Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin) said SB 231 offers tax credits to encourage more films to be made in Wisconsin. (Screenshot via WisEye)

Wisconsin Republicans advocated on Tuesday for a bill to encourage filmmaking in Wisconsin through tax credits and a state film office. Another bill would declare that “gig workers” for app-based delivery services aren’t employees of a company.

During a Tuesday Senate Utilities and Tourism committee meeting, Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin) said SB 231 offers tax credits to encourage more films to be made in Wisconsin. Bradley described  a recent movie called “Green and Gold,” about a fourth-generation dairy farmer in Wisconsin who is on the verge of losing his farm and makes a bet on the Green Bay Packers to help save it. 

Bradley said the director of the film, Anders Lindwall, chose to make it in Wisconsin, but that decision meant a financial sacrifice as the director turned down a major studio offer to purchase his film. The studio wanted him to relocate production to Alabama — a state with film tax incentives.

“He turned down the offer to keep his project authentically Wisconsin,” Bradley said. 

Wisconsin had a film incentive for a brief time in 2010 under former Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle, though the Republican-led Legislature discontinued that program just a few years later. Now, Wisconsin is  one of only four states in the country without a film office and one of 13 without any film tax incentives. 

The bill would create new tax credits including one for 30% of the total cost of the salaries paid to employees who reside in Wisconsin and work in Wisconsin, one for 30% of acquiring or improving property and one for 30% production costs paid by a company to produce a film, video, broadcast advertisement or television production. A person’s total credits would be capped at $1 million for a fiscal year. The bill would also create a new State Film Office housed in the Department of Tourism that would implement the tax credits.

Rep. David Armstrong (R-Rice Lake) said having the rate at 30% would put Wisconsin in the top tier of states offering film incentives.

“How many of you like me flinch when you see the Georgia peach logo in the credits after a movie or TV show?” Armstrong asked at the hearing. “Do we want Illinois or Minnesota or Georgia to poach productions that could just as easily be shot in Wisconsin?”

Bradley said the bill “aims to make Wisconsin competitive by attracting filmmakers and productions through meaningful incentives, which in turn support local businesses, job creation, and increased tourism. Simply put, it would encourage filmmakers like Mr. Lindwall to choose Wisconsin, bringing their stories and economic activity to our state.” 

The bill has broad bipartisan support with cosponsors including Sens. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point), Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee), Romaine Quinn (R-Birchwood) and Brad Pfaff (D-Onalaska).

Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove) expressed some concerns about whether the funding for the proposal would be included in the budget since it is not in the bill. Wisconsin lawmakers are in the progress of writing the next biennial budget and while Gov. Tony Evers included a similar proposal in his budget, it was pulled out along with more than 600 other items by Republican lawmakers on the committee.

“I have a motion to bring that back in,” Bradley told Ratcliff. 

“But if we pass this bill, it does not include the funding?” Ratcliff asked. 

“This bill does not have the funding. The funding would come through the budget… We’re going to fight real hard to try to get that funded,” Bradley said. 

According to fiscal estimates, the cost to state revenues would be at max $10 million. The new office would require three new positions in the tourism agency and would cost about $199,300 in 2026 and $254,000 in 2027. 

Film stakeholders testified in favor of the bill during the hearing. 

Paulina Lule, a Milwaukee native and an actress who recently starred in the MGM+ series Emperor of Ocean Park and has been in other shows including The Good Place and Scandal, told lawmakers that the bill would help people who want to showcase Wisconsin as it is in real life.

Lule said she has a film she has been working on called Sherman Park, which is about the neighborhood in Milwaukee. 

“I have had producers who have been interested in making this film as long as I make it not in Sherman [Park],” Lule said. “I don’t want to, and so this film has sat unfilmed for 10 years.” 

Lule said she recently began shooting a short film version in the Milwaukee park and was proud to be able to include a shot of the neighborhood’s name on a sign. She said that making films in Wisconsin would be a powerful way to promote the state and encourage people to visit. 

“Show off Racine. We can show off the real Green Bay, not just the Packers. There’s more to Green Bay than just the Packers as much as I love them,” Lule said. “You’re missing out on one of the broadest… ways of promoting the state is by having stories that are authentically about Wisconsin, made in Wisconsin… with actors in it that sound like they’re from Wisconsin.”

Michelle Maher, a River Falls movie theater owner, said that having movies filmed in the state would also provide an opportunity for local theaters. She noted that the movie Sinners, a vampire movie set in the Jim Crow South directed by Ryan Coogler and starring Michael B. Jordan, was filmed on-site in Clarksville, Mississippi.

“It was a town similar to the size of the town that I live in, River Falls,” Maher said. “Unfortunately, that town doesn’t have the movie theater that I have in my town… [Coogler and Jordan] got together and said, we are going to make sure this movie shows in this town, so they brought in a crew to be able to show that movie locally to the town that it was filmed at. What if there was a movie filmed in River Falls? Not only would I have a huge premiere for a regional area, I would have an annual event built in that would generate huge tourism opportunities and other ways to invent and reinvent that same wheel.”

Classifying ‘gig workers’ as non-employees

Lawmakers also considered SB 256, which would declare delivery drivers for app-based companies, including Uber and Doordash, are not employees of the company for the purposes of compensation insurance, minimum wage laws and unemployment insurance. The bill would allow “portable benefits” for those workers.

Bradley, the coauthor of the proposal, said the legislation is needed so that companies can provide benefits to workers without changing their “independent contractor” status. Under this type of benefit system, accounts are linked to a worker rather than the employer, meaning the benefits follow workers to other employment opportunities, and companies and workers would both be able to contribute.

“The gig economy is here to stay, and with it, the flexibility that many workers value and desire,” Bradley said. “Unfortunately, current laws prevent drivers from accessing crucial benefits. These include health care, paid leave and retirement savings. That’s the problem SB 256 aims to address. This legislation creates portable benefit accounts funded through contributions from the platforms based on drivers’ earnings. These accounts can be used by drivers to pay for a range of expenses, including health care, retirement, or coverage of loss of wages due to illness or an accident.” 

Lawmakers have considered the proposal before, including last session. The bill passed the Senate but never came up for a vote in the Assembly. 

The bill specifies that if an app-based delivery company doesn’t prescribe dates, times of day or a minimum number of hours during which someone must work; terminate the contract of the driver for not accepting a specific request for transportation or delivery service request; allow drivers to work for other companies; or restrict the driver from working in any other lawful occupation or business, then a driver is not considered an employee or agent of the company. 

“Previous versions of this legislation have garnered bipartisan support, and that support is only growing,” Bradley said. “It’s time we modernize our policies to meet the realities faced by thousands of Wisconsin workers.”

Sen. Jeff Smith (D-Brunswick) said he found it “embarrassing, disappointing” that the committee was considering the proposal. He said there is an “independent contractor travesty in this country.” 

“As an independent contractor, these workers know what they’re signing up for,” Rep. Alex Dallman (R-Markesan) said. “They understand that they’re on an independent contractor basis. They understand that they want to remain independent contractors.” 

Katie Franger, public affairs manager for Uber, told lawmakers that flexibility is the “fundamental reason” people choose the company’s platform for work. She said that the legislation would fit with this by allowing workers to have flexibility in benefits as well.

“Portable benefits allow each individual to choose what truly matters to them, ensuring resources are directed where they’re most needed,” Franger said. 

When Smith asked about why they couldn’t provide the benefits already, Addison DiSesa, legislative policy advisor for DoorDash, said “providing the benefits proactively jeopardizes the independence of these workers” and that the bill “empowers workers to get access to the benefits that they want while protecting their independence.” 

Maliki Krieski, a Ripon mother and Doordash worker, told lawmakers that she supports the bill because she wants to keep the flexibility that is part of the work currently. She said it allows her to take care of her child, who has diabetes.

“Our state system is outdated…,” Krieski said. “The one thing that stands between us and any form of health care incentive, retirement plan… The only thing that stands between us and that is the state law.”

Stephanie Bloomingdale, president for the Wisconsin AFL-CIO, cautioned that the bill seeks to create an exemption to current law and could be harmful to workers, who depending on the situation might qualify for certain benefits. She also pointed out that it doesn’t require companies to provide access to any benefits. 

“It exempts app-based delivery drivers from settled Wisconsin law concerning our workers compensation, minimum wage and unemployment insurance laws,” Bloomingdale said. 

Bloomingdale noted that to be considered an “independent contractor,” when it comes to worker’s compensation, workers have to meet a nine-part test, otherwise a worker is automatically considered an employee. The bill would replace this with the four-part test, which she said would be quite “minimal.” She noted that depending on the situation some workers could potentially qualify for worker’s compensation. 

A legislative council representative explained that “the default is that you’re an employee, and then there’s a nine factored test and that leads to a determination that you might be an independent contractor.” The bill, he said, would implement a “route that’s more streamlined for these app-based drivers.” 

“We oppose the bill because it does not guarantee any more or less flexibility for workers. It does not guarantee good wages and it does not guarantee benefits for workers in the gig economy. It does none of these things because the bill eliminates employee status for these workers and all the rights that come with that status,” Bloomingdale said. “The bill does not guarantee or require that these tech giants provide any benefits, portable or fixed.”

Bloomingdale said the bill would instead just “create special exemption for these powerful corporations at the expense of Wisconsin’s working men and women” and called the bill a “slippery slope.” 

“If this bill passes, we will be back here as those who do the bidding on international corporations come to this legislative body to similarly carve out a certain class of workers to evade state law and reclassify each group of workers one by one,” Bloomingdale said. “If these companies succeed in passing this bill, their low-pay, no-protection business model could expand in virtually every industry.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Former U.S. Rep. Billy Long, nominee for Internal Revenue Service commissioner, testifies before the Senate Finance Committee at his confirmation hearing on Tuesday, May 20, 2025. (Screenshot from committee webcast)

WASHINGTON — Senators tasked with tax writing split along party lines Tuesday praising and grilling former Republican U.S. Rep. Billy Long of Missouri, President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Internal Revenue Service, the agency tasked with enforcing the largest source of U.S. revenue as the country faces record debt and interest costs.

Long, who served in Congress from 2011 to 2023 and previously spent multiple years as a talk radio host, testified to the Senate Finance Committee that he plans to get rid of “stinking thinking” at the IRS and implement a “comprehensive plan” to modernize the agency and “invest in retaining skilled members of the team.”

“This does not mean a bloated agency, but an efficient one where employees have the tools they need to succeed,” Long said.

The agency has lost more than 11,000 employees, or 11% of its workforce, either through deferred resignations or mass firing of probationary workers since Trump began his second term, according to a May 2 report from the agency’s inspector general. Trump said in December he intended to nominate Long for the IRS post.

‘Top-down culture change’

Committee Chair Mike Crapo of Idaho opened the confirmation hearing expressing his confidence in Long, saying he will direct a “sea change” at the agency that will benefit taxpayers.

“President Trump called Congressman Long the ‘consummate people person.’ Congressman Long is very clear that he will make himself available to all IRS employees, no matter their seniority. Moreover, he wants to implement a top-down culture change at the agency,” Crapo said.

The confirmation hearing comes as lawmakers struggle to agree on a budget reconciliation package, which will extend and expand Trump’s 2017 tax law and in turn widen IRS responsibilities.

Sen. James Lankford, an Oklahoma Republican, said he trusted Long’s work ethic and told him, “We’re going to do a tax bill here in the next couple of months. To be able to get that done, as we did it in 2017, there’ll be a lot of work the IRS has to do to be able to put guidance documents out, to be able to get clear instructions of what that means.”

Nonexistent tribal tax credits

Democrats approached the hearing with skepticism.

The nearly two-hour back-and-forth with Long followed recent revelations that he accepted donations to his defunct Senate campaign shortly after Trump nominated him as the IRS commissioner. Democratic senators on the panel have also called for an investigation into Long’s work with a company that peddled nonexistent tribal tax credits.

“Bottom line, the American people have the right to know whether the future IRS commissioner is a crook,” said Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the panel’s top Democrat.

Long denies any wrongdoing.

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, a Nevada Democrat, pressed Long about $65,000 he allegedly received for his involvement promoting the fake tax credits for the companies Capital Edge Strategies and White River.

“Knowing that (the credits) are illegal, the IRS has said they’re illegal, how do you stand here before this committee and tell the chairman just a few minutes ago that you have no conflict of interest?” Cortez Masto asked.

Long replied that he’s in compliance with the Office of Government Ethics regarding his nomination and that he “did not have any perception whatsoever that these (credits) did not exist.”

Other Democrats on the panel questioned Long on Trump’s recent statements that he would pull Harvard University’s tax-exempt status over its refusal to comply with demands from the administration.

Wyden characterized Long as a “MAGA devotee” and said that Trump wants to use the IRS “as a cudgel to beat his adversaries into submission.”

14-page letter

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who sent Long a 14-page letter questioning his past, repeatedly asked Long about a statute prohibiting the president from ordering tax audits on specific people or businesses.

“Is it illegal for the President to instruct the IRS to remove nonprofit status from taxpayers?” Warren asked several times.

“I’m not going to have the answer that you need, I apologize,” Long said.

Senate Republicans on the panel questioned Long on how he can improve customer service for taxpayers — despite the party successfully fighting in 2023 to cut new IRS funding under President Joe Biden in 2022.

Sen. Todd Young of Indiana said the agency is “behind the curve” on technology and that its customer service issues are “out of hand.”

“If confirmed, will you commit to developing a comprehensive IRS modernization plan that prioritizes customer service, identifies critical technology infrastructure needs and ensures greater transparency and audit practices? Yes or no?” Young asked.

“Yes,” Long replied.

“Excellent,” Young said. 

The U.S. House Budget Committee votes on Friday, May 16, 2025 on a massive reconciliation package. The vote failed, 16-21. (Screenshot from House webcast)

WASHINGTON — Republicans suffered a major setback to their “big, beautiful bill” on Friday, when amid conservative objections the U.S. House Budget Committee failed to approve the measure, a crucial step in the process.

In a 16-21 vote, Reps. Andrew Clyde of Georgia, Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Chip Roy of Texas and Lloyd Smucker of Pennsylvania broke from their GOP colleagues to block the bill from moving toward the floor, demanding changes to several provisions.

The breakdown over the 1,116-page bill marks an escalation in the long-running feud between centrist Republicans, who have been cautious about hundreds of billions in spending cuts to safety net programs, and far-right members of the party, who argue the changes are not enough.

The committee is scheduled to reconvene Sunday at 10 p.m. Eastern. House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana has said he wants the package on the floor prior to the Memorial Day recess.

Speedier work requirements

Norman said he remains a “hard no” until new work requirements for Medicaid recipients phase in more quickly. As the bill is written, the requirements won’t begin until 2029.

“To phase this in for four years — We’re telling a healthy-bodied, a healthy American that you got four years to get a job. No, your payment stops now,” Norman said.

Brecheen criticized the bill for not going far enough to repeal wind and solar energy tax credits, which he contends are “undermining natural gas jobs.”

“We have to fix this,” he said.

Clyde denounced the measure for not adhering to President Donald Trump’s promise of “right-sizing government,” as Clyde described it. The Georgia Republican also pleaded for lower taxes on firearms and stronger cuts that would put Medicaid on a “sustainable path.”

“Unfortunately, the current version falls short of these goals and fails to deliver the transformative change that Americans were promised,” Clyde said.

Smucker initially voted ‘yes,’ but then joined his four colleagues to oppose the measure.

Trump wrote on his social media platform shortly before the committee voted that “Republicans MUST UNITE behind, ‘THE ONE, BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL!’”

“We don’t need ‘GRANDSTANDERS’ in the Republican Party. STOP TALKING, AND GET IT DONE! It is time to fix the MESS that Biden and the Democrats gave us. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

‘A wrecking ball to Medicaid’

Democrats, who as expected unified in voting no against the bill, slammed it as “ugly,” “cruel” and a “betrayal.”

“This bill takes a wrecking ball to Medicaid, on which 1 in 5 Americans and 3 million Ohioans depend for medical care — children, seniors in nursing homes,” said Rep. Marcy Kaptur, who represents northern Ohio. “Please come with me to visit the nursing homes. … Perhaps too many on the other side of the aisle have not had to endure a life that has major challenges.”

Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota said the proposed cuts to safety net programs would be “devastating.”

“Their changes will kick millions of Americans off their health care and nutrition assistance. That means more untreated illnesses, more hungry children, more preventable deaths,” she said.

Republican-only bill

Republicans are using the complex reconciliation process to move the package through Congress with simple majority votes in each chamber, avoiding the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster, which would otherwise require bipartisanship. 

Reconciliation measures must address federal revenue, spending, or the debt limit in a way not deemed “merely incidental” by the Senate parliamentarian. That means the GOP proposals must carry some sort of price tag and cannot focus simply on changing federal policy.

Republicans are using the package to extend the 2017 tax law, increase spending on border security and defense by hundreds of billions of dollars, overhaul American energy production, restructure higher education aid and cut spending.

The 11 House committees tasked with drafting pieces of the legislation have all debated and approved their measures along party lines.

The Agriculture Committee, Energy and Commerce Committee and Ways and Means Committee all completed their work earlier this week, amid strong objections from Democrats.

Proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, could shift considerable cost-sharing onto states for the first time, presenting challenges for red-state lawmakers who need to explain the bill back home.

More than $600 billion in federal spending cuts to Medicaid during the next decade could also cause some difficulties for moderate Republicans, some of whose constituents are likely to be among the millions of Americans expected to lose their health insurance.

Republicans also have yet to reach an agreement on the state and local tax deduction or SALT, a priority for GOP lawmakers from blue states like California, New Jersey and New York.

The Budget Committee’s role in the process was to package together all of the bills and then send the one massive bill to the Rules Committee, the last stop before floor debate for major legislation.

That won’t be able to happen until after GOP leaders get nearly all the Republican lawmakers on the panel to support the package. 

A solar power array. Advocates say projects that help speed the conversion to clean energy, such as solar power, could be stymied by a U.S. House proposal to repeal clean energy tax credits. (Photo by Evan Houk/Maine Morning Star)

The tax cut legislation that U.S. House of Representatives Republicans are putting together in Washington includes measures that will cost thousands of jobs in Wisconsin and undercut the state’s progress toward cleaner energy, according to environmental and labor advocates.

To help pay for the extension of tax cuts enacted in the first Trump administration, the GOP-led House Ways and Means Committee is proposing to repeal clean energy tax credits, Politico reported this week. The tax credits were among the measures enacted in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

“These credits are not just numbers on a balance sheet out in Washington D.C,” said Emily Pritzkow, executive director of the Wisconsin Building Trades Council, in an online press conference Wednesday. “They are representing real jobs, real economic growth, and real progress towards Wisconsin’s sustainable energy infrastructure. Since the IRA was signed into law in 2022 we have seen an unprecedented boom in clean energy development in the trades.”

The press conference was hosted by Forward Together Wisconsin, a nonprofit established to inform people about the Biden administration’s infrastructure and climate investments and to defend them.

“We’ve been seeing this real opportunity to drive energy costs down, and I cannot for the life of me understand why people want to reverse that progress,” said former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, president of Forward Together Wisconsin.

In addition to the tax credits that the U.S. House proposal would repeal, President Donald Trump in his second term has frozen federal clean energy grants that were part of the 2022 legislation. Those include grants to establish a network of electric vehicle charging stations — prompting a lawsuit by 15 states, including Wisconsin.

Solar energy investments that have boomed in the last three years are among those that are threatened by the House proposal, according to advocates.

“At a time when billions of dollars are being invested in states that overwhelmingly voted for President Trump, this proposed legislation will effectively dismantle the most successful industrial onshoring effort in U.S. history,” Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association, said in a statement this week.

Since passage of the IRA, Wisconsin has seen $933 million in clean energy and transportation private-sector investments, along with just over $2 billion from federal grants and loans, according to Innovation Policy & Technology, a San Francisco climate change policy think tank. The organization tallied 61 new clean energy and transportation projects that got underway in the state, with 45 manufacturing American-made products.

“Lower investment and higher energy bills due to repealing these federal programs and tax incentives will cost nearly 5,200 Wisconsin jobs in 2030 and more than 6,400 jobs in 2035, compared to current policies,” Innovation Policy & Technology reported.

The advocacy group Climate Power has calculated that without the federal support $5.4 billion for 15 planned Wisconsin clean energy projects could be in jeopardy.

Of those projects, 12 — 80% — are in five congressional districts represented by Republicans, according to Climate Power. Three representatives of those districts — Bryan Steil in the 1st CD, Scott Fitzgerald in the 5th CD and Glenn Grothman in the 6th CD — voted against the IRA in 2022. The other two, Derrick Van Orden in the 3rd CD and Tony Wied in the 8th CD, weren’t in office at the time but publicly opposed the legislation.

John Jacobs, business manager of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 494 in Southeast Wisconsin, said the clean energy tax credits and related policies have spurred investment and employment for the union’s members.

“I see first-hand how the clean energy tax credits have delivered on their promise, creating good family-sustaining union jobs across Wisconsin,” Jacobs said. “Repealing these tax credits could be devastating to many, but would put thousands of jobs at risk and hurt a growing industry.”

The tax credits were “an investment in America,” he added. The jobs lost if the credits are repealed “translate to economic instability for families across our state.”

The IRA also included a provision that extends the value of the tax credits to nonprofit organizations and government agencies.

Thanks to that benefit, called direct support payment, the Menasha Joint School District in the Fox Valley has qualified for a $4 million reimbursement from the federal government for installing rooftop solar energy and geothermal energy systems in a school currently under construction, said Brian Adesso, the school district’s business services director.

Once the school is complete the district expects to save $159,000 a year on its electric bill, “which is cost savings to local taxpayers and money that can be invested back into the students and staff,” Adesso said at the Forward Wisconsin press conference.

Adesso said the tax credits gave the district “certainty” it needed to be willing to undertake the clean energy additions to the project. Killing the credits would make that choice harder for school districts and impose higher costs on local property taxpayers, he added.

“The bill making its way through Congress takes a sledgehammer to the tax credits,” Addesso said — ending some credits early and attaching “bureaucratic restrictions that could make many of the credits unusable.”

Barnes said Forward Wisconsin Together is calling on Congress to protect the clean energy initiatives. “The people of Wisconsin deserve better,” he said. “The country deserves better. Clean energy as we know is the future, and we have to continue to invest in it.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A proposal in the U.S. House would allocate $5 billion a year in tax credits for people donating to organizations that provide private and religious school scholarships. (Getty photos)

WASHINGTON — A national school voucher program got a step closer to becoming law Wednesday, as school choice continues to take heat across the United States.

The proposal in the U.S. House would allocate $5 billion a year in tax credits for people donating to organizations that provide private and religious school scholarships and is baked into the Ways and Means Committee’s piece of a massive reconciliation package to fund President Donald Trump’s priorities.

The tax credit provision largely reflects the Educational Choice for Children Act — a sweeping bill that GOP Reps. Adrian Smith of Nebraska, Burgess Owens of Utah and Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana reintroduced in their respective chambers earlier this year.

The tax-writing committee advanced its measure Wednesday in a party-line vote. Republicans are using the complex reconciliation process to move the package through Congress with simple majority votes in each chamber, avoiding the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster, which would otherwise require bipartisanship.

“School choice” is an umbrella term centering on alternative programs to one’s assigned public school. While proponents have argued that school choice programs are necessary for parents dissatisfied with their local public schools, opponents say these efforts drain critical funds and resources from school districts.

At a press conference Wednesday, Rep. Elise Stefanik praised the Educational Choice for Children Act, which she cosponsored in the House.

The New York Republican said the bill is “a transformative piece of legislation that will expand educational opportunities for children across our nation.”

“For too long, students, especially those from underserved communities, have been trapped in failing school systems,” she said, adding that “school choice gives students the opportunity to succeed” and “is the great equalizer.”

$20 billion tax credit over 4 years

The tax panel’s proposal includes a $20 billion total tax credit, which would be made up of a $5 billion tax credit annually between 2026 and 2029. 

The scholarships would be available to students whose household incomes do not exceed 300 percent of the median gross income of their area.

“This is opening the door to the federal government subsidizing a secondary private system of education that gets to pick and choose who it educates and how it educates kids,” Sasha Pudelski, director of advocacy at AASA, The School Superintendents Association, told States Newsroom.

The association helps to ensure every child has access to a high quality public education.

“​​I think it’s really important for folks to understand that we are opening this door for the first time to this kind of subsidy,” Pudelski said.

The provision also comes as Trump has made school choice a major part of his education agenda.

He signed an executive order in January that gave the U.S. secretary of Education two months to offer guidance on how states can use “federal formula funds to support K-12 educational choice initiatives.”

More opposition

Organizations that advocate for students with disabilities, including the National Center for Learning Disabilities, the Council for Exceptional Children, the Center for Learner Equity, and The Arc of the United States, fiercely opposed the bill, highlighting concerns that it is not sufficient in providing enforceable protections for students with disabilities and their families.

In a statement, Jacqueline Rodriguez, CEO of the National Center for Learning Disabilities, said “the guarantee of rights and protections for students with disabilities using these vouchers is disingenuous at best and crooked at worst, without the other critical provisions of IDEA,” or the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

“It is quite possible that families with disabilities will use a voucher under the pretense that their child will have the same rights when in fact they do not,” Rodriguez said. 

A measure passed by the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee allows individual taxpayers such as waiters and waitresses to deduct qualifying tips earned throughout the year, a tax break that would end in 2028. (Getty Photos)

WASHINGTON — House Republicans advanced the tax portion of the “one big, beautiful” reconciliation package early Wednesday, a step forward in permanently extending, and in some cases expanding, the 2017 tax law and temporarily handing President Donald Trump a win on campaign promises like no tax on tips.

The House Committee on Ways and Means voted along party lines to pass the measure, 26-19, after nearly 18 hours of debate that went through the night. Republicans rejected numerous amendments offered by Democrats, including protecting tax credits meant to combat climate change enacted under Democrats’ own 2022 budget reconciliation law, the Inflation Reduction Act.

The marathon debate occurred as the House Committee on Energy and Commerce debated overnight and into Wednesday afternoon over deep budget cuts, including some to Medicaid assistance for low-income individuals, to pay for the cost of tax provisions.

As of now, the massive tax package is estimated to add $3.8 trillion to the budget deficit over 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

If any temporary expansions in the bill are eventually made permanent, it would add roughly $5.3 trillion to the deficit over the next decade, according to the CRFB. The official congressional budget score has not yet been released.

Overall the bill is “a very, very big tax cut,” said Howard Gleckman, senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, part of the left-leaning Brookings Institution and Urban Institute. “Much of the benefit will go to higher income people.”

Tax brackets, business breaks would continue

The bill permanently extends the underlying tax provisions passed in 2017 under the GOP-backed bill titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which is set to expire in 2025.

This means:

• Individual taxpayers would remain in the same tax brackets that were lowered in 2017, and they would continue to see the doubled standard deduction — two of the most costly measures. Additionally, taxpayers will receive a boost up to $2,000 on the standard deduction through 2028.
• Individual brackets would remain at 10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35% and 37%, though the proposal would change how inflation adjustments are calculated, meaning income would be taxed less over time, except for those in the 37% bracket.
• The $2,000 child tax credit, per child, would remain permanent but temporarily increase to $2,500 through 2028. The refundable portion of the credit — meaning how much money taxpayers can get back — would be increased to $1,400, but the amount remains subject to income thresholds, meaning lower income households would receive less of a refund.
• The child tax credit would now only be accessible if the parent submits a Social Security number, as well as a spouse’s if legally married, in addition to the already required Social Security number of each qualifying child.
• On the business side, the corporate tax rate would stay at 21%.
• Business owners who run sole proprietorships, partnerships and S-corporations would see an increase, to 23% up from 20%, in the amount of business income they can deduct from their federal returns, otherwise referred to as the pass-through income deduction.
• Expensing for research and development would be restored through 2029, as well as deductions available to businesses for certain investments, including equipment purchases.

No tax on tips, but only for a few years

Trump promised on the campaign trail to eliminate taxes on tips, Social Security and car loan interest. House Republicans handed him a win in their bill, but only a limited one.

The bill allows individual taxpayers to deduct qualifying tips earned throughout the year, a tax break that would end in 2028. And like the new child tax credit requirement, taxpayers could only take advantage of the deduction by including a Social Security number on their federal tax return as well as their spouse’s SSN, if married.

No taxes on car loan interest would also go into effect through 2028, though taxpayers could only claim it for automobiles that received final assembly in the United States.

Senior citizens with incomes of $75,000 or less, or $150,000 for a married couple, would receive an extra $4,000 discount on taxable income, with the amount decreasing as incomes increase. The tax break would also expire in 2028. The bill does not specify an age for “seniors.”

Highly taxed states still unhappy 

House Republicans raised the cap on the amount of state and local taxes, or SALT, that can be deducted, but not enough to please both GOP and Democratic lawmakers who represent highly taxed states like New York and California.

Under the bill the committee advanced Wednesday morning, taxpayers could deduct up to $30,000 — three times the $10,000 ceiling in the 2017 law — from their federal taxable income. The full cap would apply to those making $400,000 or less in annual income but phases down for higher earners.

Raising the cap is costly and unpopular with lawmakers representing lower tax states.

Republican Reps. Mike Lawler and Nick LaLota of New York, and Rep. Young Kim of California, are threatening to vote no on the House floor if the cap isn’t raised. The House GOP cannot lose more than a handful of votes if all Republicans are present.

House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana told reporters Wednesday he didn’t want to “handicap” negotiations by sharing details publicly and that he was talking to the SALT caucus until 1:30 a.m.

“But I will tell you I’m absolutely confident we’re going to be able to work out a compromise that everybody can live with,” he said.

A ‘tragic indifference’ for poor families

The committee’s party-line approval of the bill drew praise and criticism across organizations representing varying interests of Americans.

Kris Cox, director of federal tax policy for the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, wrote on social media that the temporary child tax credit bump does “zilch” for the roughly 17 million children whose parents do not earn enough money to receive a refund check from the credit.

“But it delivers an additional $500-per-kid to higher-income families,” Cox wrote.

The organization also slammed the bill for going “out of its way to take eligibility from 4.5 million US citizen kids who have at least one parent without an SSN.”

Kristen Crowell, executive director of the advocacy group Fair Share America, said in a statement Wednesday that the bill “shows a tragic indifference to the very real struggles of normal, working people.

“In order to save face in front of their constituents, Republicans are hiding behind misleading claims that everyone will see reductions in their taxes,” Crowell said.

The Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental protection advocacy organization, estimates that phasing out and altogether eliminating clean energy tax credits would result in higher electricity bills in several states, including Ohio and Pennsylvania, according to an emailed statement.

‘Unshackle the economy’ for businesses

Groups representing businesses across the U.S. praised the House bill as a way to bolster investment and growth opportunities.

Former Republican Ways and Means Chair Kevin Brady of Texas released a statement Wednesday on behalf of the Alliance for Competitive Taxation praising the bill as a path to “unshackle the economy from burdensome taxes and unlock new growth.”

“The bill reported out by the House Ways and Means Committee is an encouraging step in that direction and, if implemented with its major pro-growth proposals intact, will help American businesses and workers compete at home and abroad,” Brady said.

The alliance hailed the extension of the 21% corporate tax rate and urged lawmakers to make permanent the research and development expensing, and capital investment deductions.

Kristen Silverberg, president and chief operating officer of the Business Roundtable, said her organization “applauds Chairman Smith and members of the House Ways and Means Committee for advancing a comprehensive, pro-growth tax bill,” referring to GOP Rep. Jason Smith of Missouri.

“Today’s vote is a critical step forward in securing a more competitive tax system for American businesses and workers,” said Silverberg, whose organization represents 200 CEOs of U.S.-based companies.

The shuttered Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Middletown, Pennsylvania, pictured on Oct. 10, 2024. The plant’s owner, Constellation Energy, plans to spend $1.6 billion to refurbish the reactor that it closed five years ago and restart it by 2028 after Microsoft recently agreed to buy as much electricity as the plant can produce for the next 20 years to power its growing fleet of data centers. Nuclear energy is a rare point of agreement for members of both parties, including among state lawmakers. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON —  President Donald Trump and his team have signaled a strong interest in continuing to strengthen federal support for nuclear power, an energy source Democratic states are increasingly open to expanding.

The administration’s loudly pro-nuclear position creates a rare point of overlap between Trump and his predecessor, Joe Biden, whose signature legislation funded hundreds of millions in tax credits for low-carbon energy sources, including nuclear power.

Trump during his first roughly three months in office issued multiple executive orders mentioning nuclear energy, casting his broad energy strategy as a way to expand the country’s power resources and shore up its security. State lawmakers are also pushing their own policy moves, sometimes just in an effort to set themselves up to embrace nuclear power at some point in the future.

“There are a lot of really positive signals,” said Rowen Price, senior policy adviser for nuclear energy at Third Way, a centrist policy think tank.

But Price said she’s concerned that support for nuclear power could be swept up in bigger political fights, such as many congressional Republicans’ goal of axing clean-energy tax credits in Democrats’ 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. The administration’s broad cuts to the federal workforce could also eventually hurt the government’s nuclear ambitions, she added.

The promise of a nuclear resurgence in the United States isn’t a new goal for the industry or its backers in Washington, D.C., but how successful efforts to expand nuclear power generation will be in the U.S. — a metric that hasn’t budged from around 20% in decades — remains to be seen.

Americans’ support for the energy source, meanwhile, is just short of its record high, a recent Gallup Poll found. And more blue states have also started to embrace nuclear power, which has traditionally been more favored by Republicans, to reach climate goals and grow electricity capacity amid anticipated increases in demand.

But even as interest in states grows, the cost of building nuclear infrastructure remains an impediment only the federal government is positioned to help scale.

‘Renaissance of nuclear’

Energy Secretary Chris Wright in April talked about the administration’s desire to elevate nuclear power by making it easier to test reactors, delivering fuel to next-generation nuclear firms and utilizing the department’s Loan Programs Office to help bring nuclear power projects online.

“We would like to see a renaissance of nuclear,” Wright said at the news outlet Semafor’s World Economy Summit in Washington. “The conditions are there and the administration is going to do everything we can to lean in to help commercial businesses and customers launch nuclear.”

Wright said he wants the department to help launch 10 to 20 new nuclear reactors to get the industry moving again and to bring down costs. The department’s loan office could make debt investments alongside large-scale data center companies that use massive amounts of power to build nuclear projects and then exit those deals after the projects are built, allowing the office to recycle that funding, he said.

The department recently announced that it approved a third loan disbursement to reopen the Palisades Nuclear Plant in Covert, Michigan, which Holtec has been working on doing for the last few years.

Last month, the department said it was reopening $900 million in funding to help companies working on small modular reactors after changing some of the Biden administration’s guidance on the program.

Federal workforce cuts

Third Way’s Price noted that a portion of staffers at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission — which she described as already “tightly constrained” — are eligible for retirement either now or in the next five years.

Workforce cuts at the Energy Department and elsewhere could also hurt efforts to grow the nuclear power sector, she said.

“Frankly, all of the verbal support from this administration for nuclear only matters if they’re actually going to put forward and implement policies that support it,” Price said. “We need to make sure that they do it.”

An Energy Department spokesperson said in an email that it “is conducting a department-wide review to ensure all activities follow the law, comply with applicable court orders and align with the Trump administration’s priorities.”

The agency said it didn’t have a final count on how many staffers have left the department through its resignation program, but noted that it doesn’t necessarily approve all requests. The department didn’t comment on how many staffers focused on nuclear energy have been laid off.

Nuclear programs were among those affected by the Trump administration’s pausing of federal programs and funding, said David Brown, senior vice president of federal government affairs and public policy at Constellation Energy, which runs the biggest fleet of nuclear plants in the country. But Brown said that even so, the industry is coming out on top.

“I think what we are seeing is that as they work through their various review(s) of programs that they’re greenlighting the nuclear stuff,” Brown said.

Federal support crucial, but politics tricky

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill could also change the outcome for industry, for better or worse.

Wright, in his remarks last month, said he hopes Congress will take action to help expand nuclear energy, and said lawmakers could do so in the budget reconciliation package on which the U.S. House has started to work.

Republican House members have not yet released text of the sections of the package that will deal with energy policy. Wright said support for nuclear power could be included in the reconciliation package, but some advocates are also worried that the package, or the annual appropriations bills, are the exact kind of political battles that efforts to support nuclear power, like the tax credits, could get tied up in.

Some state lawmakers point to financial support from the federal government as essential for the industry to grow, even if states make their own headway to build support for nuclear power.

Colorado state Rep. Alex Valdez, a Democrat who sponsored a bill signed into law this session to include nuclear in the state’s definition of clean energy, said he hopes the administration follows through on its admiration of nuclear power with funding for states.

“Generally, states do not have the financial resources the federal government does,” Valdez said. “It’s going to be the federal government that puts their investments behind these things, and that’s what’s going to enable states as a whole to be able to move forward on them.”