“the bill does not include a provision to eliminate federal income taxes on Social Security benefits.
“There is no provision in the budget bill that directly ‘eliminates’ or even reduces taxes on Social Security benefits,” Howard Gleckman, senior fellow at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, told the Washington Post.
Trump’s bill offers a tax deduction of $6,000 to seniors making up to $75,000 individually, or $150,000 on a joint return. The deduction is lowered for incomes above that level and axed for seniors with individual incomes of more than $175,000, or $250,000 jointly. However, the new deduction for seniors is set to expire within a couple of years. The median income for seniors in 2022 was about $30,000.”
…
“Before the megabill’s passing, 64 percent of seniors receiving Social Security income paid no tax on their Social Security due to exemptions and deductions, according to an estimate by Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers. Under Trump’s megabill, 88 percent won’t be paying.”
…
the rise is due to the bill’s increase in “the standard deduction for seniors, which, as a result, reduces the number of seniors who will pay taxes on their Social Security benefits.”
…the new legislation will provide limited benefits for lower-income seniors because they already pay less in taxes.”
People are dying because they are not getting medicines that U.S. Aid used to bring them. Many of these medicines were already donated, but they go expired because U.S. Aid, who would be delivering them, was gutted by Trump, Elon Musk, and DOGE.
“Since Rubio took over the NSC, he has shrunk its staff by more than half. It now has fewer than 100 people, according to a person familiar with the NSC process. Arguably more importantly, Rubio has imposed changes to what’s called “the interagency process” — a key function of the NSC that involves coordinating policy and messaging across government agencies and departments.
That process, two people told me, is now one in which important meetings aren’t held, career staffers are often in the dark about what’s expected of them and some people or their institutions try to take advantage of power vacuums. I granted many of those I spoke to anonymity to discuss internal administration dynamics.
Some U.S. diplomats and other national security professionals are worried that the current structure means small crises will explode into big ones because they don’t get early attention, and that key officials who deal with priority issues, such as Ukraine, are being iced out of important conversations.
One of the people familiar with the AUKUS situation said the broken process was already fueling turf fights, such as with Colby, a man known for challenging status quo thinking.
“It’s Game of Thrones politics over there,” the person said.”
“Deportation is the most commonly understood term, but it refers to a codified judicial process for expelling an alien back to their home country for violating immigration law—a process that the Trump administration’s program barely resembled. In the multiple cases of foreign students who were snatched off the street and had their visas revoked, they were given no due process and provided no evidence of what, if any, laws they had violated.
The Trump administration also summarily expelled several hundred alleged Venezuelan gang members and sent them not to their home country but to a nightmarish Salvadoran megaprison. The only word we have that comes close to describing that, courtesy of the war on terror, is to rendition someone.
At the same time, the administration terminated temporary protected status for hundreds of thousands of refugees from countries such as Venezuela, Cuba, Haiti, and Nicaragua. There were also reports that the White House was considering revoking legal status for Ukrainians who had fled their war-torn country.
There is a term for that last one: refoulement—the act of returning a refugee or asylum seeker back to the country from which they fled, and where they face serious risk of harm. The principle of non-refoulement is a cornerstone of international refugee law.”
“The popular child tax credit will receive a slight boost from President Trump’s signature tax and spending bill — but there are caveats.
Currently, taxpayers who make under $200,000 annually as a single filer, or $400,000 if filing jointly, can qualify for a partially refundable credit of up to $2,000 for each child they claim as a dependent who is under age 17 and a US citizen or qualifying noncitizen.
The new legislation increases the credit to a maximum $2,200 per child. Without the bill, the maximum credit would have reverted to $1,000.
But the increase, which amounts to a 10% bump, follows years of rising prices that have chipped away at the value of the original benefit. And many extremely low-income children — in addition to US citizen kids of undocumented parents — will be locked out of the payments altogether.”
…
“To qualify for the refundable portion of the child tax credit, which is called the “additional child tax credit” and can be worth up to $1,700, taxpayers must earn at least $2,500 in annual income. (A refundable tax credit can lower tax liability past zero, potentially generating a refund.) Families who make less than that receive no benefit, while many more children are in low-income households that earn just enough to receive part of the benefit but not enough to receive the full payment.”
…
“The average benefit for taxpayers with children who made between $10,000 and $20,000 in 2022, for example, was $800, according to the Congressional Research Service. That pay range includes people who worked full-time jobs at the federal minimum wage. Families earning between $200,000 and $500,000, meanwhile, saw an average benefit of $2,810.”
“As Republicans began to consider their bill in January, Trump promised to “love and cherish” Medicaid. But he ultimately embraced the cuts as necessary to get the bill passed and lobbied reluctant GOP representatives and senators to go along.”
…
“Other entitlements like Medicare and Social Security, which both serve elderly people, were deemed too politically risky to touch. Trump has been even more adamant about not reducing benefits in Medicare and Social Security, a cornerstone of his first campaign in 2016, than he was about Medicaid.”
“That unwillingness to significantly budge on his array of tariffs has bogged down trade negotiations and hindered the administration from crafting substantial trade deals. As the U.S. has set out to negotiate deals with more than 60 trading partners, world leaders have grown increasingly frustrated with what they say are unbalanced demands from the U.S.
Other trading partners, including the European Union, have bristled at the terms of the UK framework and said they would not agree to a similar deal. That arrangement left a 10 percent so-called baseline tariff in place, while laying out a path to slash sector-specific tariffs.
The bloc isn’t alone, and Trump’s numerous demands and “do-it-or-else” approach have made it challenging for countries to corral the domestic political support they’ll need in order to sell any deal at home.”
“Trump’s all-sticks-and-no-carrot approach to trade talks is making it difficult for even friendly foreign governments to reach an agreement they fear could be political suicide back home — no matter how much the White House threatens their economies.”