
How Senate Republicans Want to Change the Tax Breaks in Trump's Big Bill
House and Senate Republicans are taking slightly different approaches to the tax cuts they want to include in their massive tax and spending cuts bill. Republicans in the two chambers disagree on the size of a deduction for state and local taxes. They also disagree on issues such as allowing people to use their health savings accounts to help pay for their gym memberships and whether electric vehicle and hybrid owners should pay an annual fee.
The House passed its version shortly before Memorial Day. Now the Senate is looking to pass its version. While the two bills are similar on the major tax provisions, how they work out their differences in the coming weeks will determine how quickly they can finalize a bill. President Donald Trump is pushing to have the legislation on his desk by July 4.
Here's a look at some of the key differences between the two bills:
Tax break for families: The child tax credit currently stands at $2,000 per child. The House bill temporarily boosts it to $2,500 for the 2025 through 2028 tax years –– roughly the length of President Donald Trump's second term. It also indexes the credit amount for inflation beginning in 2027. The Senate bill provides a smaller initial bump-up to $2,200, but the bump is permanent, with the credit amount indexed for inflation beginning next year.
Trump campaign promises: Trump promised during the campaign that he would seek to end income taxes on tips, overtime, and Social Security benefits. He also said he would give car buyers a new tax break by allowing them to deduct the interest paid on auto loans. The House and Senate bills incorporate those promises with temporary deductions lasting from the 2025 through 2028 tax years, but with some differences.
The House bill creates a deduction on tips for those working in jobs that have customarily received tips. The House also provides for a deduction for overtime that's equal to the amount of overtime a worker has earned.
The Senate bill comes with more restrictions. The deduction for tips is limited to $25,000 per taxpayer, and the deduction for overtime is limited to $12,500 per taxpayer. The House and Senate bills both provide a deduction of up to $10,000 for interest paid on loans for vehicles made in the US. And on Social Security, the bills don't directly touch the program. Instead, they grant a larger tax deduction for Americans age 65 and older. The House sets the deduction at $4,000. The Senate sets it at $6,000. Both chambers include income limits over which the new deductions begin to phase out.
More SALT: The caps on state and local tax deductions (known in Washington as the SALT cap) now stand at $10,000. The House bill, in a bid to win over Republicans from New York, California, and New Jersey, lifts the cap to $40,000 per household with incomes of less than $500,000. The credit phases down for households earning more than $500,000. The Senate bill keeps the cap at $10,000. That's a non-starter in the House, but Republicans in the two chambers will look to negotiate a final number in the coming weeks that both sides can accept.
Medicaid providers: The House bill prohibits states from establishing new provider taxes or increasing existing taxes. These are taxes that Medicaid providers, such as hospitals, pay to help states finance their share of Medicaid costs. In turn, the taxes allow states to receive increased federal matching funds while generally holding providers harmless through higher reimbursements that offset the taxes paid. Such taxes are now effectively capped at six percent.
The Senate looks to gradually lower that threshold for states that have expanded their Medicaid populations under the Affordable Care Act (or Obamacare) until it reaches 3.5 percent in 2031, with exceptions for nursing homes and intermediate care facilities.
Industry groups have warned that limiting the ability of states to tax providers may lead to some states making significant cuts to their Medicaid programs as they make up for the lost revenue in other ways. The Medicaid provision could be a flashpoint in the coming House and Senate negotiations. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., was highly critical of the proposed Senate changes. 'This needs a lot of work. It's really concerning, and I'm really surprised by it,' he said. 'Rural hospitals are going to be in bad shape.'
Tax breaks for business: The House bill would allow companies for five years to fully deduct equipment purchases and domestic research and development expenses. The Senate bill includes no sunset, making the tax breaks permanent, which was a key priority of powerful trade groups such as the US Chamber of Commerce.
Clean energy tax credits: Republicans in both chambers are looking to scale back the clean energy tax credits enacted through then-President Joe Biden's climate law. It aimed to boost the nation's transition away from planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions toward renewable energy, such as wind and solar power. Under the Senate bill, the tax credits for clean energy and home energy efficiency would still be phased out, but less quickly than under the House bill. Still, advocacy groups fear that the final measure will threaten hundreds of thousands of jobs and drive up household energy costs.
Odds and ends: The House bill would allow millions of Americans to use their health savings accounts to pay for gym memberships, with a cap of $500 for single taxpayers and $1,000 for joint filers. The Senate bill doesn't include such a provision.
The House reinstates a charitable deduction for non-itemizers of $150 per taxpayer. The Senate bill increases that deduction for donations to $1,000 per taxpayer.
Republicans in the House bill included a new annual fee of $250 for electric vehicle owners and $100 for hybrid owners, which would be collected by state motor vehicle departments. The Senate bill excludes the proposed fees.
Hashtags

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


Arab News
34 minutes ago
- Arab News
What's next for birthright citizenship after the Supreme Court's ruling
WASHINGTON: The legal battle over President Donald Trump's move to end birthright citizenship is far from over despite the Republican administration's major victory Friday limiting nationwide injunctions. Immigrant advocates are vowing to fight to ensure birthright citizenship remains the law as the Republican president tries to do away with more than a century of precedent. The high court's ruling sends cases challenging the president's birthright citizenship executive order back to the lower courts. But the ultimate fate of the president's policy remains uncertain. Here's what to know about birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court's ruling and what happens next. What does birthright citizenship mean? Birthright citizenship makes anyone born in the United States an American citizen, including children born to mothers in the country illegally. The practice goes back to soon after the Civil War, when Congress ratified the Constitution's 14th Amendment, in part to ensure that Black people, including former slaves, had citizenship. 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States,' the amendment states. Thirty years later, Wong Kim Ark, a man born in the US to Chinese parents, was refused re-entry into the US after traveling overseas. His suit led to the Supreme Court explicitly ruling that the amendment gives citizenship to anyone born in the US, no matter their parents' legal status. It has been seen since then as an intrinsic part of US law, with only a handful of exceptions, such as for children born in the US to foreign diplomats. Trump has long said he wants to do away with birthright citizenship Trump's executive order, signed in January, seeks to deny citizenship to children who are born to people who are living in the US illegally or temporarily. It's part of the hard-line immigration agenda of the president, who has called birthright citizenship a 'magnet for illegal immigration.' Trump and his supporters focus on one phrase in the amendment — 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' – saying it means the US can deny citizenship to babies born to women in the country illegally. A series of federal judges have said that's not true, and issued nationwide injunctions stopping his order from taking effect. 'I've been on the bench for over four decades. I can't remember another case where the question presented was as clear as this one is. This is a blatantly unconstitutional order,' US District Judge John Coughenour said at a hearing earlier this year in his Seattle courtroom. In Greenbelt, Maryland, a Washington suburb, US District Judge Deborah Boardman wrote that 'the Supreme Court has resoundingly rejected and no court in the country has ever endorsed' Trump's interpretation of birthright citizenship. Is Trump's order constitutional? The justices didn't say The high court's ruling was a major victory for the Trump administration in that it limited an individual judge's authority in granting nationwide injunctions. The administration hailed the ruling as a monumental check on the powers of individual district court judges, whom Trump supporters have argued want to usurp the president's authority with rulings blocking his priorities around immigration and other matters. But the Supreme Court did not address the merits of Trump's bid to enforce his birthright citizenship executive order. 'The Trump administration made a strategic decision, which I think quite clearly paid off, that they were going to challenge not the judges' decisions on the merits, but on the scope of relief,' said Jessica Levinson, a Loyola Law School professor. Attorney General Pam Bondi told reporters at the White House that the administration is 'very confident' that the high court will ultimately side with the administration on the merits of the case. Questions and uncertainty swirl around next steps The justices kicked the cases challenging the birthright citizenship policy back down to the lower courts, where judges will have to decide how to tailor their orders to comply with the new ruling. The executive order remains blocked for at least 30 days, giving lower courts and the parties time to sort out the next steps. The Supreme Court's ruling leaves open the possibility that groups challenging the policy could still get nationwide relief through class-action lawsuits and seek certification as a nationwide class. Within hours after the ruling, two class-action suits had been filed in Maryland and New Hampshire seeking to block Trump's order. But obtaining nationwide relief through a class action is difficult as courts have put up hurdles to doing so over the years, said Suzette Malveaux, a Washington and Lee University law school professor. 'It's not the case that a class action is a sort of easy, breezy way of getting around this problem of not having nationwide relief,' said Malveaux, who had urged the high court not to eliminate the nationwide injunctions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who penned the court's dissenting opinion, urged the lower courts to 'act swiftly on such requests for relief and to adjudicate the cases as quickly as they can so as to enable this Court's prompt review' in cases 'challenging policies as blatantly unlawful and harmful as the Citizenship Order.' Opponents of Trump's order warned there would be a patchwork of polices across the states, leading to chaos and confusion without nationwide relief. 'Birthright citizenship has been settled constitutional law for more than a century,' said Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Global Refuge, a nonprofit that supports refugees and migrants. 'By denying lower courts the ability to enforce that right uniformly, the Court has invited chaos, inequality, and fear.'

Al Arabiya
41 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
Meta seeks $29 billion from private capital firms for AI data centers: Report
Meta Platforms is seeking to raise $29 billion from private capital firms to build artificial intelligence data centers in the US, the Financial Times reported on Friday. The Facebook-parent has advanced discussions with private credit investors including Apollo Global Management, KKR , Brookfield , Carlyle and PIMCO, the report said, citing people familiar with the matter. Meta is looking to raise $3 billion in equity and $26 billion in debt, the report said, adding that the company is debating how to structure the debt raising and may also seek to raise more capital. Such a fundraising comes at a time when Meta has doubled down its commitment to artificial intelligence, including a $14.8 billion investment in startup Scale AI. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg had said in January the company would spend as much as $65 billion this year to expand its AI infrastructure, seeking to strengthen its position against competitors OpenAI and Google in the race to lead the AI technology landscape. Meta and Carlyle declined to comment, while Apollo Global, KKR, Brookfield and PIMCO did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment. Meta was working with its advisers at Morgan Stanley to arrange the financing, and it was considering ways that could make the debt more easily tradeable once it was issued, the FT report said. Major tech companies are investing heavily to secure the vast computing power needed to run AI models, fueling demand for specialized data centers that link thousands of chips into high-performance clusters. Microsoft has planned a capital expenditure of $80 billion in fiscal 2025, with most of it aimed at expanding data centers to ease capacity bottlenecks for AI services. Bloomberg News reported in February that Apollo Global Management is in talks to lead a roughly $35 billion financing package for Meta to help develop data centers in the United States.


Asharq Al-Awsat
2 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Coco Gauff is Just 21 but Already Thinking About What to Do after Tennis
To be clear, Coco Gauff didn't bring up the word 'star' during a recent interview with The Associated Press; the reporter did. So as Gauff began to answer a question about balancing her life as a professional athlete with her off-court interests, she caught herself repeating that term. 'I definitely didn't know how it would look like,' she began with a smile, 'before I got to be, I guess, a star — feels weird to call myself that — but I definitely did want to expand outside of tennis. Always. Since I was young.' She still is young, by just about any measure, and she is a really good tennis player — Gauff owns the Grand Slam titles and No. 2 ranking to prove it as she heads into Wimbledon, which begins Monday — but the 21-year-old American is also more than that, The Associated Press reported. Someone unafraid to express her opinions about societal issues. Someone who connects with fans via social media. Someone who is the highest-paid female athlete in any sport, topping $30 million last year, according to with less than a third of that from prize money and most via deals with companies such as UPS, New Balance, Rolex and Barilla. Someone who recently launched her own management firm. And someone who wants to succeed in the business world long after she no longer swings a racket on tour. 'It's definitely something that I want to start to step up for post-career. Kind of start building that process, which is why I wanted to do it early. Because I didn't want to feel like I was playing catch-up at the end of my career,' said Gauff, who will face Dayana Yastremska in the first round at the All England Club on Tuesday. 'On the business side of things, it doesn't come as natural as tennis feels. I'm still learning, and I have a lot to learn about," Gauff said. "I've debated different things and what paths I wanted to take when it came to just stimulating my brain outside of the court, because I always knew that once I finished high school that I needed to put my brain into something else.' In a campaign announced this week by UPS, which first partnered with Gauff in 2023 before she won that year's US Open, she connects with business coach Emma Grede — known for working with Kim Kardashian on Skims, and with Khloe Kardashian on Good American — to offer mentoring to three small-business owners. 'Coco plays a key role in helping us connect with those younger Gen-Z business owners — emerging or younger entrepreneurs,' Betsy Wilson, VP of digital marketing and brand activation at UPS, said in a phone interview. 'Obviously, she's very relevant in social media and in culture, and working with Coco helps us really connect with that younger group.' While Grede helped the entrepreneurs, Gauff also got the opportunity to pick up tips. 'It's really cool to learn from someone like her,' Gauff said. 'Whenever I feel like I'm ready to make that leap, I can definitely reach out to her for advice and things like that. ... This will help me right now and definitely in the long term.'