Congress weighs presidential tax promises

 

Jockeying to shape the multi-trillion-dollar fiscal debate due to take place next year heated up in recent days as former President Donald Trump promised to undo the cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap while Vice President Kamala Harris unveiled a more extensive economic policy platform that added a new targeted tax credit for domestic technology and manufacturing sectors. Congressional lawmakers also teased meaningful policy positions, with a key Senate tax writer proposing a change to how Congress debates the price tag of tax policy, and House Speaker Mike Johnson suggesting Republicans could retain some of the energy tax credits his party has targeted for repeal. 

 

 

Harris pitches ‘America Forward’ tax credit

 

Harris released an 82-page economic platform last week with some new information on tax proposals. Most of the provisions described in the plan were released previously, but it did add a new American Forward tax credit aimed at companies engaged in innovative projects in fields ranging from “longstanding manufacturing, farming, and energy communities.” Details on the credit are scarce, but Harris said the credit would come with labor provisions, likely along the lines of the prevailing wage and apprenticeship and rules for the Inflation Reduction Act’s energy credits. Her speech and the platform document also indicate the credit would target to companies that “retool or rebuild and existing facility,” particularly in longstanding iron and steel communities.

 

Harris also for the first time pitched a new “standard deduction” for small businesses, but offered no information on how this proposal would work.

 

For information on the tax plans of the candidate and how 2025 will be crucial for tax planning, see our recent pieces:

 

 

SALT deduction cap back on the (crowded) table

 

During a Sept. 17 campaign rally, Trump promised to fully restore the state and local tax deduction, reversing course from enacting the $10,000 SALT deduction cap into law as part of the TCJA in 2017. The announcement may have come as welcome news to congressional Republicans in competitive districts in high-tax states like New York and California, but it could further complicate tax negotiations next year.

 

It is unclear how much of a priority this would be in a Trump presidency or how other Republicans would view it. Extending the current TCJA over 10 years would increase the federal deficit by $4.6 trillion, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. and the Penn-Wharton Budget Model estimates eliminating the SALT deduction cap entirely would add approximately $1.2 trillion to the overall cost of that. Trump has also touted other potentially expensive tax proposals including making tips and overtime pay tax-free, which could lower federal revenues by hundreds of billions of dollars to over $1 trillion over the standard 10-year window, according to multiple estimates by independent experts.

 

Those policies could eat into budgetary space for continuing, or increasing, business tax cuts and benefits, and deficit considerations mean that tax increases, like a corporate tax hike, could be on the table in order to offset the costs of these more populist promises, though Trump has also campaigned on lowering the corporate rate, which would also reduce revenues.  

 

 

Republicans still seeking consensus on tax cuts and deficits

 

Congressional Republicans are of differing opinions over offsetting the costs of tax cuts. Top Senate Finance Committee Republican Mike Crapo told reporters on Sept. 17 that an extension of current policy should not be considered to reduce revenues, and only the cost of new tax policy should be part of the congressional debate around extending the TCJA next year.

 

“If you look at history, extending current tax law has never been offset by Congress,” Crapo said with the January 2013 extension of most of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts in mind, according to reports. “If it’s literally not changing tax policy, I’m just telling you what the precedent that Congress has set is.”

 

However, other Republicans in the House and Senate have suggested that an extension of the TCJA should be at least partially offset to help deal with mounting deficits and a historically large debt-to-GDP ratio, exacerbated in recent years by increased borrowing costs for the government.

 

Asked about whether he was concerned about the impact of Trump’s proposals, including restoring the full SALT deduction, would have on federal deficits, House Speaker Mike Johnson said, “I’ve thought about it. But I do think it’s a combination of steps we would look to take.”

 

 

Republicans soften stance on IRA energy credits

 

In remarks to journalists on Sept. 18, House Speaker Mike Johnson said that while Republicans would seek to repeal energy credits created or expanded upon by the Inflation Reduction Act, they would not try to fully repeal every one, or the entire law.

 

“You’ve got to use a scalpel and not a sledgehammer, because there’s a few provisions in there that have helped overall,” Johnson said.

 

The comments came a little over a month after 18 members of the House Republican Conference wrote Johnson in favor of preserving some of the energy tax credits.

 

During a policy speech the same day, Johnson promised to restore full Section 174 R&E expensing, as well as full bonus depreciation, two pillars of the bipartisan extenders bill that has, at least so far, fallen short in the Senate. Johnson did not elaborate on whether that might be in the lame-duck session of Congress this year or during the broader tax negotiations due to take place in 2025.

 

 

Congress takes on tax-free tips

 

Recognizing the political appeal as elections draw near, Congressional lawmakers continued to flesh out a campaign trail promise of both parties: making tips tax-free.

 

While not all proposals will have a shelf-life past the election, early details could define the path of negotiations moving forward. And though pledges, like no federal taxes on tips or overtime pay, are aimed at individuals rather than businesses, they can indirectly impact what happens around the tax treatment of businesses next year, as Congress will be conscious of the overall cost to the federal government of next year’s tax package, and may seek to recoup revenues by raising taxes or ending certain benefits for businesses to offset more popular personal tax provisions. The tips and overtime tax holidays would also increase reporting requirements for employers.

 

Congressional Democrats and Republicans have introduced their own bills on the tax-free tips pledges made by former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. 

 

  • H.R. 9264, the TIPS Act, authored by Rep. Steven Horsford, D-N.V., would create a deduction for tips earned by individuals with adjusted gross income below $112,500.
  • S. 4621, the No Tax on Tips Act, authored by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, creates a deduction equal to an individual’s cash tips in a given tax year.
  • H.R. 8785, the Tax Free Tips Act of 2024, authored by Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and cosponsored by two close Trump allies, Reps. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., and Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., would exempt tips from employment and income taxes. Notably, unlike the other two bills, this bill’s author, nor none of its cosponsors, sits on a committee of jurisdiction for tax legislation.
  • H.R. 7870, the Tip Tax Termination Act, authored by Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., would allow a deduction for tipped wages of up to $20,000 (Bacon also does not sit on a committee of jurisdiction for tax policy.

Future design of tax-free tips legislation will be shaped in concert with whichever administration begins in January, so it’s possible none of these exact policies will become law. But the bills provide a preview of that debate in Congress, as well as what the overall budgetary cost in a year when many portions of the tax code will be up for re-examination, in what figures to be a zero-sum exercise in which business and individual tax code priorities will be balanced against each other.

 
 

Contacts:

 
 
 
Content disclaimer

This content provides information and comments on current issues and developments from Grant Thornton Advisors LLC and Grant Thornton LLP. It is not a comprehensive analysis of the subject matter covered. It is not, and should not be construed as, accounting, legal, tax, or professional advice provided by Grant Thornton Advisors LLC and Grant Thornton LLP. All relevant facts and circumstances, including the pertinent authoritative literature, need to be considered to arrive at conclusions that comply with matters addressed in this content.

For additional information on topics covered in this content, contact a Grant Thornton professional.

Grant Thornton LLP and Grant Thornton Advisors LLC (and their respective subsidiary entities) practice as an alternative practice structure in accordance with the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct and applicable law, regulations and professional standards. Grant Thornton LLP is a licensed independent CPA firm that provides attest services to its clients, and Grant Thornton Advisors LLC and its subsidiary entities provide tax and business consulting services to their clients. Grant Thornton Advisors LLC and its subsidiary entities are not licensed CPA firms.

 

 

Tax professional standards statement

This content supports Grant Thornton Advisors LLC’s marketing of professional services and is not written tax advice directed at the particular facts and circumstances of any person. It is not, and should not be construed as, accounting, legal, tax, or professional advice provided by Grant Thornton Advisors LLC. If you are interested in the topics presented herein, we encourage you to contact a Grant Thornton Advisors LLC tax professional. Nothing herein shall be construed as imposing a limitation on any person from disclosing the tax treatment or tax structure of any matter addressed herein.

The information contained herein is general in nature and is based on authorities that are subject to change. It is not, and should not be construed as, accounting, legal, tax, or professional advice provided by Grant Thornton Advisors LLC. This material may not be applicable to, or suitable for, the reader’s specific circumstances or needs and may require consideration of tax and nontax factors not described herein. Contact a Grant Thornton Advisors LLC tax professional prior to taking any action based upon this information. Changes in tax laws or other factors could affect, on a prospective or retroactive basis, the information contained herein; Grant Thornton Advisors LLC assumes no obligation to inform the reader of any such changes. All references to “Section,” “Sec.,” or “§” refer to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.

Grant Thornton Advisors LLC and its subsidiary entities are not licensed CPA firms.

 

More tax hot topics