logo
What the Senate Republican tax and spending bill means for your money

What the Senate Republican tax and spending bill means for your money

CNBC01-07-2025
Senate Republicans on Tuesday approved their version of President Donald Trump's multi-trillion-dollar tax and spending package, which could broadly impact millions of Americans' wallets.
Similar to the House's One Big Beautiful Bill Act advanced in May, the Senate legislation aims to make permanent Trump's 2017 tax cuts, while adding new tax breaks for tip income, overtime pay and auto loans, among other provisions.
If enacted, the bill could also slash spending on social safety net programs such as Medicaid and SNAP, axe tax credits tied to clean energy and overhaul student loans.
More from Personal Finance:Americans say this financial milestone makes you an adultAverage 401(k) savings rate is at record-high levelsThese are the top private, public colleges for financial aid
The spending package could still see changes as it returns to the lower chamber for approval. But a House floor vote could come as this week to meet Trump's July 4 deadline.
Here are some of the key provisions to watch — and how those measures could impact household finances.
Follow along from start to finish, or use the table of contents to jump to the section(s) you want to learn more about.
Since 2018, the $10,000 cap on the state and local tax deduction, known as 'SALT,' has been a critical issue for certain lawmakers in high-tax states like New York, New Jersey and California.
The SALT deduction — including state and local income and property taxes — was unlimited for filers who itemized deductions before 2018. But the alternative minimum tax reduced the benefit for some wealthier Americans.
A sticking point for some House lawmakers, the lower chamber approved a $40,000 SALT limit starting in 2025. The higher tax break would begin in 2025 and phase out over $500,000.
The Senate version of the bill would also lift the cap to $40,000 starting in 2025, with the phaseout starting above $500,000 of income. Both figures would increase by 1% yearly through 2029 and the $40,000 limit would revert to $10,000 in 2030.
"If you raise the cap, the people who benefit the most are going to be upper middle-income," since lower earners typically don't itemize tax deductions, Howard Gleckman, senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, previously told CNBC.

Trump's 2017 tax cuts temporarily boosted the maximum child tax credit to $2,000 from $1,000, an increase that will sunset after 2025 without an extension from Congress.
If enacted, the Senate bill would permanently bump the biggest credit to $2,200 starting in 2025 and index this figure for inflation starting in 2026.
Meanwhile, the House version of the bill lifts the top child tax credit to $2,500 from 2025 through 2028. After 2028, the credit's highest value would revert to $2,000 and be indexed for inflation.
However, the proposed bills wouldn't help 17 million children from low-income families who don't earn enough to claim the full credit, according to Elaine Maag, senior fellow in the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.

Both the House and Senate called for a temporary enhanced deduction for Americans ages 65 and over, dubbed a "bonus," in their respective versions of the "big beautiful" bill.
The Senate proposed raising the deduction to $6,000 per qualifying individual, up from $4,000 proposed by the House.
The full deduction would be available to individuals with up to $75,000 in modified adjusted gross income, and $150,000 if married and filing jointly. Notably, the Senate version would phase out at a faster rate for taxpayers who are above those thresholds.
Ultimately, middle-income taxpayers may benefit most from the enhanced deduction, Howard Gleckman, senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, recently told CNBC.
The senior bonus is in lieu of eliminating taxes on Social Security benefits, which had been touted by the Trump administration, since changes to Social Security are generally prohibited in reconciliation legislation. As Republicans seek to slash federal spending, Medicaid, which provides health coverage for more than 71 million people, has been a target for those cuts in both House and Senate versions of the bill.
The Senate version of the bill would cut more than $1 trillion from Medicaid, compared to more than $800 billion in cuts in the House version, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates.
New federal work requirements would require beneficiaries ages 19 to 64 who apply for coverage or who are enrolled through an Affordable Care Act expansion group to work at least 80 hours per month. Adults may be exempt if they have dependent children or other qualifying circumstances such as a medical condition. Notably, the Senate version of the bill proposed stricter limits on exemptions for parents, limiting it to those with dependent children ages 14 and under.
The proposed Medicaid changes would also make it so states would have to conduct eligibility redeterminations for coverage every six months, rather than every 12 months based on current policy.
About 7.8 million people could become uninsured by 2034 due to Medicaid cuts, CBO has projected based on the House bill.Both Senate and House versions of the "big beautiful" bill propose cuts to food assistance through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, formerly known as food stamps.
The cuts in the Senate bill may ultimately affect more than 40 million people, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. That includes about 16 million children, 8 million seniors and 4 million non-elderly adults with disabilities, among others, according to CBPP, a nonpartisan research and policy institute.
Many states would be required to pay a percentage for food benefits to make up for the federal funding cuts. If they cannot make up for the funding losses, that could result in cuts to SNAP benefits or states opting out of the program altogether, according to CBPP.
The Senate proposal also seeks to expand existing work requirements to include adults ages 55 to 64 and parents with children 14 and over. Based on current rules, most individuals cannot receive benefits for more than three months out of every three years unless they work at least 20 hours per week or qualify for an exemption.
For about 600,000 low-income households, food benefits could be cut by an average of $100 per month, according to CBPP.The Senate's version of Trump's budget bill also included a new savings account for children with a one-time deposit of $1,000 from the federal government for those born in 2024 through 2028.
Starting in 2026, so-called "Trump accounts," a type of tax-advantaged saving account, would be available to all children under the age of eight years old who are U.S. citizens, largely in line with the House plan advanced in May.
To be eligible to receive the initial seed money, both parents must have Social Security numbers. Parents would then be able to contribute up to $5,000 a year and the balance will be invested in a diversified fund that tracks a U.S. stock index. Earnings grow tax-deferred, and qualified withdrawals are taxed as long-term capital gains.
Republican lawmakers have said these accounts will introduce more Americans to wealth-building opportunities and the benefits of compound growth. But some experts say a 529 college savings plan is a better alternative because of the higher contribution limits and tax advantages.Key changes are in store for student loan borrowers. For starters, Republicans would limit how much money people can borrow from the federal government to pay for their education.
Among other measures, the Senate plan would:
Going forward, there would be just two repayment plan choices for new borrowers: Student loan borrowers could either enroll in a standard repayment plan with fixed payments, or an income-based repayment plan known as the "Repayment Assistance Plan," or RAP.
The bill would also nix the unemployment deferment and economic hardship deferment, both of which student loan borrowers use to pause their payments during periods of financial difficulty.The Senate bill creates a tax deduction for households on car loan interest, similar to a provision in the House bill.
Certain households would be able to deduct up to $10,000 of annual interest on new auto loans from their taxable income. The tax break would be temporary, lasting from 2025 through 2028.
There are some eligibility restrictions. For example, the deduction's value would start to fall once an individual's annual income exceeds $100,000; the threshold is $200,000 for married couples filing a joint tax return. Cars must also be U.S.-assembled.
In practice, the tax benefit is likely to be relatively small, experts said.
"The math basically says you're talking about [financial] benefit of $500 or less in year one," based on the average new loan, Jonathan Smoke, chief economist at Cox Automotive, an auto market research firm, recently told CNBC.The Senate passed the No Tax on Tips Act in late May, a standalone legislation that would create a federal income tax deduction of up to $25,000 per year, with some limitations.
The tax break would apply to workers who typically receive cash tips reported to their employer for payroll tax withholdings, according to the summary of the bill.
The Senate version of the OBBBA Act includes a similar provision: If enacted, qualifying individuals can claim a deduction of up to $25,000 for qualified tips.
However, the Senate version would not apply to taxpayers whose income exceeds $150,000, or $300,000 for joint filers.
Should the bill go in effect as drafted, the Secretary of the Treasury will publish a list of occupations that typically received tips on or before December 31, 2024.
The provision would apply to taxable years between December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2028.

Another campaign promise from Trump, the House and Senate bills would also provide a temporary tax break for overtime pay.
The House-approved bill would create a deduction for "qualified overtime compensation" of $160,000 or less from 2025 to 2028. The deduction is "above-the-line," meaning the tax break is available regardless of whether you itemize deductions.
By contrast, the Senate bill offers a maximum $12,500 above-the-line deduction ($25,000 for married couples filing jointly) for overtime pay from 2025 to 2028. The tax break begins to phase out once earnings exceed $150,000 ($300,000 for joint filers).

The Senate bill, like its House counterpart, would axe consumer tax credits tied to clean energy.
It would end a $7,500 tax credit for households that buy or lease a new electric vehicle, and a $4,000 tax credit for buyers of used EVs. These tax credits would disappear after Sept. 30, 2025.
Additionally, it would scrap tax breaks for consumers who make their homes more energy-efficient, perhaps by installing rooftop solar, electric heat pumps, or efficient windows and doors. These credits would end after Dec. 31, 2025.
Many tax breaks on the chopping block were created, extended or enhanced by the Inflation Reduction Act, a 2022 law signed by former President Joe Biden that provided a historic U.S. investment to fight climate change.
The tax breaks are currently slated to be in effect for another seven or so years, through at least 2032. Another key provision in the House and Senate bills could offer a bigger deduction for so-called pass-through businesses, which includes contractors, freelancers and gig economy workers.
Enacted via Trump's 2017 tax cuts, the Section 199A deduction for qualified business income, or QBI, is currently worth up to 20% of eligible revenue, with some limitations. This will expire after 2025 without action from Congress.
The House-approved bill would make the provision permanent and expand the maximum tax break to 23% starting in 2026. Meanwhile, the Senate measure would make the deduction permanent but keep it at 20%.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Returning after a six-week break, the 'Real Time' host had a bit of catching up to do.
Returning after a six-week break, the 'Real Time' host had a bit of catching up to do.

Yahoo

timea minute ago

  • Yahoo

Returning after a six-week break, the 'Real Time' host had a bit of catching up to do.

Following a six-week break, Bill Maher returned to Real Time with guns blazing as he tore into President Donald Trump's first six months in office. Dismissing frivolities like renaming the Gulf of Mexico and changing Coca-Cola's recipe, Maher said there are 'only so many f---s to give' when it comes to current events. Instead, he focused his ire on stories that matter in his current scorecard for Trump's administration during his 'New Rules' segment. 'Turning the Environmental Protection Agency into the Pollution Protection Agency, yes, that's going to matter,' Maher said. 'All the people who will lose healthcare and all the death that will be run up from the Big, Beautiful Bill, yes, that matters.'

Trump fires a senior official over jobs numbers
Trump fires a senior official over jobs numbers

CNN

time7 minutes ago

  • CNN

Trump fires a senior official over jobs numbers

Donald Trump Job market EconomyFacebookTweetLink Follow President Donald Trump has fired Dr. Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, whom he accused, without evidence, of manipulating the monthly jobs reports for 'political purposes.' The BLS' monthly labor report Friday showed that the US economy added only 73,000 jobs in July, far below expectations. It also sharply revised down the employment growth that had been previously reported in May and June – by a combined 258,000 jobs. After the revisions, the jobs report showed the weakest pace of hiring for any three-month period since the pandemic recession in 2020. 'In my opinion, today's Jobs Numbers were RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad,' Trump said in a Truth Social post. Although the May and June jobs numbers were worse than initially believed, revisions are normal in this process. The BLS' initial monthly jobs estimates are often based on incomplete data, so they are revised twice after the initial report — followed by an annual revision every February. Additionally, BLS economists use a formula to smooth out jobs numbers for seasonal variations and that can exacerbate revisions when they fall outside economists' expectations. Trump on Friday incorrectly called the revisions a 'mistake.' 'McEntarfer said there were only 73,000 Jobs added (a shock!) but, more importantly, that a major mistake was made by them, 258,000 Jobs downward, in the prior two months,' Trump said on Truth Social. 'Similar things happened in the first part of the year, always to the negative. The Economy is BOOMING under 'TRUMP.'' Trump said McEntarfer 'faked' the jobs numbers before the election to try to boost former Vice President Kamala Harris' chances in the 2024 presidential election. 'We're doing so well. I believe the numbers were phony, just like they were before the election, and there were other times. So, you know what I did? I fired her, and you know what? I did the right thing,' Trump told reporters Friday on the South Lawn. McEntarfer was confirmed by the Senate 86-8 in January 2024 for a term of four years. CNN has reached out to McEntarfer for comment. Until Trump replaces McEntarfer, Deputy Commissioner William Wiatrowski will serve as Acting Commissioner, the administration said. Trump has previously criticized the BLS for its jobs data and revisions, and he told reporters Friday evening he's 'always had a problem with these numbers.' In 2016, during his first presidential campaign, Trump claimed that the unemployment rate was significantly higher than the BLS let on. In 2024, he accused former President Joe Biden's administration of orchestrating a cover-up, after the BLS reported that it had overcounted jobs by 818,000 over the previous 12 months. 'I was thinking about it this morning, before the numbers that came out. I said, 'Who is the person that does these numbers?' And then they gave me stats about before the election,' Trump said Friday. 'We need people that we can trust,' he added. But Trump and his administration have also praised the BLS data when it has been favorable to them. During Trump's first term, former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said in March 2017 that the jobs data was no longer 'phony' after the BLS issued a strong jobs report. And a month ago, current White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt posted on social media that the economy had beat expectations for jobs in four straight BLS labor reports. The BLS is nonpartisan, and businesses and government officials rely on the accuracy of its data to make determinations about investment, hiring, spending and all sorts of key decisions. 'It's outrageous for anyone in government to question the integrity of the BLS,' said Jason Furman, a Harvard professor and former Obama economic adviser. 'Accurate statistics are essential to the economy.' Furman doubted that replacing McEntarfer would compromise the BLS, but he said even the possibility or appearance of that notion 'would be bad.' 'Countries that have tried to fake those statistics have often ended up with economic crises as a result,' Furman said. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, said the BLS' data is at the 'highest standard,' and 'as accurate as it can be.' 'Anything that undermines that or even the perception of that high standard is deeply worrisome,' Zandi said. 'I've never seen anything even close to this.' At Moody's, Zandi said he has hired a number of former BLS economists whom he called 'fantastic.' 'They do great work,' Zandi said. 'They are critical to a well-functioning economy.' Democratic Virginia Senator Mark Warner accused Trump of working the referees. 'Firing the ump doesn't change the score,' Warner said in a statement. 'Americans deserve to know the truth about the state of the Trump economy.' But Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer said in a post on social media that she supports replacing McEntarfer. 'A recent string of major revisions have come to light and raised concerns about decisions being made by the Biden-appointed Labor Commissioner,' Chavez-DeRemer said on X. 'I support the President's decision to replace Biden's Commissioner and ensure the American People can trust the important and influential data coming from BLS.' The BLS jobs survey is widely considered by economists to be robust. It samples more than 100,000 businesses and government agencies each month, representing roughly 629,000 individual worksites. But, as part of larger cost-cutting taking place around practically every part of Trump's government, the BLS is laying off staff — and, as a result, reducing the scope of its work. For example, the BLS posted a notice in June stating it stopped collecting data for its Consumer Price Index in three cities (Lincoln, Nebraska; Buffalo, New York; and Provo, Utah) and increased 'imputations' for certain items (a statistical technique that, when boiled down to very rough terms, essentially means more educated guesses). That worried Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. In testimony before Congress in June, Powell said he believed the BLS data to be accurate, but he was upset about what could become a trend. 'I wouldn't say that I'm concerned about the data today, although there has been a very mild degradation of the scope of the surveys,' Powell said at the time, in response to a question about survey data quality. 'But I would say the direction of travel is something I'm concerned about.' This story has been updated with additional developments and context.

Are US tariffs starting to bite? Trump, in denial over rising prices, targets Fed chief Powell
Are US tariffs starting to bite? Trump, in denial over rising prices, targets Fed chief Powell

Yahoo

time7 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Are US tariffs starting to bite? Trump, in denial over rising prices, targets Fed chief Powell

Memo from the White House: inflation is 'right on track', it declared this week, citing the latest official data. Price growth is now 'very low', according to Donald Trump. The actual statistics paint a markedly different picture. Just six months after he regained power, in part by promising to rapidly reduce prices, Trump has presided over the chaotic rollout of tariffs on an array of overseas products that many have argued risk having the exact opposite effect. After a lull, the consumer price index (CPI) is back on the rise. In June, everything from fruit and washing machines to dresses and toys became more expensive. Businesses in the US and around the world have struggled to keep up with the Trump administration's erratic rollout of its aggressive trade strategy: the daily White House soap opera of warnings, threats, confusion, deadlines, delays and drama. Related: Can Trump fire Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell? Putting to one side the steady stream of twists, cliffhangers and all-caps declarations, each episode has pushed US tariffs higher. The overall average effective tariff rate is now set to hit 20.6%, according to the non-partisan The Budget Lab at Yale, its highest level since 1910. Eventually, someone has to foot the bill. Interactive By Trump's telling, the countries he targets will be forced to pay up. But in reality, tariffs are paid by the importer – US-based companies, in this case – and often passed on. Tariffs are a burden. One way or another, the impact typically is felt along each link of the supply chain, from the initial manufacturer to the customer who buys the finished product. 'All through that chain, people will be trying not to be the ones who pick up the cost,' noted Jerome Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, at a recent press conference. 'But ultimately, the cost of the tariff has to be paid and some of it will fall on the end consumer,' added Powell. 'We know that. That's what businesses say. That's what the data says from past evidence. So we know that's coming.' The effect is not immediate, though. It might take Trump a matter of minutes to announce a tariff on Truth Social, but the full effects can take months to work their way through the economy. Interactive And so Powell, and the Fed, has waited. For seven months now, at four consecutive meetings, the US central bank's policymakers have sat on their hands and kept interest rates on hold. After dramatically raising rates to combat inflation, they want to see how prices respond to Trump's tariffs before cutting them back. It's early days. Prices are still rising, and by more than the Fed's target of 2% each year. Officials want to know if Trump's plan will make them rise faster. The evidence has so far been mixed. While consumer price growth accelerated slightly between May and June, the annual rate of wholesale price growth slipped. The Fed's latest 'beige book', a semi-quarterly report of anecdotal economic insights from across the US, also released this week, described a relatively calm business landscape, despite persisting uncertainty. Assuming Trump's announced tariffs are enforced, they will dent US economic growth by 0.1 percentage point this year and 0.3 percentage points next, according to modeling by Oxford Economics. 'The drag on the economy is predominantly tied to core inflation, which will temporarily be 0.2bps [basis points] higher than in the current baseline,' said its chief US economist, Ryan Sweet. 'Though the boost to consumer prices is modest, it still reduces growth in real disposable income and, by extension, consumer spending.' Inside the Fed's headquarters in Washington DC, Powell and his officials are patiently monitoring the data while deciding their next steps. But less than a mile away, one man is not prepared to wait. In a series of increasingly bitter attacks, Trump has publicly lambasted Powell for being 'too late' to cut rates, and claimed the Fed's inaction is costing the US economy. He has called on Powell (whom he first tapped to be Fed chair in 2017) to quit, and unnerved Wall Street by raising the prospect of firing him. Bharat Ramamurti, former deputy director of the national economic council under Joe Biden, said: 'If you replace Jay Powell with someone who is clearly doing whatever Donald Trump wants them to do, expectations about what inflation is going to do in the long run are going to spike and that's going to create a real problem for the Fed in the long term.' The supreme court signaled it views the Fed chair as legally shielded from presidential removal, describing the central bank as a 'uniquely structured, quasi-private entity' in a May ruling about two of Trump's other firings. Trump is 'highly unlikely' to fire Powell, he has asserted, before floating one reason he might have to go: a $2.5bn renovation of the Fed's buildings. 'I mean, it's possible there's fraud involved,' the president claimed. Powell has reportedly asked the central bank's inspector general to review the project. Powell is due to finish his term in May, and has stressed he will remain in post until then. Advocates of the Fed's independence insist the more important question is not whether the president can remove him before then, but if he should. 'Once you no longer have the check of the central bank, which can raise interest rates as needed to curb inflation, you really start to raise the specter of runaway costs, runaway inflation, and it makes the US economy less attractive for investors domestically and abroad,' said Ramamurti. Inflation is 'right on track', according to his administration. Economists are already concerned it is tilting off course – and Trump won't rule out taking action that critics warn would shunt it off the rails altogether.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store