“Corporations are betting they will benefit from the legislation making permanent the tax breaks in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
The package would restore a tax break from the 2017 tax package that allowed businesses to fully write off the cost of equipment in the first year it was purchased. The incentive has been phasing out since 2023.
Also, the legislation would once again allow businesses to write off the cost of research and development in the year it was incurred. The TCJA required that companies deduct those expenses over five years, starting in 2022.”
“If the bill passes, businesses would be allowed to fully and immediately deduct the cost of building new manufacturing facilities. This temporary provision is retroactive to January 19, 2025 and continues for construction that begins before January 1, 2029.
And in a bid to incentivize more chipmaking in America, the legislation would enhance tax credits for semiconductor firms building manufacturing facilities in the United States.”
“The National Federation of Independent Business, the leading small business lobbying group, praised the legislation for making permanent a special deduction for the owners of certain pass-through entities who pay businesses taxes on their individual tax returns.
That deduction, which applies to small businesses and partnerships formed by lawyers, doctors and investors, would get increased in the House version of the bill from 20% to 23%. The Senate bill kept it at 20%.”
…
“The net income for the top 20% of earners would increase by nearly $13,000 per year, after taxes and transfers, according to an analysis of a near-final version of the Senate bill by Penn Wharton Budget Model.
That amounts to a 3% average increase in income for those households.
For the top 0.1% of earners, the average annual income gain would amount to more than $290,000, according to Penn Wharton.”
“Employees who work in jobs that traditionally receive tips could deduct up to $25,000 in tip income from their federal income taxes, while workers who receive overtime could deduct up to $12,500 of that extra pay.
However, highly compensated individuals, who make more than $160,000 in 2025, would not qualify.”
“Many people at the lowest end of the income ladder would be worse off because the package would enact historic cuts to the nation’s safety net program, particularly Medicaid and food stamps.
Among the many changes to these programs would be the addition of federally mandated work requirements to Medicaid for the first time in its 60-year history and the expansion of the work mandate in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, the formal name for food stamps. Parents of children ages 14 and up are among those who would have to work, volunteer, take classes or participate in job training to keep their benefits.
Millions of low-income Americans are expected to lose their benefits because of the work requirements and the bill’s other measures affecting Medicaid and food stamps. Notably, few of those dropped from Medicaid coverage would have access to job-based health insurance, according to a Congressional Budget Office report about the House version of the package.
The health provisions won’t only hit low-income Americans. The Senate is also tightening verification requirements for the Affordable Care Act’s federal premium subsidies, which could also leave some middle-income Americans uninsured.”
…
“Hospitals are not happy with the health care provisions of the bill, which would reduce the support they receive from states to care for Medicaid enrollees and leave them with more uncompensated care costs for treating uninsured patients.”
…
“The Senate version of the package would increase the deficit by about $3.4 trillion over the next decade, according to CBO.”
…
“The CBO expects US federal government interest costs to surpass $1 trillion per year.”
“Think about the timeline in Martin’s case. The feds invaded her home and held her at gunpoint while her terrified seven-year-old son cowered in a different room, all because the officers could not be bothered to perform basic due diligence—are we actually at the right house?—before breaking down the (wrong) door and detonating a flash grenade. This deplorable and entirely avoidable misdeed occurred eight years ago, which means that this family has been fighting an uphill battle for redress and accountability from the government for the better part of a decade. And their fight is still not over yet, even after securing an important win at the highest court in the land.
To say the least, it should not be so hard—and it should definitely not take so long—to hold the government to account for such blatant wrongdoing.”
“The agency tasked with advancing America’s energy security, developing its nuclear arsenal, and handling environmental challenges is now shaping the landscape of interscholastic sports in the United States.
The Energy Department recently released two direct final rules to modify existing Title IX protections. One of the rules would strike regulations requiring schools that receive federal funds to allow students to try out for opposite-sex noncontact sports teams if schools do not offer the sport to their sex. This change would impact sports such as tennis and swimming.
The Energy Department says “such athletics rules ignore differences between the sexes which are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality while also imposing a burden on local governments and small businesses who are in the best position to determine the needs of their community and constituents.” The rule was issued in response to President Donald Trump’s executive order “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” which directed the Education Department to bring Title IX enforcement actions against educational institutions receiving federal funding “that deny female students an equal opportunity to participate in sports and athletic events by requiring them, in the women’s category, to compete with or against or to appear unclothed before males.”
The second rule issued by the Energy Department would strike a provision that allows students to “take affirmative action” to “overcome the effects of conditions that resulted in limited participation” if a federal agency determines that they have not faced discrimination based on sex in an “education program or activity.” The rule also strikes a requirement mandating schools to conduct self-evaluations on how their programs and practices comply with Title IX. Reporting under this provision ended in 2002.
While Title IX enforcement has traditionally been led by the Education Department, the Energy Department has “long used the law to close the gap between men and women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics fields,” reports Politico. Still, the method by which the agency is proposing to reform Title IX is worrying several civil rights groups.
The agency is using a direct final rule process, which has been reserved for “noncontroversial rules” that are “unlikely to receive significant adverse comments,” notes Politico. Shiwali Patel, senior director of safe and inclusive schools at the National Women’s Law Center, told Politico that direct final rules can’t be used for Title IX.
“Technically, it just takes one significant adverse comment for them to have to withdraw the rule or to go through the notice of proposed rulemaking,” said Patel. “However, we’re dealing with an administration that has made very clear that they are not about complying with the law.””
Trump’s big beautiful bill hits Medicaid hard, which provides health insurance for low-income people. The bill adds onerous paperwork requirements that many people will fail to complete. Republicans represent the cuts as getting able-bodied young men back to work, but for Medicaid to save money, it has to no longer pay medical bills, which do not primarily come from able-bodied young men.
“Murkowski..was able to extract key concessions for her state…She won victories on clean energy tax credits, delaying changes to food aid for her state and the promise of massive revenues from oil and gas drilling leases, among other priorities she can take back home.
In the end, she voted for a bill that makes up the core of her party’s domestic agenda.
“I held my head up and made sure that the people of Alaska are not forgotten in this, but I think that there is more that needs to be done, and I’m not done,” Murkowski told reporters immediately after the vote. “I am going to take a nap, though.”
…
she ultimately voted for a bill she just minutes later decried as “rushed” and “imperfect.”
…
What Murkowski was wrangling for was pretty basic: How to blunt the impact of the bill on her state.
“What I tried to do was to ensure that my colleagues understood what that means when you live in an area where there are no jobs, it is not a cash economy,” she told reporters. “And so I needed help, and I worked to get that every single day.”
…
Bowhead whaling boat captains recognized by the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission will be able to deduct more for whale-hunting-related expenses, up to $50,000 from the current $10,000.”