The portion of the reconciliation bill passed by the House Ways and Means Committee on September 15th includes a lot of new tax provisions. Among them, are some significant taxes on pass-through entities and small business owners. Despite the mantra of “tax the rich,” at least some of these provisions will hit a number of small business owners, many of whom would not be typically be considered rich, particularly hard.
In this update we will focus on the individual tax provisions coming out of the Ways and Means Committee.
One bright spot is that the Ways and Means Committee’s provisions do not eliminate the step up in basis for assets going through an estate. TIA has explained why this proposal, advanced by the Administration, would have destroyed many small businesses and hit many middle and upper middle-class taxpayers with a new capital gains tax. Unfortunately, it is too early to assume that we won’t see this provision surface again as the reconciliation bill (recall this type of bill only requires a simple majority of votes in the Senate) is finalized in the House and potentially subject to modifications in the Senate. If the Senate and the House pass different versions of the reconciliation bill, then it is conceivable that even if this provision was not included in either version, it could still emerge during the conference committee where the differences between the versions are ironed out. Some think that, because this provision is one of the most controversial, it will be introduced at the last hour to shelter Democratic members of Congress from the avalanche of criticism sure to follow.
An important thing to recognize is that, under the Ways and Means provisions, by and large, few income taxes will rise for those with incomes less than $400,000. While in most areas of the country this is a significant amount of income, people with this level of income who live in many major cities are not considered wealthy, in fact they are considered upper middle class. Thus, though many Democrats in Congress believe this bill would only tax the “rich,” there are many taxpayers and particularly, small business owners, who live in these cities and the surrounding suburbs who recognize that this bill could negatively impact them though they do not consider themselves “rich” by any means. Unfortunately, since the provisions passed by Ways and Means would increase taxes for many of the small businesses and owners in these cities and suburbs, there is a real risk that the tax hit will ripple down and could hurt the employees of these businesses as well as the community as a whole.
The Ways and Means provisions include no fix to the current limit of $10,000 for state and local income and property taxes (“SALT”) which many Democrats want included in the reconciliation bill. This limitation hurt the taxpayers in blue states such as California, Maryland, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut where property, state and local taxes are high. Many Democrats from these states are saying they will not vote for the bill unless something is done to reverse this unpopular limitation. Rumors continue to abound that the fix included might only apply to taxpayers with income below the $400,000 limit, or the limitation will be eliminated but only for a 2 year period (though the limitation is set to expire at the end of 2025 in any event) or that the $10,000 limit will be increased by a somewhat modest amount, say up to $40,000.
Here's a brief breakdown of some of the major provisions affecting individuals recently passed by the Ways and Means Committee:
The most typical next step is that once the House passes its version of the reconciliation bill, then the Senate Finance will start marking up their tax provisions. If this happens, then it is expected that the House and the Senate will end up with bills that have different provisions. Then either the House will have to pass the Senate’s version of the bill or the two versions will go to the conference committee which will work out a compromise bill. The final bill will then go back to the House and the Senate (if changes are made from the Senate version) for final passage and then on to the President to be signed into law. Under this scenario, we could see different provisions emerge and the overall size of the final bill could end up far smaller than what may initially come out of the House. Senators Manchin (D-WV) and Sinema (D-AZ) are not in favor of a $3.5 trillion bill. However, what is not clear is whether, if the revenue raisers in the bill happened to exactly equal $3.5 trillion or even $3 trillion, either or both of the Senators would still consider it a $3.5 trillion bill? Thus, it is not clear how much we can read into their statements of opposition to the size of the bill. Both Senators who represent the moderate wing of the Democratic Party believe that the House bill is trying to establish too many costly new programs – in short biting off more than the country can chew. Of course, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party believes that the House bill does not go far enough. It is likely under this scenario, however, that the Senate will adopt a smaller bill with fewer new programs and fewer new tax provisions assuming either or both Senator Manchin or Senator Sinema stay firm in their opposition to a bill this large.
Recently, it looked as if the House was going to try to work with the Senate leadership and the White House to come up with a bill that would have sufficient votes in the Senate for the Senate to simply adopt it after it is passed by the House. However, unless a number of major amendments are made to the bill on the floor of the House during the vote supposedly coming up this week, then the Senate will not be in a position to pass the House bill as is and will be working on its own version.
As mentioned earlier, of concern is that the elimination of the step up in basis for assets going through an estate could surface at some later time in this process. The provisions most likely to be excised are the 3% surcharge tax on more than $100,000 of trust income and some or all of the grantor trust changes, particularly those that could have serious ramifications to the insurance market. Of course, other provisions could be on the chopping box. Many in the retirement plan community are up in arms about the sudden prohibition of certain investments in IRAs and the short period to divest these investments which will cause disruption in the market place.
As things develop, we will be reporting back to you.
The U.S. Department of Labor announced an extension of the effective date of the rescission of the “Joint Employer Status Under the Fair Labor Standards Act” final rule, the Joint Employer Rule. The effective date of the Joint Employer Rule is October 5, 2021.
The rescinded rule included a description of joint employment contrary to statutory language and Congressional intent. The rule also failed to take into account the department’s prior joint employment guidance. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York vacated most of the rule in 2020.
Under the FLSA, an employee can have more than one employer for the work they perform. Joint employment applies when – for the purposes of minimum wage and overtime requirements – the department considers two separate companies to be a worker’s employer for the same work. For example, a joint employer relationship could occur where a hotel contracts with a staffing agency to provide cleaning staff, which the hotel directly controls. If the agency and the hotel are joint employers, they are both responsible for worker protections.
A strong joint employer standard is critical because FLSA responsibilities and liability for worker protections do not apply to a business that does not meet the definition of employer.
The final rule becomes effective October 5, 2021. Until the effective date of the rescission of the Joint Employer Rule, part 791 of Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations remains in effect.
For more information about the FLSA or other laws it enforces, visit the Wage and Hour Division, or call toll-free 1-866-4US-WAGE.
For the first time, TIA has organized a golf outing at TopGolf Las Vegas to benefit TIA’s government affairs efforts. Join us for a fun-filled afternoon of golf, laughter, and networking for a worthy cause before the GTE show at Top Golf.
There is no pressure – whether you are an avid golfer or have never swung a club, TopGolf is the spot for you. There are many things to do in Las Vegas, there are plenty of places to go to – but if you are looking for a truly unique experience, look no further than TopGolf.
The cost is $150 Per Golfer and registration includes 2 hours of golf and refreshments in a private bay. The fun-filled day will include reserved bays, two-hours of golf, and refreshments.
The event will take place on October 31st, 2021 from 2-4 pm at 4627 Koval Ln, Las Vegas, NV 89109. TopGolf is located behind the MGM Grand and is a short walk from the strip. There is also plenty of parking available at the complex.
We hope you can spend the afternoon with us networking with industry professionals while enjoying some golf and appetizers for a good cause to support the association.
We also have sponsorship opportunities available for this event. For more information and to RSVP contact me at rlittlefield2@tireindustry.org
CLICK HERE for a registration form.
CLICK HERE for a sponsorship form.
A HUGE THANK YOU TO OUR SPONSORS SO FAR:
31 Incorporated
AME International
Dill Air Controls
Southeastern Wholesale Tire
ShopMonkey
Stellar Industries