Connect with us

Business

An Illustrated Guide to Who Really Benefits From ‘No Tax on Tips’

Published

on

An Illustrated Guide to Who Really Benefits From ‘No Tax on Tips’

There’s no question that President Trump’s proposal to stop taxing tips has broad appeal. It’s popular in polling, lawmakers in both parties support it, and now a version of the idea is on its way to becoming law.

But the effect of the policy would actually be quite narrow. About 3 percent of American workers receive tips, but about a third of those employees would not see a gain from the change.

Advertisement

That’s because of the way Republicans structured the policy in the tax legislation they passed through the House recently. Here’s who would benefit under their plan — and who wouldn’t.

The proposal would leave out workers who are not tipped.

Advertisement

The tax break is good news for people in industries like dining, where tips are a big part of worker pay. But it also means that two employees making the same amount, one a bartender and one a retail salesperson, could soon face very different tax bills.

Advertisement

These two workers each make $40,000, but the tipped worker would owe a lot less in taxes.

Note: Potential additional effects of tax credits or other less common deductions are not included.

Advertisement

The tax exemption would create a huge incentive for more people to try to earn tips. The Republican legislation lays out some ground rules, tasking the Treasury Department to limit the tax break to jobs in which workers have traditionally received tips. This could become the subject of intense lobbying, as companies try to convince the government that their employees deserve the tax break. Uber and DoorDash have already pushed to make sure their drivers can qualify for tax-free tips.

Many of the lowest-earning tipped workers wouldn’t benefit much, or at all.

Advertisement

Another obstacle to benefiting from the tax break is the way income is taxed in America. In general, before they pay taxes, Americans subtract deductions from their income, and then the government assesses tax on that smaller amount of money.

Everyone can take the standard deduction, which would be worth $16,000 for individuals and $32,000 for married couples this year under the Republican tax bill. “No tax on tips” would take the form of a deduction people can claim on top of the standard deduction, shrinking their taxable income even more.

But for a tipped worker who doesn’t make much more than the standard deduction — say a college student who waits tables over the summer — the ability to claim an additional deduction would not generate much in tax savings. Someone making less than the standard deduction would have no taxable income to begin with.

Advertisement

The policy would save this low-wage waiter a small amount.

Advertisement

Note: Potential additional effects of tax credits or other less common deductions are not included.

Advertisement

It’s important to note that the tips exemption applies only to the federal income tax. Workers would still owe payroll taxes, like the 6.2 percent Social Security tax, on their tipped income. They may also owe state income taxes on their tips.

For many low-income Americans, payroll taxes, rather than the income tax, are the biggest taxes they pay. Roughly 37 percent of tipped workers already don’t owe any federal income tax, according to an estimate from the Budget Lab at Yale.

Others wouldn’t gain because other benefits already eliminate their tax burden.

Advertisement

There are other tax breaks that could eliminate a worker’s tax liability before “no tax on tips” comes into the picture. For example, a full-time Uber or Lyft driver who can take advantage of the mileage deduction, which increases with every mile driven, may not have much use for another tax break.

Advertisement

The policy wouldn’t make a difference for this ride-share driver.

Advertisement

Note: Business deductions included are for qualified business income and business use of a car. The amounts differ under a “no tax on tips” policy because the deductions would interact. Potential additional effects of tax credits or other less common deductions are not included.

An exception to this would be tax benefits that are “refundable.” These are tax credits, like the earned- income tax credit, that give money to Americans even if they don’t owe anything in income tax. So these tax credits can become cash payments to low-income Americans. Because of that, workers could conceivably use the tips deduction to reduce their tax bills to zero and still receive the same benefit from a refundable tax credit.

The more money someone makes, the bigger the benefit.

Advertisement

The deduction would be most meaningful for those who make enough to owe a fair amount in income taxes. A typical tax cut for someone earning enough to benefit from the plan could be worth roughly $1,800.

Advertisement

This hairdresser would save the typical amount among those who would benefit.

Advertisement

Note: Potential additional effects of tax credits or other less common deductions are not included.

This dynamic is a microcosm of how cuts to income taxes often work: The more money you make, the more you pay in tax and therefore the more you save from a tax cut. In this case, though, your benefit would depend both on how much you make and what share of your income comes in the form of tips.

Advertisement

This Las Vegas blackjack dealer would save a lot based on his significant tips.

Advertisement

Note: Potential additional effects of tax credits or other less common deductions are not included. Figures are rounded.

This would be true up to a point. The Republican legislation would bar tipped workers making more than $160,000 from claiming the break. (That level would apply for this year and increase over time.)

Advertisement

The cut-off is a stark one. A tipped worker making $160,001 would, under the bill, receive nothing, potentially encouraging people to try to lower their earnings to claim the tax break. Making that extra dollar could mean thousands in additional taxes.

“No tax on tips” could end up as a short-lived experiment. In the House-passed bill, the policy would last only through 2028, though the legislation could change in the Senate.

Many tax-policy experts are rooting for the demise of the deduction, which they see as another potential hole in a tax system so strewn with carve-outs that it is often compared to Swiss cheese. In general, they would prefer a system that charges roughly the same tax on workers with roughly the same earnings, rather than creating a tax advantage for certain types of work.

Advertisement

“It’s the exact opposite of the general principles that tax policy purists advocate for,” said Joseph Rosenberg, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute.

Advertisement

About the data

Advertisement

Illustrated examples were constructed using data from a summary of the House Republican bill (proposed tips policy, standard deductions and tax rates); the Bureau of Labor Statistics (typical wages by occupation); companies and industry groups (estimated typical tip shares); and analyses from the Budget Lab at Yale and the Tax Policy Center (distributional effects of the policy). Workers in all examples have a single tax-filing status.

Business

How ‘The View’ Landed at the Center of a Free Speech Battle

Published

on

How ‘The View’ Landed at the Center of a Free Speech Battle

President Trump’s wide-ranging campaign to punish his perceived media critics has come for newspapers like The Wall Street Journal, The Des Moines Register and The New York Times; broadcast outlets like the BBC, NBC News and CBS News; and the late-night hosts Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert.

But now it is bearing down on a new opponent, one that remains politically potent and has a storied place in Mr. Trump’s oeuvre of media grudge matches — the long-running ABC daytime talk show, “The View.”

The Federal Communications Commission has been quietly investigating the program for months, looking into whether “The View” violated old federal rules requiring equal airtime to rival political candidates. The inquiry could also feed into the agency’s wider review of whether ABC should be allowed to continue to own some of the country’s most important local television stations.

The clash between ABC and the Trump administration could lead to a protracted, high-stakes legal battle over free expression. The network asserts that the F.C.C. action could have “a chilling effect on First Amendment-protected free speech on the eve of the 2026 elections” and affect which political guests — if any — talk shows will book.

The central role of “The View” is testament to the enduring influence of an old-fashioned broadcast television program that the ABC anchor Barbara Walters started 29 years ago, describing it “as a kaffeeklatsch with more caffeine.” People in both parties say the show continues to hold significant political power — even as streaming, podcasts and social media take up more attention.

Advertisement

“The View” draws 2.7 million viewers a day, more or less the audience it has had for a decade, according to Nielsen.

“It would be easy for our side to say, ‘Who watches that junk?’” said Tim Graham, a senior leader of the Media Research Center, a conservative group that has long been critical of the show. “But the answer is: Many people.”

Representatives for “The View” declined to comment, or to set up interviews with the hosts or anyone involved in the production.

Ms. Walters’s intention, as she said on the premiere episode in 1997, was to make the show destination viewing for a broad swath of women “of different generations, backgrounds and views.” The show’s panel has long included a conservative presence to balance the progressivism of its longstanding hosts Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg.

Mr. Trump, who was good friends with Ms. Walters, used to be a regular guest, once seeing the show as a great platform to promote himself, his business and his family. During a March 2006 appearance, Mr. Trump, sitting next to Ivanka Trump, notoriously mused, “If Ivanka weren’t my daughter, perhaps I’d be dating her.” (“Who are you, Woody Allen?” Ms. Behar blurted, sending Mr. Trump into a fit of laughter.)

Advertisement

Weeks later, Melania Trump gave the show her first interview after the birth of her son, Barron, revealing details about the delivery (“very, very easy”) and informing viewers that Mr. Trump had elected to stay out of the delivery room. Sometimes Mr. and Mrs. Trump even appeared together: In 2010, they made a joint appearance when Mrs. Trump promoted her QVC jewelry line.

But “The View” also set the scene for a foundational Trump feud — with the former host Rosie O’Donnell, starting in 2006. She called him a “snake-oil salesman”; he called her “a slob” and worse.

The final break in the relationship between the show and Mr. Trump came shortly after he entered politics. He clashed with Ms. Goldberg over his description of Mexicans as “rapists” in 2015, and he declined invitations from “The View” thereafter. He made 18 appearances in all.

The hosts became more critical of Mr. Trump over the past decade, and he attacked them back. The two Republicans on the panel — a first-term Trump spokeswoman, Alyssa Farah Griffin, and the longtime strategist Ana Navarro — are frequent Trump critics. And the anti-Trump critics are even tougher.

“It is unbelievable to me,” Sunny Hostin, a host, said this week, “that there are still people — despite the fact that they don’t have health care, despite the fact that the Department of Education has been gutted, despite the fact that they can’t afford to buy eggs — they are still with their guy.”

Advertisement

Conservatives accuse the show of interviewing mostly Democrats. This spring, the Media Research Center released a report titled, “The View Kicks Off Midterm Year With 27 Liberal Guests to 1 Republican.” (The study included celebrities in its tally.)

In its filing with the F.C.C., ABC noted that guest appearances did not reflect the full range of invitations. The network said the show had invited numerous Trump allies over the past two seasons, including Vice President JD Vance, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Senator Lindsey Graham, Elon Musk and Secretary of State Marco Rubio — all of whom declined.

ABC’s lawyers said bookings were “based on newsworthiness, anticipated audience interest and their potential to ‘make news’ on the show.”

The administration has escalated its attacks over the past year. In July, it released a statement rooting for the show’s cancellation, after Ms. Behar compared Mr. Trump unfavorably with former President Barack Obama.

The seriousness of the F.C.C.’s inquiry into “The View” came to light when ABC responded forcefully to it this week. The agency is looking into whether the show was improperly operating outside longstanding broadcast rules requiring entertainment programs to provide equal airtime to candidates for the same office.

Advertisement

ABC’s lawyers noted that “The View” had received a news exemption from the agency in 2002 and that the exemption had not been challenged in the 24 years since.

Their response, which became public on Friday, accused the F.C.C. of violating the network’s First Amendment rights and indicated that they were prepared to take the case as far as the Supreme Court.

The network maintains that the mix of its guests should not be the government’s concern. “Of course, government officials are free to express their own views about ‘The View,’” ABC’s lawyers said in the filing. “But they cannot utilize the coercive powers of the state to punish viewpoints with which they disagree.”

The show has long been under a political microscope, not only because of what its hosts say but also because of the makeup of its audience.

The two highest-rated media markets for “The View,” according to Nielsen, are Philadelphia and the Flint-Saginaw-Bay City market in Michigan’s industrial corridor — both in swing states. The show also draws strong audiences in Pittsburgh, Atlanta, Milwaukee, Chicago and New York, Nielsen said, as well as in West Palm Beach, Fla.; Kansas City, Mo.; and Hartford, Conn.

Advertisement

That audience is made up of a prime voting demographic; two-thirds of its viewers are 65 or older, and nearly 90 percent are over the age of 50. Seventy percent are women. And 60 percent of its viewers are white and a quarter are Black, according to Nielsen.

“Women are one of the most important swing segments of the electorate,” said Daniel Suhr of the Center for American Rights, the conservative legal group that in March urged the F.C.C. to deny “The View” an exemption from the equal-airtime rules as a “bona fide” news program.

Having hosts who “constantly bash the president and the party” on a show that draws such swing voters, Mr. Suhr said, “has a real effect on our politics.”

Lis Smith, a Democratic strategist who has long seen “The View” as an important stop on any major candidate’s campaign schedule, said she thought conservatives were mainly picking on the show to whip up the faithful against a favorite media target. But, she added, “The View” does have its uses for Democrats.

“They reach a large audience of women, and Democrats need women to turn out to vote to win,” she said.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Mattel investor campaigns to take the company private

Published

on

Mattel investor campaigns to take the company private

A large investor in Mattel is asking the toy maker to sell itself to a big investor and take its shares off the stock market.

Southeastern Asset Management, which oversees 4% of Mattel’s stock, said in a letter released Thursday that the company would be better off if owned by a private equity firm, a toy competitor or a media company.

Mattel stock price was $15.41 as of Friday morning, up 2% from closing on Thursday. Its shares have fallen more than 20% this year.

Southeastern said Mattel’s current strategy would make shareholders wait too long for the company’s stock price to reach $30.

“We do not want to wait longer for that to be realized,” Southeastern said in the letter, addressed to Mattel Chief Executive Ynon Kreiz. “We would prefer you lead the effort to explore strategic alternatives given your industry knowledge and relationships.”

Advertisement

Mattel said in a release Thursday that it appreciates and will consider the perspectives shared by Southeastern and other shareholders. The company said it will maintain its focus on squeezing more profit from the many famous toys and other intellectual properties it controls.

“Our Board of Directors and management team are committed to acting in the best interests of all Mattel shareholders,” the company said in the release.

Southeastern sent the open letter to Mattel’s board and other shareholders on Thursday. It was originally sent to Kreiz in mid-March, shortly before the company announced it was laying off 65 employees.

Mattel has laid off hundreds of employees in the past year and a half.

The company’s shares and profit took a dip after it announced weak holiday sales in 2025, in part due to disappointing Barbie sales.

Advertisement

Last year, its net sales were about $5.3 billion, down 1% from the year before.

Southeastern suggested three potential buyers.

Private equity firms, which have expressed interest in Mattel for years, could help provide financial stability, the shareholder said. If the company delisted, it wouldn’t have to worry about quarterly reports or annual expectations, Southeastern said.

Another toy company could also be a potential buyer, the shareholder said, noting that Mattel and Hasbro have been in talks for years.

“We believe synergies between the two companies would be material, creating a stronger player in a global industry,” Southeastern said.

Advertisement

Mattel also has valuable intellectual property that could interest large media companies, Southeastern said.

The three buyer options aren’t mutually exclusive and could be combined, the shareholder said.

“We are grateful for your leadership that stabilized the business during a difficult period,” Southeastern said in the letter. “We believe that now is the time for the company to explore strategic alternatives.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

China’s Exports and Imports Set Records in April Amid High Energy Costs

Published

on

China’s Exports and Imports Set Records in April Amid High Energy Costs

China’s exports and imports each set monthly records in April, further cementing the country as the world’s leading trading nation as Beijing prepares to welcome President Trump for a summit next week with Xi Jinping, China’s leader.

China also ran a trade surplus — the excess of exports over imports — of $84.8 billion last month, according to data released on Saturday by the General Administration of Customs. However, that surplus did not set a record. The war in Iran and closure of the Strait of Hormuz pushed up the cost of imported oil and natural gas, causing China’s overall imports to increase slightly faster than exports.

The surplus in April keeps China on track for a third year of roughly trillion-dollar trade surpluses. China posted a $1.19 trillion trade surplus last year, easily breaking the world record of $992 billion that it had set the year before.

Mr. Trump is expected to press Mr. Xi to buy more American goods during their scheduled summit, part of his long-running effort to narrow China’s longtime trade surplus with the United States. But two recent court decisions overturning Mr. Trump’s tariffs on imports have eroded some of his leverage.

China’s exports to the United States jumped 11.3 percent last month compared to its shipments in April of last year, when President Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs produced a slump in imports from China.

Advertisement

The country’s imports from the United States rose only 9 percent in April this year. As a result, its trade surplus with the United States widened by 13 percent.

China has long used state-run purchasing collectives in big categories like farm goods and commercial aircraft to manage its trade with the United States, ensuring it sells three to five times as much as it buys. Mr. Trump and his advisers have criticized that imbalance.

Semiconductor exports doubled last month compared with April of last year. Chinese manufacturers cashed in on the artificial intelligence data center boom even though they cannot yet produce some of the fastest kinds of chips.

Overall exports of electronics and machinery were up 20 percent in April from a year earlier.

China acts in many ways as a shock absorber in global oil markets. Beijing buys more oil for its vast reserves when the price is low, then cuts back purchases when prices are high, as they were last month.

Advertisement

With oil prices spiking upward this spring, the tonnage of China’s oil imports dropped last month to its lowest level since July 2022, when Shanghai’s two-month Covid lockdown reduced demand. The lockdown hurt many of China’s oil-dependent industries.

Because prices rose faster last month than the tonnage declined, China’s overall bill for crude oil imports rose 13 percent from a year earlier. Rising oil prices helped drive China’s overall imports up 25.3 percent in April from a year ago, to a record $274.6 billion. Its exports surged 14.1 percent last month from a year earlier, to a record $359.4 billion.

China has been particularly successful this year in exporting electric cars as well as renewable energy products like wind turbines and solar panels. Exports of electric vehicles were up 52.8 percent last month from a year earlier.

China has been running large, and widening, trade surpluses over the past several years with most of the rest of the world. It has trade deficits with only a handful of countries, including those like Brazil and Australia which have very large commodity exports.

The European Union and many developing countries now find themselves with rapidly growing trade deficits with China. Practically all of them have run their own trade surpluses with the United States to fund their deficits with China, sometimes repackaging goods from China and shipping them on to the United States to do so.

Advertisement

China’s huge trade surpluses are not necessarily a sign of economic strength. They partly reflect very weak spending by Chinese households on imports and domestic goods alike after five years of sliding housing prices wiped out much of the savings of the middle class. This has prompted many families to scrimp on purchases like new cars, leaving Chinese automakers with more cars to export.

“The Chinese economy still demonstrates resilience in trade and industrial supply chains,” said Zhu Tian, an economics professor at the China Europe International Business School in Shanghai, after the release of the trade data.

But weak domestic spending and a leveling off in the trade surplus, he said, “suggest that economic growth will continue to face significant challenges for the rest of the year.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending