Analysis-Wall Street, Main Street push for foreign tax rethink in US budget bill
NEW YORK/WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Industry groups representing sectors including real estate, finance and multinational companies are pushing for the reduction or exclusion of a retaliatory tax targeting foreign investors in the U.S. in the Republican tax bill, as they see it as a threat to their businesses and to the broader markets and economy.
The proposed tax, known as Section 899, applies a progressive tax burden of up to 20% on foreign investors' U.S. income as pushback against countries that impose taxes the U.S. considers unfair, such as digital service taxes. It could raise $116 billion in taxes over 10 years.
Some individual companies are also pushing for action, according to two lawyers familiar with their clients' plans, who did not name specific companies due to client confidentiality.
'Lobbying surrounding Section 899 is at peak levels,' said Jeff Paravano, a former Treasury Department official who is now chair of law firm BakerHostetler's tax group.
The move comes as Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo, the Republican in charge of the chamber's tax writing provisions, and other Republicans are in close coordination with President Donald Trump on the tax bill, having met on Wednesday.
The White House declined to comment. Crapo said he would not comment on ongoing discussions about the bill.
Global investors hold almost $40 trillion in U.S. assets, such as securities, loans and deposits, according to the U.S. Treasury International Capital Reporting System. This raises concerns about the ripple impact of the bill.
"It has the potential to be a very negative impact on the free flow of capital from the U.S. and through businesses that are multinational," said Gabriel Grossman, a U.S. tax partner at Linklaters, adding he has seen some clients put planned investments in the U.S. on pause until they have more clarity on the new levies.
The broader bill itself is also creating much debate as it is forecast to add about $2.4 trillion to the U.S. debt and has sparked an explosive feud between Trump and his erstwhile key ally Elon Musk, the billionaire CEO of Tesla.
COLLATERAL DAMAGE
Industries across different sectors are on high alert.
The new levy could increase taxes from rents and real estate investment trusts, gains from property sales and securitized products.
"There is a legitimate fear among investors that, if this goes through, it could impact investments, and that it would create higher costs for real estate in terms of getting financing," said David McCarthy, managing director at the CRE Finance Council, a nonpartisan trade group. "It could depress the value of real estate if you don't have as much money to finance property purchases."
The asset management industry is concerned about outflows.
"We encourage the Senate to make this provision more targeted to respond to unfair foreign taxes and other concerning measures rather than disincentivizing beneficial foreign investment in the U.S.," a spokesperson for the Investment Company Institute said.
The investment community is also working to clarify whether Treasuries and corporate bonds will remain exempt as they are currently subject to a portfolio interest exception that applies no taxation, lawyers and industry sources said.
"There's reason to believe that fixed-income assets wouldn't be in scope, but there's still considerable uncertainty about this point," Morgan Stanley strategist Michael Zezas said in a note to clients.
A footnote part of the Budget Committee report, which provides direction to taxpayers, courts and the Treasury in interpreting the statute, says that Section 899 "does not apply to portfolio interest."
Foreigners' equity investments, however, do not count with the portfolio interest protection and could be taxed, lawyers and banks said.
MULTINATIONALS
Multinational companies could face a new tax burden on dividends and inter-company loans, potentially reducing profit, according to Section 899.
Jonathan Samford, president of the Global Business Alliance, a lobbying group for international companies in the U.S., said many multinationals could decide to shut down operations in the U.S., risking 8.4 million jobs in the country.
"Those companies will not be paying U.S. tax whatsoever because they will not be able to operate in that punitive, high-tax environment," he said.
Morgan Stanley said in a note to clients a repatriation of profits out of the U.S. and pressure on the U.S. dollar.
Corporate loans could also become more expensive, as loans extended by foreign banks might be subject to the new tax burden if section 899 overrides current treaties, lawyers said, adding that companies could end up paying more for the debt to make up for the tax increase.
SENATE PASSAGE
Investors are hoping for some changes in the Senate.
Senator Steve Daines, a Montana Republican on the Finance Committee, said it may be necessary to clarify the language in Section 899.
'We want to make sure we don't have tax policies that in some way would diminish the fact that we are the gold standard in the world,' Daines said.
Morgan Stanley said in a note that it expects "sufficient Senate Republicans to take notice and clarify the policy to mitigate this risk" of increasing the cost of capital for the U.S.
"It actually is pretty much of a nuclear bomb," said Pascal Saint-Amans, partner at Brunswick Group, who is also the former tax chief of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, who led the 2021 global tax treaty. "The coverage (of Section 899) seems extremely broad and the terms are not extremely well-defined."
Hashtags

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

Boston Globe
28 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
'Relieved': Educators await Trump administration to release $6 billion in frozen funding
Advertisement The Trump administration announced the funding freeze on June 30, a day before the money was supposed to be sent to school districts in both New England and across the nation. It was another move toward the White House's goal to dismantle the Education Department, as President Trump argues that classrooms are teaching left-wing ideology. In Massachusetts, the freeze translated into $108 million withheld, leaving many districts scrambling to ensure they could still provide services during the summer months and the upcoming fall semester, with some cancelling summer programs entirely. In addition to training educators Advertisement Ray Hart, executive director of the Council of the Great City Schools, a nationwide association of urban districts that includes Boston, said in a statement they're 'relieved' about the administration releasing the funds 'for the benefit of schoolchildren throughout our nation.' In Rhode Island, education commissioner Angélica Infante-Green said, 'On behalf of Rhode Island's students, families, and teachers,' it is 'relieved to hear that the congressionally approved education funding is set to be released.' The Education Department 'will begin dispersing funds to states next week,' said Madi Biedermann, a spokesperson for the department, in a statement Friday. Biedermann said the Office of Management and Budget completed its review of the grants and directed the Education Department to release the funding. The move comes after the District of Columbia and 24 states, including Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Maine, 'It is impossible for states to effectively budget for an upcoming school year ... when the president takes the football away from us, like Lucy in a Charlie Brown cartoon,' said Peter Neronha, Rhode Island Attorney General, at a press conference announcing the lawsuit earlier this month. Related : A coalition of school districts and teachers' unions, including the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers and Health Professionals, Susan Collins, a Republican senator from Maine, and Ed Markey, a Democratic senator from Massachusetts, were among the politicians who criticized the freeze and demanded the administration release the money. Advertisement 'Every day that goes by without this education funding hurts our students, educators, and communities,' said Pedro Martinez, Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department for Elementary and Secondary Education, in a statement Thursday. 'We are still recovering from pandemic learning loss, and these federal funds are directly related to improving student academic achievement.' In early July, Governor Maura Healey said in a statement that districts would be forced to lay off staff, delay or cancel programs, and disrupt learning. 'Our schools were promised this funding, and the Trump Administration needs to deliver it,' Healey said. In a survey by the School Superintendents Association, about three-quarters said they would cut academic programs, and half said they would lay off teachers if funding was not restored. In a statement, the executive director of the association, David Schuler, said he was 'pleased' with the news of the funding being released. Some programs saw an immediate, negative impact following the freeze, including the The program, which has operated in Massachusetts since 1966, aims to address the toll on children's education caused by the frequent moves, as students transfer between different school districts or miss school altogether to work alongside their parents. In Springfield, 9-year-old Ery Perez Gutierrez last summer focused on sharpening his academic skills at Advertisement Ery is among hundreds of children in Massachusetts spending the summer at home because of the funding freeze. President Trump had proposed cutting the Migrant Education Program altogether in the next Last year, the grant served 438 students for summer programs statewide, said Emily Hoffman, director of the program in Massachusetts. The loss of the program at Boland Elementary is 'heartbreaking' and a 'huge step backwards,' as students are going without much-needed services, said Lisa Bakowski, the school's principal, who oversaw the program for the past three summers. Bakowski said the children enrolled in the program are among the most vulnerable in the community. Their parents work in the fields all day and often don't speak English. 'It sickens me that it's become a political issue when it really should never have been,' Bakowski said. 'It's about the betterment of humanity and being able to work to assist and provide for pockets of our community that need it.' Related : Other programs targeted in the freeze weren't immediately impacted. The largest grant frozen, known as Advertisement In previous years, Boston Public Schools used the funding to provide additional support for the district's recruitment efforts and educator preparation, including through an intensive 12-month program that prepares aspiring teachers to enter the classroom at no cost to them. Following the freeze announcement, BPS 'identified temporary one-time funding to maintain these efforts, which will continue in Fiscal Year 2026 despite the funding freeze with the hopes that the funding will eventually be available,' a spokesperson said in a statement Thursday. Massachusetts districts received $27 million in fiscal year 2025 for teacher training, with BPS receiving about Marcela Rodrigues can be reached at


Fox News
29 minutes ago
- Fox News
Rep Nancy Mace says a decision on potential gubernatorial campaign will be made in next couple of days
Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., said she will decide whether to run for governor of South Carolina in the coming days on 'Fox Report.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Analysis-Out-gunned Europe accepts least-worst US trade deal
By Mark John LONDON (Reuters) -In the end, Europe found it lacked the leverage to pull Donald Trump's America into a trade pact on its terms and so has signed up to a deal it can just about stomach - albeit one that is clearly skewed in the U.S.'s favour. As such, Sunday's agreement on a blanket 15% tariff after a months-long stand-off is a reality check on the aspirations of the 27-country European Union to become an economic power able to stand up to the likes of the United States or China. The cold shower is all the more bracing given that the EU has long portrayed itself as an export superpower and champion of rules-based commerce for the benefit both of its own soft power and the global economy as a whole. For sure, the new tariff that will now be applied is a lot more digestible than the 30% "reciprocal" tariff which Trump threatened to invoke in a few days. While it should ensure Europe avoids recession, it will likely keep its economy in the doldrums: it sits somewhere between two tariff scenarios the European Central Bank last month forecast would mean 0.5-0.9% economic growth this year compared to just over 1% in a trade tension-free environment. But this is nonetheless a landing point that would have been scarcely imaginable only months ago in the pre-Trump 2.0 era, when the EU along with much of the world could count on U.S. tariffs averaging out at around 1.5%. Even when Britain agreed a baseline tariff of 10% with the United States back in May, EU officials were adamant they could do better and - convinced the bloc had the economic heft to square up to Trump - pushed for a "zero-for-zero" tariff pact. It took a few weeks of fruitless talks with their U.S. counterparts for the Europeans to accept that 10% was the best they could get and a few weeks more to take the same 15% baseline which the United States agreed with Japan last week. "The EU does not have more leverage than the U.S., and the Trump administration is not rushing things," said one senior official in a European capital who was being briefed on last week's negotiations as they closed in around the 15% level. That official and others pointed to the pressure from Europe's export-oriented businesses to clinch a deal and so ease the levels of uncertainty starting to hit businesses from Finland's Nokia to Swedish steelmaker SSAB. "We were dealt a bad hand. This deal is the best possible play under the circumstances," said one EU diplomat. "Recent months have clearly shown how damaging uncertainty in global trade is for European businesses." NOW WHAT? That imbalance - or what the trade negotiators have been calling "asymmetry" - is manifest in the final deal. Not only is it expected that the EU will now call off any retaliation and remain open to U.S. goods on existing terms, but it has also pledged $600 billion of investment in the United States. The time-frame for that remains undefined, as do other details of the accord for now. As talks unfolded, it became clear that the EU came to the conclusion it had more to lose from all-out confrontation. The retaliatory measures it threatened totalled some 93 billion euros - less than half its U.S. goods trade surplus of nearly 200 billion euros. True, a growing number of EU capitals were also ready to envisage wide-ranging anti-coercion measures that would have allowed the bloc to target the services trade in which the United States had a surplus of some $75 billion last year. But even then, there was no clear majority for targeting the U.S. digital services which European citizens enjoy and for which there are scant homegrown alternatives - from Netflix to Uber to Microsoft cloud services. It remains to be seen whether this will encourage European leaders to accelerate the economic reforms and diversification of trading allies to which they have long paid lip service but which have been held back by national divisions. Describing the deal as a painful compromise that was an "existential threat" for many of its members, Germany's BGA wholesale and export association said it was time for Europe to reduce its reliance on its biggest trading partner. "Let's look on the past months as a wake-up call," said BGA President Dirk Jandura. "Europe must now prepare itself strategically for the future - we need new trade deals with the biggest industrial powers of the world." (Additional reporting by Jan Strupczewski in Brussels; Christian Kraemer and Maria Martinez in Berlin; Writing by Mark John; Editing by Nick Zieminski) Sign in to access your portfolio