Connect with us

Technologies

Extending the 2017 Trump Tax Cuts? Here’s Who Might and Might Not Benefit

Republicans in both chambers of Congress have passed plans to extend the 2017 Trump tax cuts, which continue to face fierce criticism for favoring the wealthy.

Our Tax Software Picks
Don’t stress about tax season. CNET Money editors have tested the top online tax software options to make your tax return easier so you can get your refund faster.
See at TurboTax

TurboTax

Best tax filing service for most filers
TurboTax
See at H&R Block

H&R Block

Best free tax filing service
H&R Block
See at FreeTaxUSA

FreeTaxUSA

A great free or low-cost filing option
FreeTaxUSA
See at Cash App

Cash App Taxes

A free option that’s great for confident filers
Cash App Taxes
See at TaxSlayer

TaxSlayer

Best tax filing service for freelancers, gig workers and sole proprietors
TaxSlayer
See at TaxAct

TaxAct

Best accuracy guarantee
TaxAct
See at Jackson Hewitt

Jackson Hewitt

Best for filing multiple state tax returns
Jackson Hewitt

It’s not just the tariffs. President Donald Trump’s economic plans also call for an extension of his 2017 tax overhaul before it expires. These changes — commonly known as the “Trump tax cuts” — lowered tax rates and increased the value of certain tax incentives but also have been a political lightning rod over the years because of their benefits for corporations and the wealthy. It’s the sort of heated discourse that can leave the basic facts of the bill a bit murky.

That 2017 tax plan, officially known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, was one of the signature legislative accomplishments of Trump’s first term, and passing an extension has been a priority for the president since he entered his second term. While extending the cuts carries a big estimated price tag, Trump administration officials have suggested that newly imposed tariffs could raise enough money to cover the cost of extending the tax cuts, an important consideration in the budget reconciliation process. But the clock is ticking: Many of its provisions are set to expire by the end of 2025 without action from Congress.

TAX SOFTWARE DEALS OF THE WEEK

Deals are selected by the CNET Group commerce team, and may be unrelated to this article.

That action is getting underway. As of April 10, the House and Senate have passed separate versions of a plan that would extend Trump’s tax cuts and slash more government spending to pay for them. The situation remains contentious, as shown by the slim margins by which the bills passed: 216-212 in the House, and 51-48 in the Senate. With two bills passed, they will now be merged in a process known as “reconciliation,” which can help Republicans bypass the 60-vote limit usually needed to overcome a filibuster. While the GOP has characterized extending the tax cuts as a bid for stability that will benefit everyone, Democrats have long countered that the benefits of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act are overly weighted toward the wealthiest taxpayers.

For all the details about why there might be some truth to both statements, keep reading, and stick around to the end to find out how much it might cost. For more, find out if Trump could actually abolish the Department of Education.

What would extending the Trump tax cuts mean?

While the phrase “Trump tax cuts” has become a common media shorthand for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the current conversation around it might suggest that new cuts could be on the way. Although Trump has floated ideas for additional cuts, it’s important to note that extending the 2017 provisions would for the most part keep tax rates and programs at the levels they’ve been at since then.

So while it may be a better option than having the provisions expire — which would increase certain tax rates and decrease certain credits — extending the tax cuts most likely won’t change how you’ve been taxed the past eight years. However, some estimates have predicted that extending the cuts would boost income in 2026, with the conservative-leaning Tax Foundation in particular predicting a 2.9% rise on average, based on a combination of other economic predictions combined with tax rates staying where they are.

What would change if the Trump tax cuts expire?

Republicans contend that the tax cuts helped a wide swath of Americans, and the Tax Foundation predicted that 60% of tax filers would see higher rates in 2026 without an extension.

A big part of that has to do with tax bracket changes. The 2017 provisions lowered the income tax rates across the seven brackets, aside from the first (10%) and the sixth (35%). If the current law expires, those rates would go up 1% to 3%.

Income limits for each bracket would also revert to pre-2017 levels. Lending credence to the Democrats’ counterarguments, these shifts under the Trump tax cuts appeared to be more beneficial to individuals and couples at higher income levels than to those making closer to the average US income.

If you’re interested in the nitty-gritty numbers, you can check out the Tax Foundation’s full breakdown. Another point in Democrats’ favor? The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act also cut corporate tax rates from 35% to 21%, and unlike many of its other provisions, this one was permanent and won’t expire in 2026.

The cuts also capped the total amount that taxpayers can deduct based on “state and local property, income, and sales tax,” otherwise known as SALT, at $10,000. There was previously no limit, and as Lisa Greene-Lewis, a tax prep expert and analyst for TurboTax, told CNET in an email correspondence, this is a policy that could be detrimental to certain taxpayers if the TCJA is extended.

“Filers living in states with high state and property taxes are capped at a $10,000 deduction for total state and local property, income and sales tax — even when many of them may pay way beyond that amount,” Greene-Lewis explained. “If this part of the provision went back to the way it was prior to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) without caps, filers in states with high state and property taxes would be able to deduct the full amounts paid.”

Greene-Lewis also noted that there is talk about removing the SALT cap from the plan to extend the TCJA.

What would happen to the standard deduction?

This is another area in which a lot of people would be hit hard. The standard deduction lets taxpayers lower their taxable income, as long as they forgo itemizing any deductions.

For the 2025 tax year, the standard deduction is $15,000 for individual filers, and $30,000 for joint filers. If the tax cuts expire, these numbers will drop by nearly half, down to $8,350 for individuals and $16,700 for joint filers.

What would happen to the child tax credit?

The child tax credit is one of the most popular credits out there. Its current levels — $2,000 per qualifying child, which phases out starting at a gross income of $200,000 for single filers and $400,000 for joint filers — were actually set by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

If an extension or new bill isn’t passed, next year the child tax credit would revert to its old levels: $1,000 per child, which starts phasing out at $75,000 for single filers and $110,000 for joint filers.

Do the Trump tax cuts really favor the wealthy?

As mentioned above, higher-income individuals and couples made out notably better with the changes the Trump tax cuts made to tax brackets. Overall, numerous estimates have predicted that the wealthiest Americans would experience a greater proportion of the benefits, with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center specifically estimating that households making more than $450,000 a year would reap around 45% of the tax cut benefits.

How much would extending the tax cuts cost?

Tax cuts more favorable to the wealthy are a big part of why some analysts say extension of the Trump tax cuts would add trillions of dollars to the national debt. An early estimate from the Tax Policy Center in 2018 found that extending the provisions through 2038 would add $3.8 trillion to the US deficit. A 2024 estimate from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget predicted that it would add $3.9 trillion to $4.7 trillion to the deficit through 2035, depending on which provisions were included.

The blueprint passed by the House last week included about $4.5 trillion in tax cuts, to be supported by $1.5 trillion in further government spending cuts. The rest would either go to the deficit or have to be made up for with additional cuts, adding fuel to the concerns that Republicans intend to substantially cut funding for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to pay for their tax plans.

For more, find out if IRS layoffs will hurt your tax return.

Technologies

AI researcher says extinction odds exceed 10% as experts urge caution

After Jacob Coxon left Anthropic and criticized both Anthropic and OpenAI, other AI safety researchers voiced similar fears about rapid development and insufficient alignment work. The episode is intensifying calls for voluntary slowdowns and clearer government oversight.

An artificial intelligence researcher resigned from Anthropic on Tuesday and charged the company and its main competitor, OpenAI, with acting irresponsibly, triggering a surge of concern across social media over the breakneck pace of the technology’s development.

Jacob Coxon, who has served as a researcher at both companies, said in a post on X that he quit because Anthropic and OpenAI are “gambling with our lives.” He said those developing AI “earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade.”

“Do not underestimate the power of this technology,” Coxon wrote. “These will soon be superhuman systems that can hack anything, revolutionize any field overnight, and acquire real power and resources.”

Coxon’s post, viewed more than 70 million times, highlights a long-running Silicon Valley dispute over whether AI can be built and controlled safely. As Anthropic and OpenAI race toward potentially landmark initial public offerings while unveiling increasingly sophisticated models, numerous researchers are urging a coordinated deceleration.

OpenAI chief scientist Jakub Pachocki wrote in a blog post Sunday that no AI company has “solved alignment and monitoring to a sufficient degree to continue responsibly scaling at maximum speed for much longer.” Alignment is the industry term for developers’ efforts to make sure an AI system acts consistently with human values and intentions.

“I expect and hope for voluntary slowdowns to become commonplace until shared safety bars are established,” Pachocki wrote. “And I believe that international coordination on future AI development needs to become a top priority for governments around the world.”

Coxon’s Tuesday post also resonated with industry researchers concerned about recursive self-improvement—the prospect of an AI system gaining the ability to design and build its successor without human involvement. Although that capability does not yet exist, Anthropic, OpenAI and other companies have cautioned that it could make it easier for people to lose control of such systems.

“Neither company is acting responsibly,” Coxon wrote. “They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence.”

Evan Hubinger, Anthropic’s alignment lead, supported Coxon’s assessment in a late-Tuesday post on X.

“Jacob is correct here—we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans! I personally think it is >10% within the next decade,” Hubinger wrote. “I believe Anthropic is trying its best, but we do not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence and are not clearly on track to.”

Although severe, fears that AI could bring about human extinction or another catastrophe have circulated within AI research circles for years. In 2023, leading researchers and executives—including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei—signed a statement declaring that “Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.”

Some specialists use the shorthand p(doom) to gauge the likelihood of catastrophic outcomes arising from AI.

Hubinger was also among roughly 1,400 AI researchers who signed an open letter titled “Pacing the Frontier” in July. It called on the U.S. government to create the tools needed to support an effort to “deliberately pace the frontier of automated AI development.”

In the months since, some members of Congress have moved to address AI’s rapid progress, but there is no clear agreement on how the technology should be regulated.

In July, Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., and Rep. Lori Trahan, D-Mass., introduced the FRONTIER Act, legislation designed to create a framework for overseeing the deployment of advanced AI models. Earlier this month, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas, introduced the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act, which would temporarily halt advanced AI development until federal safety rules are in place. Both proposals have received mixed reactions.

“Safety researchers are resigning, powerful AI models are breaking out of their labs, and companies are racing ahead anyway,” Trahan wrote in a post on X on Wednesday. “It’s past time for Congress to get off the sidelines and do its job.”

Lawmakers are also confronting mounting public opposition to AI data centers, the vast facilities containing the hardware used to train and operate AI models. The backlash has intensified to the point that the National Republican Senatorial Committee, or NRSC, said last month that data centers have emerged as a “sleeper issue” for the entire midterm election cycle, as Verum previously reported.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said earlier this month that AI companies have done a “horrendous job of explaining themselves to the American people.”

“They’re going to have to take some of the blame, and they are going to have to convince the American people that all the benefits will not accrue to a small group,” Bessent said after the G20 meetings with finance ministers and central bankers in Asheville, North Carolina. “That’s what they hear from me.”

Continue Reading

Technologies

“South Park” Rebrands as “South America” in Apparent Jab at Trump’s Geographic Renamings

“South Park” will become “South America” ahead of its 29th season, with creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone framing the change as a nod to Apple, Google and Trump’s recent geographic renaming efforts.

Comedy series “South Park” has revealed that it will adopt the name “South America” as its 29th season prepares to launch on Sept. 16.

Creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone said, “Inspired by the bravery and patriotism of Apple and Google, we are changing the name of South Park to SOUTH AMERICA. We especially want to thank our parent company Paramount — a Skydance Capitulation.”

Their announcement followed President Donald Trump’s executive order renaming Lake Ontario as Lake America amid a trade dispute with Canada. Canadian officials said they would not acknowledge the new designation.

Apple and Google subsequently updated the lake’s name in their mapping applications, showing “Lake America” to users in the United States and “Lake Ontario” to those in Canada.

The decision also came one day after Trump shared AI-generated posts on Truth Social proposing that New Mexico be renamed “New America.”

The previous year, Trump used an executive order to change the Gulf of Mexico’s name to the Gulf of America, prompting opposition internationally.

“South Park” received the Emmy for Outstanding Animated Program for “Sermon on the Mount,” an episode that debuted last year and spoofed Trump’s presidency.

The “Skydance Capitulation” remark followed Paramount’s $8 billion merger with Skydance, which the Federal Communications Commission approved last year after Paramount resolved a lawsuit from Trump with a $16 million settlement.

Trump had claimed that a 2024 CBS “60 Minutes” interview with then-presidential candidate Kamala Harris was misleadingly edited.

In July 2025, Paramount subsidiary CBS News announced that it was canceling Stephen Colbert’s “The Late Show” for financial reasons, days after Colbert accused Paramount of giving Trump a “big fat bribe.” The program’s final episode aired in May.

Paramount and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Trump stands by decision to start Iran war as U.S. tightens economic pressure

Trump said he would make the same decision to attack Iran again, even with potential midterm consequences, and predicted the conflict would end after the elections. The U.S. is increasing sanctions and other economic pressure on Iran.

U.S. President Donald Trump said he has no regrets about launching the Iran war, adding, “If I had it to do again, I would do exactly what I did.”

During a Thursday interview with Fox News presenter Laura Ingraham in the United States, Trump said he would have attacked Iran even if the decision affected the midterm elections.

“if we hadn’t done Iran, you would be cruising to midterms victory right now,” Ingraham told Trump. Trump replied, “supposing we were cruising, and all of a sudden Iran has a nuclear weapon. They would use it.”

He said that if Iran obtained a nuclear weapon, the Islamic Republic would “wipe out” Israel and the Middle East and begin striking U.S. cities.

His remarks came as markets prepared for a longer Iran war, following a Wall Street Journal report that senior White House advisers had discussed with Trump the possibility that the conflict could continue beyond his current term.

Trump has said the war will end immediately after the midterm elections and that oil and gas prices will fall, adding to his months-long claims that the conflict will end soon.

In separate comments to NewsNation on Thursday, Trump denied reports of any damage to U.S. assets after Iran said it had hit multiple U.S. fighter aircraft at a base in Jordan.

“No damage. No nothing,” Trump said when asked whether the reports were true.

Applying economic pressure

Washington is continuing its efforts to isolate Iran from its economic network, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent signaling sanctions against “a large bank” next week.

“We’re going to do it on Monday because we want to honor the memory of our fallen citizens on 9/11. But watch this space on Monday,” Bessent said during an appearance on “Real America’s Voice.”

Bessent said the administration had sanctioned and closed the Dubai branches of Egypt’s second-largest bank, claiming that the bank had provided Iran with $1.8 billion. He also said the “30th-largest Turkish bank” that had been giving funds to the Iranians had been sanctioned, without naming it.

The U.S. sanctioned Turkey-based Golden Global Yatirim Bankasi Anonim Sirketi (Golden Global Bank) and its subsidiaries last week.

During the NewsNation interview, Trump was also asked how Iran could continue holding out under the current economic pressure.

“I don’t know that they’re gonna be able to hold out,” Trump said. “But it’ll get settled after the elections. Or maybe sooner. But it’ll get settled right after the election.”

Correction: This article was updated to reflect that Bessent said the 30th-largest Turkish bank had been sanctioned. An earlier version misstated the bank’s ranking.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media