Business

Tax deal faces obstacles as crucial markup looms on January 19, 2024 at 10:30 am Business News | The Hill

Published

1 year ago

January 19, 2024

A deal reached this week by top tax writing committees in Congress faces a number of hurdles in the House and Senate.

Ahead of a Friday markup scheduled for the bill in the House Ways and Means Committee, lawmakers in both chambers have concerns about how exactly the $70 to $80 billion in tax relief will be divided between an expansion of the child tax credit (CTC) and deductions for businesses.

The Democratic left flank says the bill allots too little for the CTC and restores business credits that were already offsetting a 2017 reduction in the corporate tax rate.

“We should demand more of ourselves than going along with a deal that gives big corporations billions and billions of dollars more in tax breaks than help for struggling families. It just makes no sense at all,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) told reporters Wednesday.

“The fact that we’re not prioritizing children first as a country and understanding that that will help our economy, businesses and future entrepreneurs – the whole thing is sort of ridiculous,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) said Wednesday.

Republicans argue the CTC expansion is too generous and that people should be working harder to qualify for the credit.

“There are some things that shouldn’t be in there, some of the things on the CTC, for example. It’s always been connected to work. You can get it for one year, but then you can get the thing for two successive years without working,” Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) said Wednesday. “They increased the refundability amount and indexed the overall credit [to inflation]. There are some things in there that I’ve got to take a look at.”

Revenue tables for the bill hadn’t been released to the public as of Thursday, but the proposal from the Ways and Means Committee allows taxpayers in 2024 and 2025 to use income estimates from prior taxable years in calculating their credit.

Conservatives are troubled that this would mean people who would have to work less to claim the credit — a major sticking point in past efforts to expand the CTC.

“This policy would cut the CTC’s current annual work requirement in half by allowing parents to claim the CTC for two years while working in just one,” Matt Weidinger, a senior fellow with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, wrote in a Wednesday analysis of the proposal.

Beyond disagreements about the substance of the deal, there are procedural questions about what larger package the tax proposal could be attached to, or whether it would be its own separate bill. Standalone tax bills are relatively rare pieces of legislation.

“I think probably it will be a standalone bill,” Rep. Tom Cole (Okla.), a senior Republican appropriator, told The Hill Wednesday. “We’re having enough challenges moving appropriations bills. I don’t know why you’d want to add something else to them right now.”

“I have a lot to criticize in the bill, but I think this is the best we can get at this particular time, realizing the precarious situation that [Speaker Mike] Johnson [R-La.] is in,” Ways and Means Committee member Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) told The Hill.

Johnson is under pressure from House conservatives to support steeper cuts and stricter immigration policy despite the speaker already striking a bipartisan funding agreement with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

While Schumer endorsed the deal on the Senate floor Tuesday and Wednesday, and specifically its expansion of low-income housing credits, Johnson still hadn’t weighed in on the deal as of Thursday morning.

Experts on the Congressional tax negotiations process told The Hill the bill is just at the beginning of its journey on the way to becoming a potential law and that the changes to it could be manifold.

“I just have a sense that we may see changes in the markup in Ways and Means, and once we get to the Senate, the Senate always gets its own stuff,” former Ways and Means Committee tax counsel Marc Gerson said in an interview. “And so what we have is a base bill … and I think it’s going to change.”

One source of pressure for more changes to the bill is the $10,000 cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction imposed through Republicans’ 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).

Blue-state Republican lawmakers representing districts with high local taxes have insisted on raising the SALT cap in any tax measure.

“I’m a no on a tax package that does not have adequate relief for SALT,” Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) told The Hill.

“In high-tax blue states, it’s a popular thing to be pro-SALT, but to also fight for it. And I’m willing to fight for my constituents by voting no against my own party’s tax package unless and until it has meaningful relief on SALT,” he added.

Top tax writers in both chambers say there’s plenty of room to maneuver to get the deal done, specifically with the cancellation of the employee retention tax credit (ERC), which would serve as the deal’s main source of new revenue.

“There’s room on that,” Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), ranking member of the House Ways and Means Committee, told The Hill on Wednesday.

“There’s a lot of moving parts that could bring a lot of Democrats along. We could make some adjustments based on the score [to] refundability on the child tax credit. There’s no inherent hostility on our side to some of the provisions, but we want them better paired with our requests for equitable purposes,” he said.

Neal said he “speculated” that the lion’s share of the roughly $78 billion in tax relief was now going to business credits rather than the expanded CTC.

“With a little bit more raising the ceiling, we could accomplish all the priorities that the members desire,” he added.

IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel was on Capitol Hill last week briefing the Senate Finance Committee on fraudulent activity associated with the ERC claims, which lawmakers say has been rampant as a result of intensive marketing a promotion by lawyers and accountants in the tax prep industry.

“We heard from a whistleblower that with these new claims, 95 percent of them were fraudulent,” Senate Finance Committee chair Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) told The Hill Wednesday. “I asked the commissioner if that was right, and he said, basically, ‘Yes.’”

Enthusiasm for the deal is also high with Wyden’s counterpart on the Senate Finance Committee, ranking member Mike Crapo (R-Idaho).

“The agreement announced … by Chairman Smith and Chairman Wyden is a thoughtful starting point for the House to begin the process,” Crapo said Tuesday.

A White House spokesperson told The Hill the White House looks forward to reviewing the full details of their agreement and supports the work of the tax-writing committees on the CTC and low-income housing.

Despite encouragement from the White House and at the committee level, lawmakers hardly think the tax deal is a lock.

“I hope people don’t try to tamper with it too much, because I think it will all just fall apart,” Cole said.

Business, Domestic Taxes, House, American Enterprise Institute, Bill Pascrell, business taxes, Child Tax Credit, Chuck Schumer, Cory Booker, Danny Werfel, Elizabeth Warren, Mike Crapo, Nick LaLota, Rep. Mike Johnson, Richard Neal, Sen. John Thune, Sen. Ron Wyden, Tax credits, tax fraud, taxes, Tom Cole A deal reached this week by top tax writing committees in Congress faces a number of hurdles in the House and Senate. Ahead of a Friday markup scheduled for the bill in the House Ways and Means Committee, lawmakers in both chambers have concerns about how exactly the $70 to $80 billion in tax relief…

Business

How Trump’s Tariffs Could Hit American Wallets

Published

1 day ago

July 11, 2025

Bolanle Media Staff

As the debate over tariffs heats up ahead of the 2024 election, new analysis reveals that American consumers could face significant financial consequences if former President Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs are enacted and maintained. According to a recent report highlighted by Forbes, the impact could be felt across households, businesses, and the broader U.S. economy.

The Household Cost: Up to $2,400 More Per Year

Research from Yale University’s Budget Lab, cited by Forbes, estimates that the average U.S. household could pay an additional $2,400 in 2025 if the new tariffs take effect and persist. This projection reflects the cumulative impact of all tariffs announced in Trump’s plan.

Price Hikes Across Everyday Goods

The tariffs are expected to drive up consumer prices by 1.8% in the near term. Some of the hardest-hit categories include:

Apparel: Prices could jump 37% in the short term (and 18% long-term).
Footwear: Up 39% short-term (18% long-term).
Metals: Up 43%.
Leather products: Up 39%.
Electrical equipment: Up 26%.
Motor vehicles, electronics, rubber, and plastic products: Up 11–18%.
Groceries: Items like vegetables, fruits, and nuts could rise up to 6%, with additional increases for coffee and orange juice due to specific tariffs on Brazilian imports.

A Historic Tariff Rate and Economic Impact

If fully implemented, the effective tariff rate on U.S. consumers could reach 18%, the highest level since 1934. The broader economic consequences are also notable:

GDP Reduction: The tariffs could reduce U.S. GDP by 0.4% annually, equating to about $110 billion per year.
Revenue vs. Losses: While tariffs are projected to generate $2.2 trillion in revenue over the next decade, this would be offset by $418 billion in negative economic impacts.

How Businesses Are Responding

A KPMG survey cited in the report found that 83% of business leaders expect to raise prices within six months of tariff implementation. More than half say their profit margins are already under pressure, suggesting that consumers will likely bear the brunt of these increased costs.

What This Means for Americans

The findings underscore the potential for substantial financial strain on American families and businesses if Trump’s proposed tariffs are enacted. With consumer prices set to rise and economic growth projected to slow, the debate over tariffs is likely to remain front and center in the months ahead.

For more in-depth economic analysis and updates, stay tuned to Bolanlemedia.com.

Business

U.S. Limits Nigerian Non-Immigrant Visas to Three-Month Validity

Published

3 days ago

July 9, 2025

Bolanle Media Staff

In July 2025, the United States implemented significant changes to its visa policy for Nigerian citizens, restricting most non-immigrant and non-diplomatic visas to a single entry and a maximum validity of three months. This marks a departure from previous policies that allowed for multiple entries and longer stays, and has important implications for travel, business, and diplomatic relations between the two countries.

Key Changes in U.S. Visa Policy for Nigerians

Single-Entry, Three-Month Limit: As of July 8, 2025, most non-immigrant visas issued to Nigerians are now valid for only one entry and up to three months.
No Retroactive Impact: Visas issued prior to this date remain valid under their original terms.
Reciprocity Principle: The U.S. cited alignment with Nigeria’s own visa policies for U.S. citizens as the basis for these changes.
Enhanced Security Screening: Applicants are required to make their social media accounts public for vetting, and are subject to increased scrutiny for any signs of hostility toward U.S. institutions.

Rationale Behind the Policy Shift

Security and Immigration Integrity: The U.S. government stated the changes are intended to safeguard the immigration system and meet global security standards.
Diplomatic Reciprocity: These restrictions mirror the limitations Nigeria imposes on U.S. travelers, emphasizing the principle of fairness in international visa agreements.
Potential for Further Action: The U.S. has indicated that additional travel restrictions could be introduced if Nigeria does not address certain diplomatic and security concerns.

Nigeria’s Updated Visa Policy

Nigeria Visa Policy 2025 (NVP 2025): Introduced in May 2025, this policy features a new e-Visa system for short visits and reorganizes visa categories:
- Short Visit Visas (e-Visa): For business or tourism, valid up to three months, non-renewable, processed digitally within 48 hours.
- Temporary Residence Visas: For employment or study, valid up to two years.
- Permanent Residence Visas: For investors, retirees, and highly skilled individuals.
Visa Exemptions: ECOWAS citizens and certain diplomatic passport holders remain exempt.
Reciprocal Restrictions: Most short-stay and business visas for U.S. citizens are single-entry and short-term, reflecting reciprocal treatment.

Impact on Travelers and Bilateral Relations

Nigerian Travelers: Face increased administrative requirements, higher costs, and reduced travel flexibility to the U.S.
U.S. Travelers to Nigeria: Encounter similar restrictions, with most visas limited to single entry and short duration.
Diplomatic Tensions: Nigerian officials have called for reconsideration of the U.S. policy, warning of negative effects on bilateral ties and people-to-people exchanges.

Conclusion

The U.S. decision to limit Nigerian non-immigrant visas to three months highlights the growing complexity and reciprocity in global visa regimes. Both countries are tightening their policies, citing security and fairness, which underscores the need for travelers and businesses to stay informed and adapt to evolving requirements.

Business

Nicki Minaj Demands $200 Million from Jay-Z in Explosive Twitter Rant

Published

3 days ago

July 9, 2025

Bolanle Media Staff

Nicki Minaj has once again set social media ablaze, this time targeting Jay-Z with a series of pointed tweets that allege he owes her an eye-popping $200 million. The outburst has reignited debates about artist compensation, industry transparency, and the ongoing power struggles within hip-hop’s elite circles.

The $200 Million Claim

In a string of tweets, Minaj directly addressed Jay-Z, writing, “Jay-Z, call me to settle the karmic debt. It’s only collecting more interest. You still in my top five though. Let’s get it.” She went further, warning, “Anyone still calling him Hov will answer to God for the blasphemy.” According to Minaj, the alleged debt stems from Jay-Z’s sale of Tidal, the music streaming platform he launched in 2015 with a group of high-profile artists—including Minaj herself, J. Cole, and Rihanna.

When Jay-Z sold Tidal in 2021, Minaj claims she was only offered $1 million, a figure she says falls dramatically short of what she believes she is owed based on her ownership stake and contributions. She has long voiced dissatisfaction with the payout, but this is the most public—and dramatic—demand to date.

Beyond the Money: Broader Grievances

Minaj’s Twitter storm wasn’t limited to financial complaints. She also:

Promised to start a college fund for her fans if she receives the money she claims is owed.
Accused blogs and online creators of ignoring her side of the story, especially when it involves Jay-Z.
Warned content creators about posting “hate or lies,” saying, “They won’t cover your legal fees… I hope it’s worth losing everything including your account.”

She expressed frustration that mainstream blogs and platforms don’t fully cover her statements, especially when they involve Jay-Z, and suggested that much of the coverage she receives is from less reputable sources.

Satirical Accusations and Industry Critique

Minaj’s tweets took a satirical turn as she jokingly blamed Jay-Z for a laundry list of cultural grievances, including:

The state of hip-hop, football, basketball, and touring
The decline of Instagram and Twitter
Even processed foods and artificial dyes in candy

She repeatedly declared, “The jig is up,” but clarified that her statements were “alleged and for entertainment purposes only.”

Political and Cultural Criticism

Minaj also criticized Jay-Z’s political involvement, questioning why he didn’t campaign more actively for Kamala Harris or respond to President Obama’s comments about Black men. While Jay-Z has a history of supporting Democratic campaigns, Minaj’s critique centered on more recent events and what she perceives as a lack of advocacy for the Black community.

The Super Bowl and Lil Wayne

Adding another layer to her grievances, Minaj voiced disappointment that Lil Wayne was not chosen to perform at the Super Bowl in New Orleans, a decision she attributes to Jay-Z’s influence in the entertainment industry.

Public and Industry Reaction

Despite the seriousness of her financial claim, many observers note that if Minaj truly believed Jay-Z owed her $200 million, legal action—not social media—would likely follow. As of now, there is no public record of a lawsuit or formal complaint.

Some fans and commentators see Minaj’s outburst as part of a larger pattern of airing industry grievances online, while others interpret it as a mix of personal frustration and performance art. Minaj herself emphasized that her tweets were “for entertainment purposes only.”

Conclusion

Nicki Minaj’s explosive Twitter rant against Jay-Z has once again placed the spotlight on issues of artist compensation and industry dynamics. Whether her claims will lead to further action or remain another dramatic chapter in hip-hop’s ongoing soap opera remains to be seen, but for now, the world is watching—and tweeting.