Latest news with #childtaxcredit
Wall Street Journal
7 hours ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
Americans Want More Kids. The IRS Can Help
In his op-ed 'You Can't Legislate Fertility' (June 24), Matthew Hennessey writes that 'encouraging people to start families is a job for churches and civil society, not the IRS.' But Americans rely on the tax code to make it easier to have the children they already want. Women in the U.S. report having, on average, one child fewer than they'd like. Programs like the child tax credit can help close that gap. The current credit has lost a fifth of its value to inflation since President Trump's first term. The reconciliation bill is Congress's chance to add that value back. Parents are essentially small-scale entrepreneurs: When they're empowered to take risks, everyone benefits from the payoff. Family tax benefits are pro-growth policy—like R&D credits, they help parents afford the start-up costs of a major investment in the future of their family and our country.
Forbes
3 days ago
- Business
- Forbes
House/Senate Plans Boost Child Tax Credit, Not For Low-Income Families
A happy mixed race family of three relaxing in the lounge and being playful together. Loving black ... More family bonding with their son while playing fun games on the sofa at home The Senate Finance Committee has issued draft reconciliation text that mirrors much of the narrowly passed One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) from the House. Both would increase the maximum child tax credit (CTC) and restrict eligibility among citizen children who live in families whose parents are not both US citizens. Neither would increase benefits for the 17 million children who live in families that receive less than today's $2,000 per child credit maximum —though Congress has options to do so. Increasing the CTC for very low-income families could also help offset program cuts elsewhere in the legislation that would affect these families. Both plans boost the maximum CTC The House bill would increase the maximum per child credit to $2,500 through 2028, at which point it would drop to an estimated $2,100. From that point on, the credit would be indexed for inflation. The Senate Finance Committee's draft would permanently increase the maximum per child credit to $2,200 beginning in 2025 and index it for inflation. In general, increasing credits to keep pace with inflation stops the erosion of benefits as prices rise. Adjusting the CTC for inflation would put this critical program for children on par with benefits for the elderly that already grow with prices. Under both proposals, the maximum allowable refundable portion of the CTC would continue to grow with inflation, as it has done since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017. Rules that limit how the credit phases in with earnings would remain unchanged, so families with earnings in the phase-in range of the credit today would see no additional benefit from either proposal. Others would see a limited benefit if they did not have enough tax liability to offset with the higher proposed maximums. Proposed Child Tax Credit, Maximum Credit 2025-2034 Both plans add restrictions on mixed-status families Since 2018, the $2,000 CTC has only been available to children with Social Security Numbers (SSNs). When this TCJA restriction went into effect, about 1 million children no longer qualified for the benefit (but some did qualify for the smaller $500 credit for other dependents). Both the House-passed OBBBA and the Senate Finance Committee draft would continue this restriction on children and apply a new one to parents. Under the House plan, both parents of a child would need an SSN to claim the benefit while under the Senate Finance Committee draft, at least one parent would need an SSN. This new parental restriction in the House plan would eliminate an additional 2 million children from the higher CTC level, as noted in recent testimony by the chief of staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation. The Senate Finance Committee restriction would have a somewhat smaller effect. The House plan adds a new restriction on married couples who file separately Married filing separately is a relatively rare tax filing status that allows married couples to file their taxes on separate returns instead of jointly. Filing separately may render married couples ineligible for certain tax benefits including the earned income tax credit, credits that help pay for college (the American Opportunity Tax Credit and the Lifetime Learning Credit), and the premium tax credit and the child and dependent care tax credit. But under current law, married taxpayers who file separately can claim the CTC. The House plan would eliminate eligibility for the CTC for married couples who file separately (the Senate Finance Committee draft does not make this change). Requiring couples to file jointly may bolster the new SSN requirement in the House plan because it would prevent married couples with only one SSN holder from getting the CTC by filing separately. But it would also risk the credits of some survivors of domestic violence, who may become ineligible for the CTC (unless new legislation to change the tax treatment of survivors of domestic violence is adopted) as well as military personnel stationed abroad who marry noncitizens (as happened with stimulus checks). The House's plan means fewer children with SSNs would get the full CTC If the House-passed OBBBA becomes law, TPC estimates that in 2026, the number of children with SSNs who live in families that do not receive the full $2,500 CTC will jump from 17 million to over 26 million, more than 1 in 3 children in the US (Table 2). Primarily, it is because the credit's TCJA phase-in rules would remain. It's also because of the cuts directed at children with SSNs who have at least one parent that is not a US citizen: TPC estimates 500,000 children with SSNs would receive no benefit from the CTC because of the new restriction on these families and another 1 million will move from receiving the full credit to receiving less than the full CTC (up to a maximum of $500 per child as part of the other dependent credit). When more families cannot receive the full benefit of the CTC, the CTC is less able to reduce income inequality. Under both House and Senate plans, more low- and middle-income families would receive a partial credit, while their peers in all but the highest-income families would receive the full House and Senate have options to help more low-income families Research shows that increasing the CTC for low-income children and young children generates the greatest returns from this investment. My colleagues and I outlined several options, including phasing the credit in as soon as families begin to earn income (boosting the credit by $375 for most low-income families who currently receive the CTC) and phasing the credit in on a per-child basis, rather than per tax return (doubling the credit for many low-income families with two children). Both options would cost little relative to the proposed CTC expansion being proposed and would direct almost all of the additional benefits to families in the bottom one-fifth of the income distribution. The House plan and the Senate Finance Committee draft would both expand the CTC – but not for low-income families. Expanding the CTC to include more low-income families—including those with children who are US citizens—would be a sound investment in our nation's future.
Washington Post
3 days ago
- Business
- Washington Post
What House and Senate Republicans can't agree on in Trump's tax bill
Congress is moving toward passing the centerpiece of President Donald Trump's tax and spending agenda — but that doesn't mean all Republicans agree on some of its most crucial components. Trump's massive tax and immigration measure would extend nearly $4 trillion in tax cuts from his first term, while also ending taxes on tips and overtime and spending hundreds of billions on immigration enforcement and national defense. Republicans broadly agree on those proposals, but GOP lawmakers in the House and the Senate have struggled to reach consensus on how to pay for them and on other policies that touch on child care, business investments and climate change — programs that could dramatically alter the economy and the federal government. Here are Republicans' biggest areas of disagreement, and what they could mean for you. Each chamber has a slightly different approach here, but over time, both versions would wind up at about the same place. The House would increase the maximum child tax credit to $2,500, from the current $2,000. The Senate would raise it to $2,200, then index the payment to inflation, so as the cost of living goes up, so would the credit. Republican lawmakers in both chambers appear to be mostly content with the Senate's version. Each chamber has a slightly different approach here, but over time, both versions would wind up at about the same place. The House would increase the maximum child tax credit to $2,500, from the current $2,000. The Senate would raise it to $2,200, then index the payment to inflation, so as the cost of living goes up, so would the credit. Republican lawmakers in both chambers appear to be mostly content with the Senate's version. Changes to Medicaid, the federal health insurance program for low-income individuals, have sparked some of the sharpest disagreements among Republicans. In the House, the bill calls for new requirements for beneficiaries, including co-pays for those earning above 100 percent of the federal poverty level and work requirements for many able-bodied, childless adults. It would tighten eligibility verification rules and penalize states that provide health coverage to immigrants. The Senate's bill proposes more aggressive cuts, incorporating much of the House's framework and reducing federal support for states that expanded Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act; 44 million people get their health insurance through the law's marketplaces or Medicaid expansion, according to the KFF. The Senate would also limit taxes that states charge medical providers as a roundabout way of collecting more federal Medicaid dollars. That has some lawmakers particularly concerned about rural hospitals, which rely heavily on Medicaid patients. Changes to Medicaid, the federal health insurance program for low-income individuals, have sparked some of the sharpest disagreements among Republicans. In the House, the bill calls for new requirements for beneficiaries, including co-pays for those earning above 100 percent of the federal poverty level and work requirements for many able-bodied, childless adults. It would tighten eligibility verification rules and penalize states that provide health coverage to immigrants. The Senate's bill proposes more aggressive cuts, incorporating much of the House's framework and reducing federal support for states that expanded Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act; 44 million people get their health insurance through the law's marketplaces or Medicaid expansion, according to the KFF. The Senate would also limit taxes that states charge medical providers as a roundabout way of collecting more federal Medicaid dollars. That has some lawmakers particularly concerned about rural hospitals, which rely heavily on Medicaid patients. The House's legislation would cap future expansion of SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program formerly known as food stamps. It would also pass on more of the cost for administering the program to state governments, potentially forcing local officials to decide whether to cut benefits or dig into their state and municipal budgets. The Senate's bill cannot keep that provision; it was ruled out of order by the parliamentarian. That takes a big chunk out of the savings Republicans had hoped to find to cover the costs of extending the tax cuts: The Congressional Budget Office found that change would have saved the federal government more than $128 billion over 10 years by shifting those costs to states. The House's legislation would cap future expansion of SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program formerly known as food stamps. It would also pass on more of the cost for administering the program to state governments, potentially forcing local officials to decide whether to cut benefits or dig into their state and municipal budgets. The Senate's bill cannot keep that provision; it was ruled out of order by the parliamentarian. That takes a big chunk out of the savings Republicans had hoped to find to cover the costs of extending the tax cuts: The Congressional Budget Office found that change would have saved the federal government more than $128 billion over 10 years by shifting those costs to states. The House's bill is slightly more generous than the Senate's when it comes to some of Trump's campaign promises for new tax breaks. The House would allow workers in certain industries — mostly food service and hospitality — to exempt all of their tipped income and overtime wages from federal taxes so long as they are not considered 'highly compensated employees.' The Senate would cap tip and overtime deductions at $12,500 for single filers or $25,000 for married couples filing jointly. The Senate, though, is slightly more generous when it comes to seniors. Trump ran on a campaign promise to exempt Social Security benefits from taxes. His bill does not include that; instead, Republicans added several thousand dollars to the standard deduction for filers aged 65 and up. The Senate would offer a $6,000 bonus, the House a $4,000 bonus. The House's bill is slightly more generous than the Senate's when it comes to some of Trump's campaign promises for new tax breaks. The House would allow workers in certain industries — mostly food service and hospitality — to exempt all of their tipped income and overtime wages from federal taxes so long as they are not considered 'highly compensated employees.' The Senate would cap tip and overtime deductions at $12,500 for single filers or $25,000 for married couples filing jointly. The Senate, though, is slightly more generous when it comes to seniors. Trump ran on a campaign promise to exempt Social Security benefits from taxes. His bill does not include that; instead, Republicans added several thousand dollars to the standard deduction for filers aged 65 and up. The Senate would offer a $6,000 bonus, the House a $4,000 bonus. The state and local tax deduction, or SALT, is perhaps the largest wedge between the House and the Senate. The policy allows itemizing filers to deduct what they paid in state and local taxes from their federal taxable income, reducing their overall tax burden. The House's bill would allow filers earning no more than $500,000 to deduct $40,000 on SALT, a product of hard-fought negotiations that nearly tanked the legislation in the lower chamber. The Senate's bill would limit the SALT deduction to $10,000, where it stands under current law; the limit was imposed in 2017 to offset some of the costs of Trump's tax cuts. Blue-state Republicans in the House say they will vote against the legislation if it arrives back in their chamber without the $40,000 deal. The state and local tax deduction, or SALT, is perhaps the largest wedge between the House and the Senate. The policy allows itemizing filers to deduct what they paid in state and local taxes from their federal taxable income, reducing their overall tax burden. The House's bill would allow filers earning no more than $500,000 to deduct $40,000 on SALT, a product of hard-fought negotiations that nearly tanked the legislation in the lower chamber. The Senate's bill would limit the SALT deduction to $10,000, where it stands under current law; the limit was imposed in 2017 to offset some of the costs of Trump's tax cuts. Blue-state Republicans in the House say they will vote against the legislation if it arrives back in their chamber without the $40,000 deal. The House was more aggressive about gutting elements of President Joe Biden's signature 2022 climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act. It would eliminate a federal tax credit of up to $7,500 that consumers can receive for buying an electric vehicle. Republicans are also seeking to phase out incentives for the production of clean energy, such as wind and solar power. The Senate's bill would temporarily preserve some of those credits. Wind and solar energy producers would maintain their tax breaks until 2026 and would then see the benefit phase out over two years. For hydropower, nuclear and geothermal energy firms, the phaseout period wouldn't begin until 2034. The House was more aggressive about gutting elements of President Joe Biden's signature 2022 climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act. It would eliminate a federal tax credit of up to $7,500 that consumers can receive for buying an electric vehicle. Republicans are also seeking to phase out incentives for the production of clean energy, such as wind and solar power. The Senate's bill would temporarily preserve some of those credits. Wind and solar energy producers would maintain their tax breaks until 2026 and would then see the benefit phase out over two years. For hydropower, nuclear and geothermal energy firms, the phaseout period wouldn't begin until 2034. For a trio of business tax deductions — bonus depreciation, research and development expensing, and asset depreciation — both versions of the bill are similar. The main difference is that the House would sunset those deductions after 10 years, while the Senate would make them permanent, which would be more expensive. The two chambers have a more substantial disagreement on a 'duty drawback' provision that provides tax rebates for tobacco companies that import their products. The House would immediately eliminate that rebate. The Senate, under pressure from Sen. Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina), would preserve it. For a trio of business tax deductions — bonus depreciation, research and development expensing, and asset depreciation — both versions of the bill are similar. The main difference is that the House would sunset those deductions after 10 years, while the Senate would make them permanent, which would be more expensive. The two chambers have a more substantial disagreement on a 'duty drawback' provision that provides tax rebates for tobacco companies that import their products. The House would immediately eliminate that rebate. The Senate, under pressure from Sen. Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina), would preserve it. The House included a provision that would block federal courts from imposing contempt citations unless the plaintiff posted a bond as collateral. The result, legal experts say, would be to significantly reduce the power of judges to train accountability, especially on civil rights issues. The Senate bill does not include this provision — and the final legislation won't, either. The Senate parliamentarian ruled that the proposal violates the procedures that govern 'budget reconciliation,' the procedure Republicans are using to bypass a Democratic Senate filibuster. The House included a provision that would block federal courts from imposing contempt citations unless the plaintiff posted a bond as collateral. The result, legal experts say, would be to significantly reduce the power of judges to train accountability, especially on civil rights issues. The Senate bill does not include this provision — and the final legislation won't, either. The Senate parliamentarian ruled that the proposal violates the procedures that govern 'budget reconciliation,' the procedure Republicans are using to bypass a Democratic Senate filibuster. The House and the Senate are $1 trillion apart on raising the debt ceiling, a cap on how much the government can borrow to pay for spending Congress already approved. The House wrote its bill with a $4 trillion debt limit increase; the Senate proposes $5 trillion. Trump is the animating force behind this policy; he wants to eliminate the debt limit, something that cannot be accomplished through the reconciliation process. The next best option, lawmakers have said, is raising the debt ceiling enough to cover spending through the end of his term. The House and the Senate are $1 trillion apart on raising the debt ceiling, a cap on how much the government can borrow to pay for spending Congress already approved. The House wrote its bill with a $4 trillion debt limit increase; the Senate proposes $5 trillion. Trump is the animating force behind this policy; he wants to eliminate the debt limit, something that cannot be accomplished through the reconciliation process. The next best option, lawmakers have said, is raising the debt ceiling enough to cover spending through the end of his term.
Al Arabiya
21-06-2025
- Business
- Al Arabiya
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.
Associated Press
21-06-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
How Senate Republicans want to change the tax breaks in Trump's big bill
WASHINGTON (AP) — House and Senate Republicans are taking slightly different approaches when it comes to the tax cuts that lawmakers are looking to include in their massive tax and spending cuts bill. Republicans in the two chambers don't agree on the size of a deduction for state and local taxes. And they are at odds on such things as allowing people to use their health savings accounts to help pay for their gym membership, or whether electric vehicle and hybrid owners should have to 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 get a final product over the finish line. President Donald Trump is pushing to have the legislation on his desk by July 4th. 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 the child tax credit 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 on the campaign trail that he would seek to end income taxes on tips, overtime and Social Security benefits. Also, 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 OT 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 United States. 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 over 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 now are effectively capped at 6%. 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% 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 U.S. 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 EV owners and $100 for hybrid owners that would be collected by state motor vehicle departments. The Senate bill excludes the proposed fees. ___
