Yes. But determined presidential support for such popular changes can be expected to prevail in Congress.
Almost all the promises made by candidates would require Congress to pass before taking effect.
However as head of the executive branch the President can set the agenda for the various government agencies that are under his control.
This is the President’s real power lies.
I think it depends on how the statutes define income.
There could be a loophole where all it takes is for the IRS to change its regulations.
But, I suspect Congress would have to change the statutes.
Yes, all the more reason to focus on down ballot candidates as well. Trump needs the Senate and a stronger majority in the House.
Just ask Joementia.
Look what he’s done, via EO, and the border INVADERS.
The promises and money for everything is just getting started. The closer to the election, the more these politicians will promise for other people and groups.
Grok; Aren’t “{No Tax On Tips” and “No Tax On Overtime” dependent on a Congressional vote Tax Code VOTE ?
For accurate and up-to-date information about the 2024 U.S. Elections, please visit Vote.gov.
Answer
Yes, both “No Tax On Tips” and “No Tax On Overtime” proposals would indeed be dependent on a Congressional vote to amend the tax code. Here’s how it generally works:
Legislation Introduction: A bill like the “No Tax on Tips Act” or any legislation regarding overtime would first need to be introduced in Congress by a senator or representative.
Committee Review: The bill would then typically go to relevant committees (like the Ways and Means Committee in the House or the Finance Committee in the Senate for tax-related issues) where it could be reviewed, amended, or ignored.
Floor Vote: If the bill makes it out of committee, it would be scheduled for a vote on the floor of the House and/or Senate. Here, it would need a majority vote to pass.
Conference Committee: If the House and Senate pass different versions of the bill, a conference committee would reconcile these differences.
Final Vote: Both chambers would then need to vote on the reconciled version.
Presidential Action: After passing both chambers, the bill would go to the President, who could sign it into law, veto it, or do nothing (which, after ten days if Congress is in session, results in it becoming law anyway).
Implementation: If signed into law, the IRS would then need to adjust the tax code accordingly, which might involve new regulations or guidance.
For “No Tax On Tips,” there’s been discussion and legislative proposals, but as of my last update, no such law has been universally enacted. However, individual states or cities might have their own regulations or exemptions regarding taxes on tips or overtime pay.
For “No Tax On Overtime,” the situation might be more complex due to the integration of overtime pay within the broader labor laws, not just tax laws. Changes here might also involve the Department of Labor, not just the IRS.
Both proposals would represent significant changes to current tax practices:
No Tax On Tips: This would likely involve amending the Internal Revenue Code to exclude tips from taxable income, which could affect both federal income tax and possibly Social Security and Medicare taxes (FICA).
No Tax On Overtime: This could mean overtime wages wouldn’t be taxed, or it might refer to not taxing the additional amount over regular hours, which would also require a change in tax law.
The passage of such laws would depend on numerous factors, including political will, economic analysis of the impact on federal revenue, and public support. Given the nature of these changes, they would indeed require a Congressional vote to alter the tax code, followed by presidential action.
Remember, while there’s been legislative interest and proposals, without a final vote and signature into law, these remain proposals or ideas rather than enacted policy.
I believe the constitution requires imposition of taxes to be approved by Congress. Instructing the IRS not to collect taxes on certain incomes? Why not an Executive order? I can’t imagine the Founders objecting to a president reducing the financial burden of government on the citizenry.
Pretty much everything a presidential candidate promises or a president does is, except for executive orders, which often far overreach anything that would make it through congress...
Any IRS employees that haven’t paid their taxes should be fired immediately.
I pay taxes on social security and that’s not income. So why shouldn’t tips be taxed? It is concerned income.
The is why I roll my eyes at all the promises politicians make. It’s like the middle school kid running for class president. Nonsense.
Says you’d like to do this and will support efforts to make it happen. Don’t say “I will do…”
Yes indeed they are. And given how Congress likes to not even budgets anymore, which this would be a part, such a thing is guaranteed to never happen. Welcome to politics.
Here’s another couple.....arn’t student loan repayments something the President cannot willy nilly implement on his own? By the same token, aren’t Que-Mala’s wage and price freeze orders in the same boat without benefit of Congress or the USSC. I say just chalk it up to a retro-Chevron decision by the IRS and let it fly.
Kamala said she would confiscate firearms through an executive order.
Maybe: it depends on how “income” is defined in the law and the Federal register. “Income” used to be fairly narrowly defined: I think tips were once not included because they were a gratuity and not a wage. I don’t know if they were reclassified in law or by regulation. Looks like law in 1982.
Both Trump and Harris are over-promising. In reality, there’s no money to pay for these promises.
Most wage laws are local state laws.
Democrat politicians hate overtime.
He can use an EO that will last as long as he is in office.