members, echoed conservatives' warnings to senators not to change the bill. 'House Members like me respect the Senate's prerogative to shape key aspects of the One Big Beautiful Bill, but we respectfully request that Senators preserve the interlocking provisions that were carefully negotiated through months of tough internal deliberation,' LaLota said. 'The bill's strength and viability depend on maintaining that hard-earned balance.' The precarious nature of the agreement is very much on the radar of House leaders, who are delivering their own unsubtle message to the Senate as the upper chamber prepares to deliberate the bill. Johnson huddled behind closed doors with Senate Republicans on Tuesday, during a traditional weekly lunch. Afterwards, he said he practically pleaded with the group not to make huge changes to the House design. 'I encouraged them to remember that we have a very delicate equilibrium that we've reached over here. A lot of work went into this to find exactly the right balance,' Johnson said. 'You saw how perilous that was over the last week as it developed,' he continued. 'And I encouraged our Senate colleagues to think of this as a one-team effort, as we have, and to modify this as little as possible, because it will make it easier for us to get it over the line, ultimately, and finished and get it to the president's desk by July 4. 'That's a big thing.' House Republicans are quick to acknowledge that some Senate changes are inevitable — even welcome. Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), for instance, said the House bill leaves some confusion about whether refugees in the country legally can qualify for food assistance benefits under the bill's reforms to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and he hopes that the Senate clarifies. Major changes, though, would be more problematic. In an early sign of trouble for House Republicans, a number of GOP senators are already rejecting parts of the lower chamber's bill — an indication that the package could return to the House in an entirely different form, which would likely spark a revolt from one wing or another. 'I think there will be considerable changes in the Senate,' Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the chair of the Commerce Committee, said this week, specifying that the tweaks will likely be 'across the board' in the measure. Republican senators are already voicing their dismay with the SALT provision included in the bill. New York, New Jersey and California — the three states most concerned by SALT — are completely represented by Democrats in the Senate, leaving the issue with no GOP champions in the upper chamber. 'There's not one Republican in the United States Senate who gives a s— about SALT,' Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said. 'Having said that, what does matter is 218 votes in the House, and we want to be cognizant about that.' Some senators are also eyeing changes to the Medicaid language in the House bill. The legislation beefs up work requirements for able-bodied individuals between the ages of 18 and 65 and institutes more frequent eligibility checks, among other provisions. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that the bill would result in 10.3 million people losing Medicaid coverage by 2034 and 7.6 million people going uninsured, prompting concerns among some Senate Republicans. That review was released before the House expedited the implementation of the work requirements. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has been most vocal about the worries pertaining to Medicaid, writing in a New York Times op-ed earlier this month that Medicaid cuts are 'both morally wrong and politically suicidal.' Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) have also noted concerns about changes to the social safety net program, which further suggests the Senate is ready to shift the legislation to the center, not the right. Trump, who intervened at the last minute to get the House bill passed, remains a wildcard in the Senate debate. But a source close to the White House noted that there's a short list of GOP senators — including Collins, Murkowski, Hawley and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) — who can steer the direction of the bill on behalf of others without feeling pressured by Trump. 'A group of them are going to say, 'Hey, we're not going to just bow down to these things, which we believe are draconian, right?'' the source said. 'They're going to be a problem for our constituency, but more importantly, our colleagues.' Senate Republicans can afford to lose only three of their own and get the legislation over the finish line. And they are already down to two: Rep. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said he is a hard no on the House bill unless it removes the $4 trillion debt limit hike — an unlikely scenario as a summer default looms. 'It's not conservative; I can't support it,' Paul said. As House Republicans warn against changes to their preferred provisions in the bill, some of the same voices are holding out hope that whatever product returns from the Senate to the lower chamber will be more conservative — an aspiration that is sure to leave them disappointed as Senate Republicans push to bring the package more towards the middle. Roy, for example, said he voted for the bill despite 'significant reservations,' noting that it needs 'massive improvements.' Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), the chair of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, echoed that sentiment, arguing that the Senate can make inroads in areas that the upper chamber is already looking to water down. 'I'm hoping the Senate can address the two issues that I think still are there,' Harris said. 'One, the early deficit increases in the 10-year window. And the other one is getting at more of the fraud, waste and abuse in Medicaid.' But if the Senate tries to weaken the legislation, he warned, all bets are off. 'We'll reconsider our support,' he told reporters of such a scenario. Alex Gangitano and Al Weaver contributed reporting. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
24-05-2025
- Business
- The Hill
House Republicans warn Senate GOP against watering down Trump agenda bill
House Republicans are sending a clear and early warning to their Senate allies as the bill encompassing President Trump's domestic priorities heads to the upper chamber: Don't water it down. House GOP leaders spent weeks in delicate talks with Republican holdouts before cobbling together a fragile agreement that could thread the needle between conservatives' demands for more spending cuts and moderates' insistence on a controversial tax break. As the massive package heads to the Senate, the critical voices of the House debate — blue-state Republicans, hardliners and party leaders — are cautioning their upper-chamber counterparts not to alter their design too severely, or it will never get through the House on its return. The warnings forecast a coming clash between Republicans in the two chambers, since many senators are already saying they can't support the package without substantial changes. House conservatives would be fine with some changes — if they shift the bill to the right with more spending cuts and deficit reduction. At the bare minimum, they're demanding that the Senate keep in place hard-fought provisions to limit Medicaid eligibility and roll back green-energy subsidies adopted by the Biden administration. 'They've got a lot they still need to do to make it better, and they can't unwind what we achieved. And those are going to be red lines,' said Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas). 'If the SALT guys think they've got red lines, just wait until you see what's coming out of us.' Blue-state Republicans have their own concerns. They went to the mats to lift the $10,000 cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction, and they don't want Senate Republicans to nibble away at their hard-earned victory. Their agreement included not only an increase in the cap — to $40,000 for those making up to $500,000 — but also commitments on how to handle the threat of any Senate changes. Unlike in the House, Senate Republicans do not represent regions where constituents are greatly impacted by the SALT deduction cap. For that reason alone, many Senate Republicans are cold to the notion of giving a bigger tax break to those who primarily have higher incomes and live in blue states. Under the terms of the SALT Caucus deal, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) committed to holding the line against any Senate changes. And the SALT Caucus members agreed to go to the Senate, at the Speaker's request, to advocate for the higher deduction. Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), one of those core SALT Caucus members, echoed conservatives' warnings to senators not to change the bill. 'House Members like me respect the Senate's prerogative to shape key aspects of the One Big Beautiful Bill, but we respectfully request that Senators preserve the interlocking provisions that were carefully negotiated through months of tough internal deliberation,' LaLota said. 'The bill's strength and viability depend on maintaining that hard-earned balance.' The precarious nature of the agreement is very much on the radar of House leaders, who are delivering their own unsubtle message to the Senate as the upper chamber prepares to deliberate the bill. Johnson huddled behind closed doors with Senate Republicans on Tuesday, during a traditional weekly lunch. Afterwards, he said he practically pleaded with the group not to make huge changes to the House design. 'I encouraged them to remember that we have a very delicate equilibrium that we've reached over here. A lot of work went into this to find exactly the right balance,' Johnson said. 'You saw how perilous that was over the last week as it developed,' he continued. 'And I encouraged our Senate colleagues to think of this as a one-team effort, as we have, and to modify this as little as possible, because it will make it easier for us to get it over the line, ultimately, and finished and get it to the president's desk by July 4. 'That's a big thing.' House Republicans are quick to acknowledge that some Senate changes are inevitable — even welcome. Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), for instance, said the House bill leaves some confusion about whether refugees in the country legally can qualify for food assistance benefits under the bill's reforms to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and he hopes that the Senate clarifies. Major changes, though, would be more problematic. In an early sign of trouble for House Republicans, a number of GOP senators are already rejecting parts of the lower chamber's bill — an indication that the package could return to the House in an entirely different form, which would likely spark a revolt from one wing or another. 'I think there will be considerable changes in the Senate,' Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the chair of the Commerce Committee, said this week, specifying that the tweaks will likely be 'across the board' in the measure. Republican senators are already voicing their dismay with the SALT provision included in the bill. New York, New Jersey and California — the three states most concerned by SALT — are completely represented by Democrats in the Senate, leaving the issue with no GOP champions in the upper chamber. 'There's not one Republican in the United States Senate who gives a s— about SALT,' Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said. 'Having said that, what does matter is 218 votes in the House, and we want to be cognizant about that.' Some senators are also eyeing changes to the Medicaid language in the House bill. The legislation beefs up work requirements for able-bodied individuals between the ages of 18 and 65 and institutes more frequent eligibility checks, among other provisions. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that the bill would result in 10.3 million people losing Medicaid coverage by 2034 and 7.6 million people going uninsured, prompting concerns among some Senate Republicans. That review was released before the House expedited the implementation of the work requirements. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has been most vocal about the worries pertaining to Medicaid, writing in a New York Times op-ed earlier this month that Medicaid cuts are 'both morally wrong and politically suicidal.' Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) have also noted concerns about changes to the social safety net program, which further suggests the Senate is ready to shift the legislation to the center, not the right. Trump, who intervened at the last minute to get the House bill passed, remains a wildcard in the Senate debate. But a source close to the White House noted that there's a short list of GOP senators — including Collins, Murkowski, Hawley and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) — who can steer the direction of the bill on behalf of others without feeling pressured by Trump. 'A group of them are going to say, 'Hey, we're not going to just bow down to these things, which we believe are draconian, right?'' the source said. 'They're going to be a problem for our constituency, but more importantly, our colleagues.' Senate Republicans can afford to lose only three of their own and get the legislation over the finish line. And they are already down to two: Rep. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said he is a hard no on the House bill unless it removes the $4 trillion debt limit hike — an unlikely scenario as a summer default looms. 'It's not conservative; I can't support it,' Paul said. As House Republicans warn against changes to their preferred provisions in the bill, some of the same voices are holding out hope that whatever product returns from the Senate to the lower chamber will be more conservative — an aspiration that is sure to leave them disappointed as Senate Republicans push to bring the package more towards the middle. Roy, for example, said he voted for the bill despite 'significant reservations,' noting that it needs 'massive improvements.' Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), the chair of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, echoed that sentiment, arguing that the Senate can make inroads in areas that the upper chamber is already looking to water down. 'I'm hoping the Senate can address the two issues that I think still are there,' Harris said. 'One, the early deficit increases in the 10-year window. And the other one is getting at more of the fraud, waste and abuse in Medicaid.' But if the Senate tries to weaken the legislation, he warned, all bets are off. 'We'll reconsider our support,' he told reporters of such a scenario. Alex Gangitano and Al Weaver contributed reporting.
NBC News
22-05-2025
- Business
- NBC News
House Republican tax bill passes 'SALT' deduction cap of $40,000. Here's who benefits
House lawmakers on Thursday morning passed changes for the federal deduction for state and local taxes, known as SALT, as part of President Donald Trump 's tax package. Enacted via the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or TCJA, of 2017, there's currently a $10,000 limit on the SALT deduction, and raising that cap has been a priority for certain House lawmakers in high-tax states like New York, New Jersey and California. Filers must itemize deductions to claim the tax break for SALT. If the House provision is enacted, the SALT cap would rise to $40,000, up from $30,000 in the previous plan, and phases out over $500,000, according to revised language released by the House Rules Committee. The provision would go into effect in 2025. The SALT cap and income phaseout would increase annually by 1% from 2026 through 2033, according to the text. The revised text would also reduce itemized deductions for certain taxpayers in the 37% income tax bracket, which could lower the benefit of the higher SALT cap. For 2025, the top rate of 37% applies to individuals with taxable income above $626,350, and married couples filing jointly earning $751,600 or more. However, the House proposal for changes to the SALT deduction could still face pushback in the Senate. Before TCJA, the SALT deduction was unlimited, but the so-called alternative minimum tax reduced the benefit for some higher earners. How the SALT deduction works When filing taxes, you pick the greater of the standard deduction or your itemized deductions, including SALT capped at $10,000, medical expenses above 7.5% of your adjusted gross income, charitable gifts and others. Starting in 2018, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act doubled the standard deduction, and it adjusts for inflation yearly. For 2025, the standard deduction is $15,000 for single filers and $30,000 for married couples filing jointly. These could increase under the House-proposed tax bill. Under the current thresholds, the vast majority of filers — roughly 90%, according to the latest IRS data — use the standard deduction and don't benefit from itemized tax breaks. Who benefits from the higher SALT cap 'Any changes to lift the cap would primarily benefit higher earners,' Garrett Watson, director of policy analysis at the Tax Foundation, wrote in an analysis on Tuesday. With an income phaseout over $400,000, the top 20% of taxpayers 'would be the only group to meaningfully benefit,' Watson wrote. But members of the so-called SALT Caucus contend the deduction limit is a middle-class issue in their districts. Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., co-chair of the SALT Caucus, told CNBC's 'The Exchange' on Tuesday that a full repeal of the $10,000 SALT deduction limit would be a 'huge tax cut and benefit for middle-class families around the country.' Weekly advice on managing your money SIGN UP NOW Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about about our products and signing up for newsletters, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use and Privacy nowVIDEO04:03Rep. Josh Gottheimer on SALT: 'Red moocher states' expect the Northeastern U.S. to pay for them
CNBC
22-05-2025
- Business
- CNBC
House Republican tax bill passes 'SALT' deduction cap of $40,000. Here's who benefits
House lawmakers on Thursday morning passed changes for the federal deduction for state and local taxes, known as SALT, as part of President Donald Trump's tax package. Enacted via the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or TCJA, of 2017, there's currently a $10,000 limit on the SALT deduction, and raising that cap has been a priority for certain House lawmakers in high-tax states like New York, New Jersey and California. Filers must itemize deductions to claim the tax break for SALT. If the House provision is enacted, the SALT cap would rise to $40,000, up from $30,000 in the previous plan, and phases out over $500,000, according to revised language released by the House Rules Committee. The provision would go into effect in 2025. The SALT cap and income phaseout would increase annually by 1% from 2026 through 2033, according to the text. More from Personal Finance:Senate passed a surprise 'no tax on tips' bill. What it could mean GOP aims to axe EV, green tax credits. Act 'now' to claim, experts sayTrump tariffs create the 'perfect storm' for financial scams The revised text would also reduce itemized deductions for certain taxpayers in the 37% income tax bracket, which could reduce the benefit of the higher SALT cap. For 2025, the top rate of 37% applies to individuals with taxable income above $626,350, and married couples filing jointly earning $751,600 or more. However, the House proposal for changes to the SALT deduction could still face pushback in the Senate. When filing taxes, you pick the greater of the standard deduction or your itemized deductions, including SALT capped at $10,000, medical expenses above 7.5% of your adjusted gross income, charitable gifts and others. Starting in 2018, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act doubled the standard deduction, and it adjusts for inflation yearly. For 2025, the standard deduction is $15,000 for single filers and $30,000 for married couples filing jointly. These could increase under the House-proposed tax bill. Under the current thresholds, the vast majority of filers — roughly 90%, according to the latest IRS data — use the standard deduction and don't benefit from itemized tax breaks. "Any changes to lift the cap would primarily benefit higher earners," Garrett Watson, director of policy analysis at the Tax Foundation, wrote in an analysis on Tuesday. With an income phaseout over $400,000, the top 20% of taxpayers "would be the only group to meaningfully benefit," Watson wrote. But members of the so-called "SALT Caucus" argue the SALT deduction limit is a middle-class issue in their districts. Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-NJ., co-chair of the SALT Caucus, told CNBC's "The Exchange" on Tuesday that a full repeal of the $10,000 SALT deduction limit would be a "huge tax cut and benefit for middle-class families around the country."
