Evidence of Temporary Benefits for Families and Individuals
Many family-oriented provisions in the Working Families Tax Cut are explicitly time-limited, providing short-term relief that sunsets without further congressional action. This creates uncertainty and minimal long-term impact:
- Expiration of Key Individual Provisions: The act extends the TCJA's doubled standard deduction and expanded child tax credit (CTC) but only through 2028 in many cases. For example, the temporary boost to the standard deduction (an extra $2,000 for singles/$4,,000 for joint filers in 2025–2026) reverts afterward, potentially raising taxes for 60%+ of filers. The CTC expansion for low-income families (e.g., making more of it refundable) is also temporary, affecting ~17 million children in 2025 but phasing out post-2028 without renewal. Analysis from the Tax Policy Center (TPC) shows this "cliff" could increase taxes for middle-class families by $1,500–$2,000 annually starting in 2029, undoing any gains.
- Limited and Short-Lived Relief for Low-Income Households: The no-tax-on-tips and no-tax-on-overtime provisions cap benefits (e.g., overtime exemption up to $10,000/year) and expire after 2028. The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) estimates that in 2025, the poorest 20% of households get just $140/year net from the bill—mostly from temporary CTC tweaks—while facing higher costs from inflation and deficits. Post-expiration, these families see no sustained income boost, as the provisions don't address structural issues like childcare costs (averaging $13,000/year per child nationally).
- Inflationary and Uneven Short-Term Effects: The Bipartisan Policy Center notes that temporary extensions like the paid family leave tax credit (Section 45S) create "uncertainty for businesses," leading to inconsistent adoption. Families might see a one-time wage bump (e.g., 2–3% in 2026 per TPC models), but this fades as provisions lapse, without evidence of lasting employment gains. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) calls such temporary deductions "costly and ineffective," providing "little to no tax relief" for the bottom 20% of earners, who already pay minimal federal income tax.
These temporary elements were designed to fit within 10-year budget windows, but they leave families vulnerable to hikes, as seen in state-level analyses where similar short-term cuts failed to prevent post-expiration tax increases.
Evidence of Permanent Corporate Cuts
In contrast, the act locks in TCJA's business provisions indefinitely, prioritizing corporations over families:
- Permanent Corporate Rate Reduction: The 35%→21% corporate tax rate cut (costing ~$1.3 trillion over 10 years) is made fully permanent, with no sunset. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) estimates this alone adds $200–$300 billion/year to deficits long-term, as revenue losses compound without offsets.
- Entrenched Business Deductions: Expensing for R&D and equipment (full immediate write-offs) and the 20% pass-through deduction for business owners are permanent. The Heritage Foundation acknowledges these as "pro-growth" but notes they disproportionately aid large firms and wealthy owners (top 1% capture 60%+ of benefits per TPC data). Foreign investors also gain permanently, as they're exempt from capital gains taxes on buybacks funded by these cuts.
- No Reversion Mechanism: Unlike family credits, corporate changes lack expiration dates, driven by lobbying and Senate rules. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) highlights how this "tilt" shrinks revenues by trillions, limiting funds for family programs like Medicaid or SNAP.
Why This Structure Makes the Act "Unhelpful" Overall
Evidence shows the imbalance harms working families more than it helps, with corporate permanence crowding out family priorities:
- Failure to Deliver Promised Trickle-Down Benefits: Post-TCJA studies (mirroring the 2025 act) from the Center for American Progress (CAP) and Federal Reserve economists find "little evidence" of wage growth or investment from corporate cuts—real wages rose just 1–2% short-term (mostly pre-pandemic), while stock buybacks hit $1 trillion in 2018 alone. The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) projects extending these cuts adds 1.2% to the fiscal gap, forcing future pain via spending cuts (e.g., $500 billion from social programs) or tariffs that act as a "regressive sales tax" on low-income households.
- Deficit-Driven Long-Term Harm: CRFB and CBPP estimate the act's net cost at $4–$5 trillion over a decade (if family extensions are renewed ad hoc), worsening the $29 trillion debt. This could raise interest rates by 0.5–1%, per EPI models, increasing family borrowing costs (e.g., mortgages up $100/month). Low/middle-income families, who rely on public investments, face the brunt—e.g., Treasury/Fed research shows no job/wage boost from pass-through deductions, yet they fund 70% of the bill's cost.
- Regressive Distribution: ITEP analysis: Richest 20% get $110/year net in 2025 (mostly permanent corporate/pass-through perks), while poorest get $140 (temporary CTC). Over time, as family benefits lapse, the net effect is a $1,000+ annual loss for median families via higher deficits/taxes. CAP notes this "failed to deliver promised growth," with GDP up just 0.3–0.7% annually post-TCJA, far below projections.
In summary, while the act offers modest, fleeting relief to families, its permanent corporate favoritism locks in inequality and fiscal strain, making it net unhelpful for most Americans.
Add comment
Comments