Latest news with #Senate-amended
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Ohio Senate budget eyes flat income tax, $600M toward Cleveland Browns
Jun. 3—The Ohio Senate unveiled a plan this week that makes hundreds of tweaks to the state's proposed two-year spending plan, including measures to set a flat income tax rate and tweak how the state would help finance the Cleveland Browns' new stadium. The Senate-amended House Bill 96, released Tuesday, is the Senate's first swing at shaping the state's behemoth operating budget — a gargantuan piece of legislation that sets spending, taxes, and a wide range of other policy. "What we're unveiling today is a bold, transformative and balanced budget," Senate President Rob McColley, R-Napoleon, told reporters. "It's something we've spent an awful lot of time on in the last several weeks, something that we entered into knowing that it had to be a pro-growth, positive budget for the state of Ohio." The budget process starts with a draft from the governor (which is the office's biggest opportunity to create a legislative wish-list). That draft is then sent to the Ohio House, which amends the governor's draft and passes it along to the Senate. What the Senate received this year from the Ohio House contained some substantial proposals: A plan to sell $600 million in public bonds to help fund the Cleveland Browns' proposed stadium in Brook Park; a plan to refund property taxes by cutting down on many Ohio schools' financial reserves; a much-contested change to how Ohio funds its public libraries; a late switch from a multi-year funding formula for Ohio's K-12 public schools that has raised alarms for local school districts and much more. Some of the Senate changes would: — Create a flat, 2.75% income tax rate for all Ohioans who earn more than $26,050 annually. The proposal eliminates Ohio's highest tax bracket for earners pulling over $100,000 per year, eliminating over a billion in state tax revenue over a two-year period. — Expand access to Ohio's "homestead exemption" property tax relief program by increasing income threshold from $40,000 to $42,000 and allowing slightly more of a qualifying participants' home value to be tax exempt. — Grant county budget commissions the authority to reduce property tax millage "if the commission finds it reasonably necessary or prudent to avoid unnecessary, excessive, or unneeded property tax collections." — Eliminate replacement and substitute property tax levies. — Cap a school district's financial reserves at 50% of the prior year's operating expenses, as opposed to the House-proposed 30% carryover cap. General funds in excess of that 50% cap would then be portioned back out to the property taxpayers of that district. — Direct $600 million of the state's $3.7 billion in unclaimed funds to the Cleveland Browns new stadium project, instead of issuing public bonds. — Require school boards to obtain a 2/3 vote from members before putting a property tax levy on the ballot. — Add $633.9 million more to the state's K-12 public schools than the current biennium, phased in largely through new "performance-based" incentives that will reward high-performing and improving districts with more cash. — Establish a $100 million set-aside to potentially withhold from state universities that do not come under compliance of the newly-passed Senate Bill 1, which eliminates university-sanctioned diversity, equity and inclusion programs on public campuses. The bill now awaits further hearings before the Senate Finance Committee, which is expected to approve a slate of amendments to the bill in the coming weeks. Senate Democrats said the bill was unveiled to them only shortly before it was unveiled to the public, but that they already took issue with much of it. That includes the Senate's flat tax proposal, which Democrats framed as policy that puts an outsized tax burden on lower earners. "We talk about this every time we have a flat tax discussion," Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood, said Tuesday. "They're inequitable in that they fall short of a 'flat' tax — actually what ends up happening is that they pay off the folks at the top of the income brackets and the folks at the lower end are the losers." Local testimony A variety of Dayton-area organizations and residents testified to senators in recent weeks about what they'd like to see in the state budget, particularly regarding education funding. For example, Dayton Early College Academy asked the Senate to maintain the House's provisions that would increase community school funding from $1,000 today to $1,500 per pupil over the biennium. The Senate's proposal lowered the proposed rate to $1,100 in 2026 and $1,200 in 2027. Meanwhile, the Clark Shawnee School District testified merely as an interested party, saying the district wanted the state to enact the third and final round of its so-called fair school funding plan, which would have pumped an additional $1.8 billion into public schools over 2026 and 2027 compared to the previous biennium. Springfield City School District, meanwhile, testified in opposition to the House's budget on the basis of the House's provision that would cap districts from carrying financial reserves greater than 30% of the district's operating cost in the previous year. Superintendent Bob Hill argued that the provision takes away schools' safety net and creates a system "penalizing fiscal responsibility rather than curbing waste." The Senate's proposed change from a 30% cap to a 50% cap would address much of Hill's concerns, but his district today is clocked with carrying a 66.6% year-over-year reserve and could therefore still be docked under the Senate's plan. Miami University encouraged the Senate to maintain House provisions that would route $14 million for the university to create the Ohio Institute for Quantum Computing Research, Talent, and Commercialization in partnership with the Cleveland Clinic. The two institutions will invest $70 million in the program over the next 10 years with the goal of making Ohio the "global epicenter of quantum computing medical research." The Senate eliminated the earmark entirely. ------ For more stories like this, sign up for our Ohio Politics newsletter. It's free, curated, and delivered straight to your inbox every Thursday evening. Avery Kreemer can be reached at 614-981-1422, on X, via email, or you can drop him a comment/tip with the survey below.
Forbes
29-04-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Budget Votes And Tax Cut Hopes: Congress's Path To Reconciliation
WASHINGTON, DC - OCTOBER 24: The U.S. Capitol Dome is seen as House Republicans continue to search ... More for a Speaker of the House in the Longworth House Office Building on Capitol Hill on October 24, 2023 in Washington, DC. Members of the GOP conference met for a closed-door vote to select their nominee for Speaker of the House to succeed former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), who was ousted on October 4 in a move led by a small group of conservative members of his own party. The Republicans nominated Rep. Tom Emmer (R-MN) today but he has already dropped out of the running after it became clear he could not secure enough votes to be elected Speaker. (Photo by) In this episode of Tax Notes Talk, Tax Notes Capitol Hill reporters Cady Stanton and Katie Lobosco outline Congress's progress on drafting the tax-focused reconciliation bill and the obstacles still remaining. Tax Notes Talk is a podcast produced by Tax Notes. This transcript has been edited for clarity. David D. Stewart: Welcome to the podcast. I'm David Stewart, editor in chief of Tax Notes Today International. This week: The bill is due. With many of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act provisions scheduled to sunset at the end of 2025, all eyes have been on Congress's progress toward a tax bill. But before they could focus on the contents of that bill, legislators had to get something else squared away: the budget framework. So how did the votes shake out on the framework, and what hurdles still remain on the path to a finished tax bill? Joining me now to walk through all of this are Tax Notes Capitol Hill reporters Cady Stanton and Katie Lobosco. Katie, Cady, welcome to the podcast. Cady Stanton: Thanks for having us. Katie Lobosco: Yeah, glad to be here. David D. Stewart: So let's start with you, Katie. What is the latest that we've heard on this issue? Katie Lobosco: So before Congress left on a two-week recess, the House passed the Senate-amended budget on April 10. Now, this unlocks the reconciliation process and paves the way for one bill that addresses much of President Trump's agenda, including the extension of the expiring provisions of the TCJA. Now, this budget resolution has taken up a lot of the legislative calendar so far this year. The House and the Senate both passed their own versions of the budget back in February, but both chambers must pass an identical budget resolution to be allowed to use reconciliation. And this is a process that lets the Senate pass a bill with a simple majority, and in this case, the GOP can pass it without Democratic votes. So the Senate amended the House's budget on April 5, sent it back to the House, and this is where we saw some drama. So in the days leading up to the House vote, many deficit hawks in the House and many Freedom Caucus members told us they were going to vote 'no' on this. There was no changing their mind. The issue was that the Senate-amended version doesn't go nearly as far in demanding spending cuts that the House wanted. So an hour or so before the vote was scheduled, we see a lot of these supposed 'no' votes marching into Senate Majority Leader John Thune's office. They're seeking assurances that there will be more spending cuts that are aligned with the House version. And overnight, most of those 'no' votes had flipped, citing assurances that they got from Republican leadership and the White House about spending cuts. In the end, there were just two 'no' votes: Tom Massie of Kentucky and Victoria Spartz of Indiana, both who were concerned about deficit issues. Now, it's worth noting there was no change in the text of the bill guaranteeing more spending cuts. Basically at a press conference the morning of the vote, Thune said that there were a lot of senators that really believed that there should be more spending cuts, but he didn't make a formal assurance about this. David D. Stewart: What can we expect in a reconciliation bill around the tax issues? Cady Stanton: So this reconciliation bill is expected to be pretty large, and it's going to cover a variety of policy areas, but tax is a top priority in this bill because it has a really important upcoming deadline, as you mentioned. The main aim of the tax portions of the reconciliation bill will be to extend the expiring provisions from the TCJA. That includes individual income tax rates, expanded child tax credit, the SALT cap, estate tax changes, things like that. They're all scheduled to sunset at the end of 2025. Not everything in the TCJA was temporary — obviously the corporate tax rate, international tax reform were permanent — but as a result of the deadline at the end of 2025, those expiring provisions are likely going to be the primary focus of this year's reconciliation bill. Beyond that, there are a lot of additional provisions that could definitely be included and are being discussed as being on the table right now. Some talk has included a hike in the SALT cap; no tax on tips, which was one of President Trump's promises on the campaign trail and one that he's talked about since he has taken up the White House; the expanded child tax credit has been mentioned; tax relief for seniors; changes to the low-income housing tax credit — all of those are part of the conversation here. But while they're all on the table as possibilities, it's going to be dependent on how much lawmakers want to impact the deficit and include possible other pay-fors in what's going to be part of the larger bill in the end. ZEBULON, GEORGIA - OCTOBER 23: Republican presidential nominee, former U.S. President Donald Trump ... More looks on during a roundtable with faith leaders at Christ Chapel on October 23, 2024 in Zebulon, Georgia. Trump is campaigning across Georgia today as he and Democratic presidential nominee, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris attempt to win over swing state voters. (Photo by) David D. Stewart: What sort of things did we see in this budget resolution that we can expect to see in the final bills? Katie Lobosco: Well, so the budget is very important to unlocking this process, but at the end of the day, it's just a blueprint. It's not law; it doesn't have policy specifications. What it does, basically, is provide instructions to the House and Senate committees setting spending and revenue targets. But here's where things get a little complicated: This budget resolution provides different instructions to the House than it does for the Senate. For example, the Senate instructions mandate a floor of $4 billion in spending cuts across the federal government, while the House section requires $1.5 trillion in cuts. And when it comes to taxes, there's another big difference. The Senate Finance Committee is given $1.5 trillion for new tax proposals, but also scores the extension of the existing tax cuts as costing nothing. The House Ways and Means Committee, on the other hand, gets $4.5 trillion for both new tax proposals and the extensions. There is a caveat there: If the House doesn't achieve $2 trillion in spending cuts, that $4.5 trillion for tax cuts could go down as low as $500 billion. Basically, this gives us a range for the tax cuts, is the way I like to think about it. Bipartisan Policy Center's Andrew Watts told me that he puts this range between $4 trillion and $5.3 trillion. David D. Stewart: So I know there's been some drama around how this is all going to get scored. So what is happening with budget scoring? Cady Stanton: So you may have heard the phrase, especially in the news and by lawmakers lately, of a current-policy baseline, and it's definitely in the weeds on the technical parts of scoring, but it's important for thinking about how many tax cuts might be passed in this package. So one of the major points of tension in this year's reconciliation bill, particularly as it pertains to tax, is around that scoring cost we've been talking about. So the main goal of this bill, as I said, is to extend the TCJA provisions that are set to expire at the end of the year. But that move is estimated to cost $4.6 trillion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. So obviously very expensive. Now, Republican senators led by Senate Finance Committee Chair Mike Crapo have pushed for using something called a current-policy baseline to score those extensions. Like I said, it's pretty in the weeds, but the basis of it is that a current-policy baseline scores extending policy already in place as costing zero, as opposed to a current-law baseline, which scores based on what's actually written into the law. WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 26: Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID) arrives to the U.S. Capitol Building on ... More September 26, 2023 in Washington, DC. The U.S. Senate is working to write up separate legislation to fund the government ahead of the September 30th shutdown deadline, as legislation being drawn up by House Republicans is being stalled. (Photo by) Now, Democrats have called this method "magic math," and they aren't the only ones who are pretty skeptical of it. Quite a few Republicans in the House, such as Ways and Means Committee members David Schweikert and Lloyd Smucker, have also criticized the measure and said they're not so sure it's the right way to go about it. But for lawmakers who are attempting to balance deficit reduction, often at the demands of members of their caucus who are really worried about the deficit with this expensive tax bill, it's seen by some as the only way to make the TCJA extensions permanent, especially when other provisions that we talked about, like no tax on tips or the SALT cap, will really only increase the tally and the overall cost of this bill. David D. Stewart: So what is next for this reconciliation bill? Cady Stanton: So the House and Senate return to the Hill the week of April 28, and that's when the different committees will start writing up the actual bill text. The budget resolution gives committees until May 9, but it's not really a binding deadline. House Speaker Mike Johnson wants to move fast, and he wants to have a bill to the president's desk by Memorial Day. Now, plenty of people will tell you that this is possibly a bit optimistic. For context, we can look back to 2017, when Congress also used the reconciliation process to pass the TCJA. All told, it took about two months after the budget resolution was passed to get the TCJA signed into law. Now, one thing that could throw a wrench into this timeline is if Republican leaders want to use the reconciliation process to also raise the debt ceiling. Right now, the government is expected to run out of money in August or September, if Congress doesn't act before then, but as this year's tax revenue comes in, that date could change. And if it comes earlier, it may pressure lawmakers to move even faster on this bill. Of course, they could also just deal with the debt ceiling in a separate piece of legislation. David D. Stewart: What hurdles are we expecting to getting final passage of this reconciliation bill? Cady Stanton: So there's obviously a lot of obstacles that could come up between now and when they finally pass the bill, but I can focus on three pretty big ones right here. The first one is having to do with energy. So one possible pay-for would be either a partial or a complete rollback of the clean energy credits from the Inflation Reduction Act. Some members of the Republican caucus, like Congressman Chip Roy has said he wants a full rescission of those credits. WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 29: Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) speaks during a news conference with members of ... More the House Freedom Caucus at the U.S. Capitol November 29, 2023 in Washington, DC. The members of the House Freedom Caucus and a few Republican Senators discussed federal spending and the need for stronger border security. (Photo by) But a number of Republicans in states that benefited from IRA investments are cautioning against using a sledgehammer against the IRA rather than a scalpel. A group of senators and a group of House members have respectively written to the leaders of their caucus cautioning against that full repeal because of the impact in their districts should that happen. There's also a question of how much revenue a full or partial rescission would bring in reality, given that the bill became law more than two years ago, and estimates vary on how much money that might bring in. A second area to focus in on has to do with Medicaid. So as Katie mentioned, the budget resolution includes pretty specific instructions for spending cuts, and among them is $880 billion in cuts to be made by the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Given the budget that that committee has, a big chunk of it is Medicare and Medicaid, and Republicans really don't want to touch Medicare — it near guarantees there's going to have to be some cuts to Medicaid. Moderates are pretty upset about this requirement, and even withheld their vote briefly over it. We watched the floor during the budget resolution debate, and there were some centrist members who went up to Mike Johnson and tried to really get some reassurances from him on a limit to those Medicaid cuts, or even no Medicaid cuts at all. So that's definitely something to watch because it impacts a lot of especially low- to middle-income constituents of these moderate members. Now the third area is the SALT cap, and this is something I've found comes up with just about any tax bill that we discuss. This year, I think as Katie mentioned, the House has very thin margins for all of these votes, and what that basically means is any small group can attempt to leverage their numbers to get what they want on this bill. That includes members of the state and local tax, or SALT, caucus. Now, Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith and others have acknowledged that because of those numbers, raising the SALT cap is now a near guarantee. It would be otherwise pretty much impossible to pass the bill without their votes. The tricky part here is how high that new cap could be. A $25,000 cap has been floated recently, but members of the SALT Caucus have shot that down pretty quickly, and a separate proposal would put a cap on the corporate SALT deductions — some people refer to it as C-SALT — as a pay-for for SALT or for other provisions, but that idea has also received a pretty chilly reception. So basically what to watch for is there will likely be a change in the SALT cap, but what that new number might look like is pretty up in the air right now. David D. Stewart: Now, one of the issues that's been dominating politics lately has been the issue of tariffs. What are we hearing from Congress on them? Katie Lobosco: Yes. We've all heard a lot about tariffs lately, and there are some Republicans that have pushed back on the president's tariffs. Chuck Grassley and six other Republican senators, along with Don Bacon of Nebraska in the House, have introduced bipartisan bills that would rein in the president's authority when it comes to tariffs. This bill would require the White House to notify Congress and justify the tariffs, and unless Congress passes a joint resolution approving them, they would expire after 60 days. And Senator Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican, is another one who's voiced some opposition. He joined a group of Democrats introducing a bill that would repeal Trump's 10 percent across-the-board tariffs. But there's been no real indication that either of these bills would end up passing either chamber. These tariffs may come up later as we get a full reconciliation package. Now, they won't be included in the bill, but I could see some Republican lawmakers pointing to the revenue from the tariffs as an offset for government spending — some of these members that are really concerned about the deficit. But I think it's worth noting that the official score of the package will not consider the tariffs because they came from the executive branch. David D. Stewart: One other issue I want to touch on: the potential expansion of existing credits like the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit in the Senate. What's happening there? Cady Stanton: I think that's going to be one of the most interesting debates — specifically on the child tax credit — this year. So just for some context, the child tax credit was doubled from $1,000 to $2,000 in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, but that provision is set to expire at the end of the year. Now, CTC expansion historically has received bipartisan support. Democrats expanded it to the highest level it's ever been in the American Rescue Plan Act, though that eventually phased back. And a bipartisan bill last year that we covered extensively that passed the House but stalled in the Senate included CTC expansion alongside retroactive restoration of expired business provisions from the TCJA. So those were paired together. Now, there's debate over how to expand the CTC within the Republican caucus. So some have pushed, for example, for some enhanced work requirements for the credit or raising the qualified income level. There's definitely going to be a lot of back-and-forth as to how to tweak the dials on the credit. The idea of CTC expansion most recently came up in the past week or two, when Senator Chuck Grassley, who's on the Senate Finance Committee, said that one of the proposals Republicans are considering is raising the top marginal income tax rate to pre-TCJA levels as an offset to CTC expansion. Now, we should be really clear here that many Republicans have objected to the idea of changing that rate for the highest earners, but Senator Grassley discussing this shows that CTC expansion and how to pay for it is going to be part of discussions in the coming weeks and months. Now, turning to the earned income tax credit, which you also mentioned, I feel like that's a different ballgame here. Changes to that might be a little less likely. I wrote a few weeks back about how advocates both for expansion of the EITC or for pared-back reform of the credit have both been pushing for legislative change for many years, and really upped that push a few weeks ago ahead of the 50th anniversary of the credit. But unfortunately, there's really little to no appetite in Congress for a real full overhaul as both groups have been pushing for. So we may see some modest changes to the EITC, but the primary focus in terms of reform to those two credits will likely be on the child tax credit. David D. Stewart: Well, I guess the one thing that we can be sure of is you're going to have a lot to do over the next few months, and I thank you so much for helping us understand all that's gone on so far. Cady, Katie, thank you for being here. Cady Stanton: Thanks so much for having us. Katie Lobosco: Thank you.
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Gov. Kehoe signs SLMPD state takeover bill
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – The St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department is once again under the control of a handpicked state board. Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe signed HB 495 late Tuesday morning at the state capitol. State Representative Brad Christ, R-St. Louis County, and State Senators Nick Schroer, R-St. Charles County, and Travis Fitzwater, R-Callaway County, were present at the signing. They co-sponsored the legislation. Earlier this month, the Missouri House overwhelmingly approved a Senate-amended bill to place the SLMPD under the authority of the state board, despite protestations from St. Louis Mayor Tishaura Jones, St. Louis Police Chief Robert Tracy, and other city officials. Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now The bill establishes a six-member board to oversee the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department. Five of the members will be citizens appointed by the governor. The Mayor of St. Louis will have the sixth and final seat on the board. Mayor Jones released a statement shortly after the signing: 'From the very beginning, this bill has been a sham, and the Governor's signature represents nothing but disrespect for every Missouri voter who supported local control. The residents of the City of St. Louis are safer today because my administration has made difficult and bold decisions that have resulted in a historic reduction in crime. State takeover is not based in reality, and only shows that Governor Kehoe and the legislature are willing to throw out facts, reason, and the will of the people in order to give the safety of our city away to special interests.' The city police department was under state control from the American Civil War until 2012, when voters passed a ballot measure transferring control to local authorities. However, state officials, including Governor Kehoe, argued that the City of St. Louis would be in a better situation with the board running the police department. Both the St. Louis Police Officers Association and the Ethical Society of Police expressed support for the state takeover. Chief Tracy said his department will remain focused on public safety while adhering to the strictures of the new law. 'The brave men and women of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department are fully committed to protecting and serving our community. Public safety remains our top priority,' Tracy said in a statement. 'We will work with Governor Mike Kehoe's Office and the Transition Director while maintaining the highest standards of excellence in policing and delivering quality service to our community.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
