Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are considering additional tax proposals in response to COVID-19 but will likely have to resolve major political differences first.
Ways and Means Committee Chair Richard Neal (D-Mass.) announced last week that House Democrats are preparing legislation to aid state and local governments, many of which have had their budgets upended and are projecting significant declines in tax revenue as a result of COVID-19. The proposal is expected to include direct payments and tax-favored bonds and could be expanded to serve as a vehicle for broader stimulus and relief.
However, it already faces a major obstacle in the Senate. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has insisted the next round of COVID-19 legislation include liability and litigation protections for businesses and employees as cities and states reopen, which Democrats strongly oppose.
Congress has already passed four bills totaling more than $2.5 trillion to address the pandemic, most recently reconvening briefly to advance a $480 billion package that included urgent funding for the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). But it appears to be headed toward a protracted political battle over the fifth round, with Democratic and Republican priorities differing significantly.
McConnell has generally dismissed proposals emerging from the House as wishful. House Democrats have previously floated several long-standing priorities that were likely to be met with pushback, such as retroactively rolling back the $10,000 cap on the state and local tax deduction and bolstering the Earned Income Tax Credit and child tax credit. They have also discussed making additional direct payments to individuals, expanding the recently enacted sick pay and paid family leave requirements to larger employers and providing a more generous employee retention credit.
President Donald Trump has indicated he is uninterested in additional direct payments to individuals, preferring to suspend payroll taxes until the end of the year instead. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) called that proposal a non-starter during stimulus and relief negotiations in March.
Talks to resolve such differences could move slowly, particularly with the House indefinitely pushing back its May 4 return to Washington. However, Congress could be pressed into action if the economic or public health situation deteriorates so significantly that swift action is again warranted. Additional funding for the PPP may also provide a vehicle for some proposals, but they are likely to be limited in scope.
Washington National Tax Office
+1 202 861 4144
Washington National Tax Office
+1 202 861 4143
Tax professional standards statement
This content supports Grant Thornton LLP’s marketing of professional services and is not written tax advice directed at the particular facts and circumstances of any person. If you are interested in the topics presented herein, we encourage you to contact us or an independent tax professional to discuss their potential application to your particular situation. 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. To the extent this content may be considered to contain written tax advice, any written advice contained in, forwarded with or attached to this content is not intended by Grant Thornton LLP to be used, and cannot be used, by any person for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code.
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 or tax advice provided by Grant Thornton LLP to the reader. 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 Grant Thornton LLP or other tax professionals 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 LLP 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.