Alert 02.04.25
Federal Funding in Flux: Policy Shifts and Uncertain Terrain
Executive orders, funding freezes, and what’s next for federal disbursements
Alert
Alert
03.10.25
With the Trump administration and a Republican-controlled Congress now in office, significant changes to the U.S. economic landscape and tax policy are expected. Indeed, legislation to change tax policy and to implement accompanying budget cuts to “pay for” potential decreased federal tax revenues is the signature legislative agenda item for the Washington Republicans during the first year of President Trump’s second term. The key question surrounding the legislation is how comprehensive a tax plan Congress can pass given the small majorities held by Republicans in the House (only 2-3 votes, pending expected retirements) and Senate (4 votes), the procedures by which the legislation advances, the competing legislative priorities, and the already large federal budget deficit.
With most of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) cuts set to expire this year, Congressional Republicans are positioned to develop a tax plan that President Trump supports. The House plan proposes to cut taxes by approximately $4.5 trillion over 10 years, while requiring about $1.5 trillion in spending cuts over the same period, which would increase the deficit. This legislation will also include funding of President Trump’s major public policy priorities, including increased funds for border security, energy and national defense. President Trump has endorsed the House approach, which he has described as “one big, beautiful bill” that addresses both tax policy and other domestic policy items. The House passed a budget resolution by a simple majority in late February that serves as a precursor to consideration of the comprehensive “reconciliation” bill that includes tax and spending policies.
In contrast, Senate Republicans are charging forward with their own legislative plan. Under its approach, the Senate aims to pass a smaller bill focused on border, energy and defense spending and then proceed to a separate bill focused squarely on tax issues and associated spending cuts to pay for those tax cuts. The Senate passed a budget resolution in February that serves as a prerequisite to consideration of its “skinnier” reconciliation bill. It remains to be seen how House and Senate leaders will work with the Trump administration to resolve these diverging approaches.
Key Tax Proposals
The TCJA was enacted under the first Trump administration, under the fast-track budget reconciliation process that Republicans aim to use this year. President Trump and congressional Republicans have pledged to extend many of the TCJA provisions that are set to expire at the end of 2025, along with the enactment of other proposals that would provide additional tax cuts. (Some proposals will only be applicable below a certain income level.) The following are some of the key proposals of the Republicans’ tax plan, which, if enacted, would modify how individuals and corporations are taxed:
Budget Reconciliation and Financing the Key Tax Proposals
The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (CRS RL30862) provides for a fast-track procedure, known as the budget reconciliation process, under which Congress can pass certain tax-and-spending legislation by a simple majority vote in both chambers, forgoing the typical requirement of a 60-vote majority in the “cooling saucer” of the Senate for legislation to advance and pass. In order to use budget reconciliation, each chamber must first adopt a budget resolution that outlines total budget outlays and instructs congressional committees to recommend revenue and spending measures. With the budget resolution acting as a blueprint, each chamber can then proceed to pass an identical bill by simple majority vote that reflects the top-line budget numbers contained in the budget resolution. During this process, Congress will ultimately be determining how much of new spending and/or new tax cuts will be offset by cuts to federal programs and/or provisions that raise revenue (i.e., removal of tax incentives or other tax increases).
For example, some lawmakers have proposed repealing energy tax credits authorized under the Inflation Reduction Act, rescinding IRS funding, or increasing the corporate tax rate (even while other have proposed decreasing the corporate rate, as referenced above). Other possibilities include extending the 20% passthrough deduction under Section 199A, imposing additional taxes on large endowments and municipal bonds, lowering the mortgage interest deduction, and eliminating state workarounds for the SALT cap.
The role of tariffs may also affect the tax legislation. On February 1, 2025, President Trump signed executive orders that impose tariffs on Mexican, Canadian and Chinese (including Hong Kong) imports under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the implementation of which has since been turbulent. On February 13, 2025, the Trump administration announced the “Fair and Reciprocal Plan,” directing key government agencies to take action against trading partners who do not provide reciprocal treatment on U.S. exports, which President Trump claims will lead to a new wave of country-specific tariffs on April 2, 2025. The Trump administration announced Section 232 investigations under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 on copper, timber and lumber imports, which may also lead to additional tariffs. Between March 4, 2025, and March 6, 2025, the IEEPA tariffs on imports from Mexico, Canada and China went into effect, which were subsequently delayed in its implementation on Canadian and Mexican auto imports and all imports compliant with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), while maintaining all tariffs imposed on China. Delayed IEEPA tariffs on temporarily exempted imports have since been given the same effective date as the reciprocal tariffs, which is April 2, 2025. If the IEEPA tariffs are implemented as prescribed in the original executive orders, citing national security risks and threats posed by illegal drug flows, several priorities are emphasized, including:
President Trump and his allies claim that the tariffs are expected to generate revenue in the trillions and could aid in offsetting the costs of extending the expiring TCJA provisions and implementing the proposed tax cuts. If Congress enacted these and other tariffs through reconciliation, the generated revenue could be used to finance some of the tax cuts. However, as President Trump seems poised to impose the tariffs unilaterally without congressional action, they may not necessarily get factored in directly or immediately in the reconciliation process. All of this assumes that increasing countermeasures by targeted countries’ governments and escalating public boycotts of U.S. exports in those countries will not offset any net revenue generated by the new tariffs U.S. importers must pay for goods at U.S. ports of entry.
Challenges
As noted above, the future of Republicans’ tax proposals is dependent on finding ways for a majority of Congress and the Administration to reach agreement to pass legislation that will cover the costs of all or at least some of the tax cuts. Extending the TCJA and implementing the multiple tax cuts could lead to an increasing deficit, estimated to total almost $22.1 trillion in the next decade, and increasing interest rates. As the tax cuts must be balanced with the generation of revenue and involve a wide range of policy trade-offs that could affect congressional Republicans’ ability to garner a majority in both chambers of Congress, it is unclear whether the tax proposals will be implemented. Taxpayers should continue to stay informed about how these discussions—which will likely have may twists and turns—unfold.