[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 161 (Friday, September 28, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H9158-H9174]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  0915
       PROTECTING FAMILY AND SMALL BUSINESS TAX CUTS ACT OF 2018

  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1084, I 
call up the bill (H.R. 6760) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
to make permanent certain provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act 
affecting individuals, families, and small businesses, and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1084, the 
amendment in the nature of a substitute, recommended by the Committee 
on Ways and Means, printed in the bill, modified by the amendment 
printed in part C of House Report 115-985, is adopted, and the bill, as 
amended, is considered read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H.R. 6760

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE, ETC.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting 
     Family and Small Business Tax Cuts Act of 2018''.

[[Page H9159]]

       (b) Amendment of 1986 Code.--Except as otherwise expressly 
     provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is 
     expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a 
     section or other provision, the reference shall be considered 
     to be made to a section or other provision of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986.
       (c) References to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.--Title I of 
     Public Law 115-97 may be cited as the ``Tax Cuts and Jobs 
     Act''.
       (d) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title, etc.

               TITLE I--INDIVIDUAL REFORM MADE PERMANENT

                        Subtitle A--Rate Reform

Sec. 101. Modification of rates.

   Subtitle B--Deduction for Qualified Business Income of Pass-thru 
                                Entities

Sec. 111. Deduction for qualified business income.
Sec. 112. Limitation on losses for taxpayers other than corporations.

         Subtitle C--Tax Benefits for Families and Individuals

Sec. 121. Increase in standard deduction.
Sec. 122. Increase in and modification of child tax credit.
Sec. 123. Increased limitation for certain charitable contributions.
Sec. 124. Increased contributions to ABLE accounts.
Sec. 125. Rollovers to ABLE programs from 529 programs.
Sec. 126. Treatment of certain individuals performing services in the 
              Sinai Peninsula of Egypt.
Sec. 127. Extension of reduction in threshold for medical expense 
              deduction.

                         Subtitle D--Education

Sec. 131. Treatment of student loans discharged on account of death or 
              disability.

                 Subtitle E--Deductions and Exclusions

Sec. 141. Repeal of deduction for personal exemptions.
Sec. 142. Limitation on deduction for State and local, etc. taxes.
Sec. 143. Limitation on deduction for qualified residence interest.
Sec. 144. Modification of deduction for personal casualty losses.
Sec. 145. Termination of miscellaneous itemized deductions.
Sec. 146. Repeal of overall limitation on itemized deductions.
Sec. 147. Termination of exclusion for qualified bicycle commuting 
              reimbursement.
Sec. 148. Qualified moving expense reimbursement exclusion limited to 
              members of Armed Forces.
Sec. 149. Deduction for moving expenses limited to members of Armed 
              Forces.
Sec. 150. Limitation on wagering losses.

         Subtitle F--Increase in Estate and Gift Tax Exemption

Sec. 151. Increase in estate and gift tax exemption.

    TITLE II--INCREASED EXEMPTION FOR ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX MADE 
                               PERMANENT

Sec. 201. Increased exemption for individuals.

               TITLE I--INDIVIDUAL REFORM MADE PERMANENT

                        Subtitle A--Rate Reform

     SEC. 101. MODIFICATION OF RATES.

       (a) Married Individuals Filing Joint Returns and Surviving 
     Spouses.--Section 1(a) is amended by striking the table 
     contained therein and inserting the following:


 
          ``If taxable income is:                    The tax is:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not over $19,050..........................  10% of taxable income.
Over $19,050 but not over $77,400.........  $1,905, plus 12% of the
                                             excess over $19,050.
Over $77,400 but not over $165,000........  $8,907, plus 22% of the
                                             excess over $77,400.
Over $165,000 but not over $315,000.......  $28,179, plus 24% of the
                                             excess over $165,000.
Over $315,000 but not over $400,000.......  $64,179, plus 32% of the
                                             excess over $315,000.
Over $400,000 but not over $600,000.......  $91,379, plus 35% of the
                                             excess over $400,000.
Over $600,000.............................  $161,379, plus 37% of the
                                             excess over $600,000.''.

       (b) Head of Households.--Section 1(b) is amended by 
     striking the table contained therein and inserting the 
     following:


 
          ``If taxable income is:                    The tax is:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not over $13,600..........................  10% of taxable income.
Over $13,600 but not over $51,800.........  $1,360, plus 12% of the
                                             excess over $13,600.
Over $51,800 but not over $82,500.........  $5,944, plus 22% of the
                                             excess over $51,800.
Over $82,500 but not over $157,500........  $12,698, plus 24% of the
                                             excess over $82,500.
Over $157,500 but not over $200,000.......  $30,698, plus 32% of the
                                             excess over $157,500.
Over $200,000 but not over $500,000.......  $44,298, plus 35% of the
                                             excess over $200,000.
Over $500,000.............................  $149,298, plus 37% of the
                                             excess over $500,000.''.

       (c) Unmarried Individuals Other Than Surviving Spouses and 
     Heads of Household.--Section 1(c) is amended by striking the 
     table contained therein and inserting the following:


 
          ``If taxable income is:                    The tax is:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not over $9,525...........................  10% of taxable income.
Over $9,525 but not over $38,700..........  $952.50, plus 12% of the
                                             excess over $9,525.
Over $38,700 but not over $82,500.........  $4,453.50, plus 22% of the
                                             excess over $38,700.
Over $82,500 but not over $157,500........  $14,089.50, plus 24% of the
                                             excess over $82,500.
Over $157,500 but not over $200,000.......  $32,089.50, plus 32% of the
                                             excess over $157,500.
Over $200,000 but not over $500,000.......  $45,689.50, plus 35% of the
                                             excess over $200,000.
Over $500,000.............................  $150,689.50, plus 37% of the
                                             excess over $500,000.''.

       (d) Married Individuals Filing Separate Returns.--Section 
     1(d) is amended by striking the table contained therein and 
     inserting the following:


 
          ``If taxable income is:                    The tax is:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not over $9,525...........................  10% of taxable income.
Over $9,525 but not over $38,700..........  $952.50, plus 12% of the
                                             excess over $9,525.
Over $38,700 but not over $82,500.........  $4,453.50, plus 22% of the
                                             excess over $38,700.
Over $82,500 but not over $157,500........  $14,089.50, plus 24% of the
                                             excess over $82,500.
Over $157,500 but not over $200,000.......  $32,089.50, plus 32% of the
                                             excess over $157,500.
Over $200,000 but not over $300,000.......  $45,689.50, plus 35% of the
                                             excess over $200,000.
Over $300,000.............................  $80,689.50, plus 37% of the
                                             excess over $300,000.''.

       (e) Estates and Trusts.--Section 1(e) is amended by 
     striking the table contained therein and inserting the 
     following:


 
          ``If taxable income is:                    The tax is:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not over $2,550...........................  10% of taxable income.
Over $2,550 but not over $9,150...........  $255, plus 24% of the excess
                                             over $2,550.
Over $9,150 but not over $12,500..........  $1,839, plus 35% of the
                                             excess over $9,150.
Over $12,500..............................  $3,011.50, plus 37% of the
                                             excess over $12,500.''.

       (f) Inflation Adjustments.--Section 1(f) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``1993'' in paragraph (1) and inserting 
     ``2018'',
       (2) by amending paragraph (2)(A) to read as follows:
       ``(A) by increasing the minimum and maximum dollar amounts 
     for each bracket for which a tax is imposed under such table 
     by the cost-of-living adjustment for such calendar year, 
     determined under this subsection for such calendar year by 
     substituting `2017' for `2016' in paragraph (3)(A)(ii),'',
       (3) in paragraph (7)(B), by striking all that precedes 
     ``(other than with respect to'' and inserting the following:

[[Page H9160]]

       ``(B) Special rule.--In the case of a table prescribed in 
     lieu of the table contained in subsection (b), (c), or (d), 
     subparagraph (A)'',
       (4) by striking paragraph (8), and
       (5) in the heading, by striking ``Phaseout of Marriage 
     Penalty in 15-percent Bracket; Adjustments'' and inserting 
     ``Adjustments''.
       (g) Special Rules for Certain Children With Unearned 
     Income.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1(g) is amended by striking all 
     that precedes paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
       ``(g) Special Rules for Certain Children With Unearned 
     Income.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of any child to whom this 
     subsection applies--
       ``(A) Modifications to applicable rate brackets.--In 
     determining the amount of tax imposed by this section for the 
     taxable year on such child, the income tax table otherwise 
     applicable under this section to such child shall be applied 
     with the following modifications:
       ``(i) 24-percent bracket.--The maximum taxable income which 
     is taxed at a rate below 24 percent shall not be more than 
     the sum of--

       ``(I) the earned taxable income of such child, plus
       ``(II) the minimum taxable income for the 24-percent 
     bracket in the table under subsection (e) (as adjusted under 
     subsection (f)) for the taxable year.

       ``(ii) 35-percent bracket.--The maximum taxable income 
     which is taxed at a rate below 35 percent shall not be more 
     than the sum of--

       ``(I) the earned taxable income of such child, plus
       ``(II) the minimum taxable income for the 35-percent 
     bracket in the table under subsection (e) (as adjusted under 
     subsection (f)) for the taxable year.

       ``(iii) 37-percent bracket.--The maximum taxable income 
     which is taxed at a rate below 37 percent shall not be more 
     than the sum of--

       ``(I) the earned taxable income of such child, plus
       ``(II) the minimum taxable income for the 37-percent 
     bracket in the table under subsection (e) (as adjusted under 
     subsection (f)) for the taxable year.

       ``(B) Coordination with capital gains rates.--For purposes 
     of applying section 1(h)--
       ``(i) the maximum zero rate amount shall not be more than 
     the sum of--

       ``(I) the earned taxable income of such child, plus
       ``(II) the amount in effect under subsection (h)(13) for 
     the taxable year, and

       ``(ii) the maximum 15-percent rate amount shall not be more 
     than the sum of--

       ``(I) the earned taxable income of such child, plus
       ``(II) the amount in effect under subsection (h)(12)(D) for 
     the taxable year.''.

       (2) Earned taxable income.--Section 1(g)(3) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(3) Earned taxable income.--For purposes of this 
     subsection, the term `earned taxable income' means, with 
     respect to any child for any taxable year, the taxable income 
     of such child reduced (but not below zero) by the net 
     unearned income of such child.''.
       (3) Conforming amendment.--So much of paragraph (5) of 
     section 1(g) as precedes subparagraph (A) thereof is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(5) Special rules for determining parent eligible to make 
     election.--For purposes of paragraph (7), the parent referred 
     to in subparagraph (A)(iv) thereof is--''.
       (h) Application of Income Tax Brackets to Capital Gains 
     Brackets.--Section 1(h) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(B)(i), by striking ``25 percent'' and 
     inserting ``22 percent'',
       (2) in paragraph (1)(C)(ii)(I), by striking ``which would 
     (without regard to this paragraph) be taxed at a rate below 
     39.6 percent'' and inserting ``below the maximum 15-percent 
     rate amount'', and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(12) Maximum 15-percent rate amount defined.--For 
     purposes of this subsection, the maximum 15-percent rate 
     amount shall be--
       ``(A) in the case of a joint return or surviving spouse (as 
     defined in section 2(a)), $479,000 (\1/2\ such amount in the 
     case of a married individual filing a separate return),
       ``(B) in the case of an individual who is the head of a 
     household (as defined in section 2(b)), $452,400,
       ``(C) in the case of any other individual (other than an 
     estate or trust), $425,800, and
       ``(D) in the case of an estate or trust, $12,700.
       ``(13) Determination of 0 percent rate bracket for estates 
     and trusts.--In the case of any estate or trust, paragraph 
     (1)(B) shall be applied by treating the amount determined in 
     clause (i) thereof as being equal to $2,600.
       ``(14) Inflation adjustment.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of any taxable year 
     beginning after 2018, each of the dollar amounts in 
     paragraphs (12) and (13) shall be increased by an amount 
     equal to--
       ``(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by
       ``(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under 
     subsection (f)(3) for the calendar year in which the taxable 
     year begins, determined by substituting `calendar year 2017' 
     for `calendar year 2016' in subparagraph (A)(ii) thereof.
       ``(B) Rounding.--If any increase under subparagraph (A) is 
     not a multiple of $50, such increase shall be rounded to the 
     next lowest multiple of $50.''.
       (i) Application of Section 15.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (a) of section 15 is amended by 
     striking ``If any rate of tax'' and inserting ``In the case 
     of a corporation, if any rate of tax''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) Section 15 is amended by striking subsections (d), (e), 
     and (f).
       (B) Section 6013(c) is amended by striking ``sections 15, 
     443, and 7851(a)(1)(A)'' and inserting ``section 443''.
       (C) The heading of section 15 is amended by inserting ``on 
     corporations'' after ``effect of changes''.
       (D) The table of sections for part III of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 is amended by striking the item relating to section 
     15 and inserting the following new item:

``Sec. 15. Effect of changes on corporations.''.

       (j) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 1 is amended by striking subsections (i) and 
     (j).
       (2) Section 3402(q)(1) is amended by striking ``third 
     lowest'' and inserting ``fourth lowest''.
       (k) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall 
     apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017.
       (2) Application of section 15.--Section 15 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 shall not apply to any change in a rate 
     of tax by reason of--
       (A) section 1(j) of such Code (as in effect before its 
     repeal by this section), or
       (B) any amendment made by this Act.

   Subtitle B--Deduction for Qualified Business Income of Pass-thru 
                                Entities

     SEC. 111. DEDUCTION FOR QUALIFIED BUSINESS INCOME.

       (a) In General.--Section 199A is amended by striking 
     subsection (i).
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

     SEC. 112. LIMITATION ON LOSSES FOR TAXPAYERS OTHER THAN 
                   CORPORATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 461 is amended--
       (1) by amending subsection (l)(1) to read as follows:
       ``(1) Limitation.--In the case of a taxpayer other than a 
     corporation, any excess business loss of the taxpayer for the 
     taxable year shall not be allowed.'', and
       (2) by striking subsection (j) and redesignating 
     subsections (k) and (l) (as amended) as subsections (j) and 
     (k), respectively.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 58(a)(2)(A) is amended by striking ``461(k)'' 
     and inserting ``461(j)''.
       (2) Section 461(i)(4) is amended by striking ``subsection 
     (k)'' and inserting ``subsection (j)''.
       (3) Section 464(d)(2)(B)(iii) is amended by striking 
     ``section 461(k)(2)(E)'' and inserting ``section 
     461(j)(2)(E)''.
       (4) Subparagraphs (B) and (C) of section 1256(e)(3) are 
     each amended by striking ``section 461(k)(4)'' and inserting 
     ``section 461(j)(4)''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

         Subtitle C--Tax Benefits for Families and Individuals

     SEC. 121. INCREASE IN STANDARD DEDUCTION.

       (a) In General.--Section 63(c)(2) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``$4,400'' in subparagraph (B) and 
     inserting ``$18,000'', and
       (2) by striking ``$3,000'' in subparagraph (C) and 
     inserting ``$12,000''.
       (b) Inflation Adjustment.--Section 63(c)(4) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(4) Adjustments for inflation.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of a taxable year beginning 
     after 2018, each dollar amount in paragraph (2)(B), (2)(C), 
     or (5) or subsection (f) shall be increased by an amount 
     equal to--
       ``(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by
       ``(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under 
     section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which the taxable 
     year begins, determined by substituting for `2016' in 
     subparagraph (A)(ii) thereof--

       ``(I) in the case of the dollar amounts contained in 
     paragraph (2)(B) or (2)(C), `2017',
       ``(II) in the case of the dollar amounts contained in 
     paragraph (5)(A) or subsection (f), `1987', and
       ``(III) in the case of the dollar amount contained in 
     paragraph (5)(B), `1997'.

       ``(B) Rounding.--If any increase under subparagraph (A) is 
     not a multiple of $50, such increase shall be rounded to the 
     next lowest multiple of $50.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 1(f)(7)(A) is amended by striking ``section 
     63(c)(4),''.
       (2) Section 1(f)(7)(B) is amended by striking ``sections 
     63(c)(4) and'' and inserting ``section''.
       (3) Section 63(c) is amended by striking paragraph (7).
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

     SEC. 122. INCREASE IN AND MODIFICATION OF CHILD TAX CREDIT.

       (a) In General.--Section 24 is amended by striking 
     subsections (a), (b), and (c) and inserting the following new 
     subsections:
       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--There shall be allowed as a 
     credit against the tax imposed by this chapter for the 
     taxable year an amount equal to the sum of--
       ``(1) $2,000 for each qualifying child of the taxpayer, and
       ``(2) $500 for each qualifying dependent (other than a 
     qualifying child) of the taxpayer.
       ``(b) Limitation Based on Adjusted Gross Income.--The 
     amount of the credit allowable under subsection (a) shall be 
     reduced (but not below zero) by $50 for each $1,000 (or 
     fraction thereof) by which the taxpayer's modified adjusted 
     gross income exceeds $400,000 in the case of a joint return 
     ($200,000 in any other case). For purposes of the preceding 
     sentence, the term ``modified adjusted gross income'' means 
     adjusted gross income increased by any amount excluded from 
     gross income under section 911, 931, or 933.

[[Page H9161]]

       ``(c) Qualifying Child; Qualifying Dependent.--For purposes 
     of this section--
       ``(1) Qualifying child.--The term `qualifying child' means 
     any qualifying dependent of the taxpayer--
       ``(A) who is a qualifying child (as defined in section 
     7706(c)) of the taxpayer,
       ``(B) who has not attained age 17 at the close of the 
     calendar year in which the taxable year of the taxpayer 
     begins, and
       ``(C) whose name and social security number are included on 
     the taxpayer's return of tax for the taxable year.
       ``(2) Qualifying dependent.--The term `qualifying 
     dependent' means any dependent of the taxpayer (as defined in 
     section 7706 without regard to all that follows `resident of 
     the United States' in section 7706(b)(3)(A)) whose name and 
     TIN are included on the taxpayer's return of tax for the 
     taxable year.
       ``(3) Social security number defined.--For purposes of this 
     subsection, the term `social security number' means, with 
     respect to a return of tax, a social security number issued 
     to an individual by the Social Security Administration, but 
     only if the social security number is issued--
       ``(A) to a citizen of the United States or pursuant to 
     subclause (I) (or that portion of subclause (III) that 
     relates to subclause (I)) of section 205(c)(2)(B)(i) of the 
     Social Security Act, and
       ``(B) on or before the due date of filing such return.''.
       (b) Portion of Credit Refundable.--
       (1) In general.--Section 24(d)(1)(A) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(A) the credit which would be allowed under this section 
     determined--
       ``(i) by substituting `$1,400' for `$2,000' in subsection 
     (a)(1),
       ``(ii) without regard to subsection (a)(2), and
       ``(iii) without regard to this subsection and the 
     limitation under section 26(a), or''.
       (2) Modification of limitation based on earned income.--
     Section 24(d)(1)(B)(i) is amended by striking ``$3,000'' and 
     inserting ``$2,500''.
       (3) Inflation adjustment.--Section 24(d) is amended by 
     inserting after paragraph (3) the following new paragraph:
       ``(4) Adjustment for inflation.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of a taxable year beginning 
     after 2018, the $1,400 amount in paragraph (1)(A)(i) shall be 
     increased by an amount equal to--
       ``(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by
       ``(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under 
     section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which the taxable 
     year begins, determined by substituting `2017' for `2016' in 
     subparagraph (A)(ii) thereof.
       ``(B) Rounding.--If any increase under subparagraph (A) is 
     not a multiple of $100, such increase shall be rounded to the 
     next lowest multiple of $100.
       ``(C) Limitation.--The amount of any increase under 
     subparagraph (A) (after the application of subparagraph (B)) 
     shall not exceed $600.''.
       (4) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) Section 24(e) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(e) Taxpayer Identification Requirement.--No credit shall 
     be allowed under this section if the identifying number of 
     the taxpayer was issued after the due date for filing the 
     return of tax for the taxable year.''.
       (B) Section 24 is amended by striking subsection (h).
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

     SEC. 123. INCREASED LIMITATION FOR CERTAIN CHARITABLE 
                   CONTRIBUTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 170(b)(1)(G) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(G) Cash contributions.--
       ``(i) In general.--Any contribution of cash to an 
     organization described in subparagraph (A) shall be allowed 
     to the extent that the aggregate of such contributions does 
     not exceed 60 percent of the taxpayer's contribution base for 
     the taxable year, reduced by the aggregate amount of 
     contributions allowable under subparagraph (A) for such 
     taxpayer for such year.
       ``(ii) Carryover.--If the aggregate amount of contributions 
     described in clause (i) exceeds the limitation of clause (i), 
     such excess shall be treated (in a manner consistent with the 
     rules of subsection (d)(1)) as a charitable contribution to 
     which clause (i) applies in each of the 5 succeeding years in 
     order of time.''.
       (b) Coordination With Limitations on Other Contributions.--
       (1) Coordination with 50 percent limitation.--Section 
     170(b)(1)(A) is amended by striking ``Any charitable 
     contribution'' and inserting ``Any charitable contribution 
     other than a contribution described in subparagraph (G)''.
       (2) Coordination with 30 percent limitation.--Section 
     170(b)(1)(B) is amended--
       (A) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking ``to 
     which subparagraph (A) applies'' and inserting ``to which 
     subparagraph (A) or (G) applies'',
       (B) by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
       ``(ii) the excess of--

       ``(I) the sum of 50 percent of the taxpayer's contribution 
     base for the taxable year, plus so much of the amount of 
     charitable contributions allowable under subparagraph (G) as 
     does not exceed 10 percent of such contribution base, over
       ``(II) the amount of charitable contributions allowable 
     under subparagraphs (A) and (G) (determined without regard to 
     subparagraph (C)).'', and

       (C) in the matter following clause (ii), by striking ``(to 
     which subparagraph (A) does not apply)'' and inserting ``(to 
     which neither subparagraph (A) nor (G) applies)''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to contributions made in taxable years beginning 
     after December 31, 2017.

     SEC. 124. INCREASED CONTRIBUTIONS TO ABLE ACCOUNTS.

       (a) Increase in Limitation for Contributions From 
     Compensation of Individuals With Disabilities.--Section 
     529A(b)(2)(B)(ii) is amended by striking ``before January 1, 
     2026''.
       (b) Allowance of Saver's Credit for ABLE Contributions by 
     Account Holder.--Section 25B(d)(1)(D) is amended by striking 
     ``made before January 1, 2026,''.
       (c)  Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

     SEC. 125. ROLLOVERS TO ABLE PROGRAMS FROM 529 PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--Section 529(c)(3)(C)(i)(III) is amended by 
     striking ``before January 1, 2026,''.
       (b)  Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to distributions after December 31, 2017.

     SEC. 126. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS PERFORMING 
                   SERVICES IN THE SINAI PENINSULA OF EGYPT.

       (a) In General.--Section 112(c)(2) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``means any area'' and inserting ``means--
       ``(A) any area'', and
       (2) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``, and
       ``(B) the Sinai Peninsula of Egypt.''.
       (b) Period of Treatment.--Section 112(c)(3) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``only if performed'' and inserting ``only 
     if--
       ``(A) in the case of an area described in paragraph (2)(A), 
     such service is performed'', and
       (2) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``, and
       ``(B) in the case of the area described in paragraph 
     (2)(B), such service is performed during any period with 
     respect to which one or more members of the Armed Forces of 
     the United States are entitled to special pay under section 
     310 of title 37, United States Code (relating to special pay; 
     duty subject to hostile fire or imminent danger), for service 
     performed in such area.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendment.--The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is 
     amended by striking section 11026.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to services performed on or after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 127. EXTENSION OF REDUCTION IN THRESHOLD FOR MEDICAL 
                   EXPENSE DEDUCTION.

       (a) In General.--Section 213(a) is amended by inserting 
     ``(7.5 percent in the case of any taxable year beginning 
     after December 31, 2018, and ending before January 1, 2021)'' 
     after ``10 percent''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 56(b)(1) is amended by striking subparagraph 
     (B) and by redesignating subparagraphs (C) through (F) as 
     subparagraphs (B) through (E), respectively.
       (2) Section 213 is amended by striking subsection (f).
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2018.

                         Subtitle D--Education

     SEC. 131. TREATMENT OF STUDENT LOANS DISCHARGED ON ACCOUNT OF 
                   DEATH OR DISABILITY.

       (a) In General.--Section 108(f)(5) is amended by striking 
     ``after December 31, 2017, and before January 1, 2026''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to discharges of indebtedness after December 31, 
     2017.

                 Subtitle E--Deductions and Exclusions

     SEC. 141. REPEAL OF DEDUCTION FOR PERSONAL EXEMPTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Part V of subchapter B of chapter 1 is 
     hereby repealed.
       (b) Definition of Dependent Retained.--Section 152, prior 
     to the repeal made by subsection (a), is hereby redesignated 
     as section 7706 and moved to the end of chapter 79.
       (c) Application to Trusts and Estates.--Section 642(b) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2)(C)--
       (A) in clause (i), by striking ``the exemption amount under 
     section 151(d)'' and all that follows through the period at 
     the end and inserting ``the dollar amount in effect under 
     section 7706(d)(1)(B).'', and
       (B) by striking clause (iii),
       (2) by striking paragraph (3), and
       (3) by striking ``Deduction For Personal Exemption'' in the 
     heading thereof and inserting ``Basic Deduction''.
       (d) Application to Nonresident Aliens.--Section 873(b) is 
     amended by striking paragraph (3).
       (e) Modification of Return Requirement.--
       (1) In general.--Section 6012(a)(1) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(1) Every individual who has gross income for the taxable 
     year, except that a return shall not be required of--
       ``(A) an individual who is not married (determined by 
     applying section 7703) and who has gross income for the 
     taxable year which does not exceed the standard deduction 
     applicable to such individual for such taxable year under 
     section 63, or
       ``(B) an individual entitled to make a joint return if--
       ``(i) the gross income of such individual, when combined 
     with the gross income of such individual's spouse, for the 
     taxable year does not exceed the standard deduction which 
     would be applicable for such taxable year under section 63 if 
     such individual and such individual's spouse made a joint 
     return,

[[Page H9162]]

       ``(ii) such individual's spouse does not make a separate 
     return, and
       ``(iii) neither such individual nor such individual's 
     spouse is an individual described in section 63(c)(4) who has 
     income (other than earned income) in excess of the amount in 
     effect under section 63(c)(4)(A).''.
       (2) Bankruptcy estates.--Section 6012(a)(8) is amended by 
     striking ``the sum of the exemption amount plus the basic 
     standard deduction under section 63(c)(2)(C)'' and inserting 
     ``the standard deduction in effect under section 
     63(c)(1)(B)''.
       (3) Conforming amendment.--Section 6012 is amended by 
     striking subsection (f).
       (f) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 1(f)(7), as amended by section 121, is 
     amended--
       (A) by striking ``, section 68(b)(2) or section 151(d)(4)'' 
     in subparagraph (A) and inserting ``or section 68(b)(2)'', 
     and
       (B) by striking ``(other than with respect to section 
     151(d)(4)(A))'' in subparagraph (B).
       (2) Section 1(g)(5)(A) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(e)'' and inserting ``section 7706(e)''.
       (3) Section 2(a)(1)(B) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``section 152'' and inserting ``section 
     7706'', and
       (B) by striking ``with respect to whom the taxpayer is 
     entitled to a deduction for the taxable year under section 
     151'' and inserting ``whose TIN is included on the taxpayer's 
     return of tax for the taxable year''.
       (4) Section 2(b)(1)(A)(i) is amended--
       (A) in the matter preceding subclause (I)--
       (i) by striking ``section 152(c)'' and inserting ``section 
     7706(c)'', and
       (ii) by striking ``section 152(e)'' and inserting ``section 
     7706(e)'', and
       (B) in subclause (II), by striking ``section 152(b)(2) or 
     152(b)(3)'' and inserting ``section 7706(b)(2) or 
     7706(b)(3)''.
       (5) Section 2(b)(1)(A)(ii) is amended by striking ``if the 
     taxpayer is entitled to a deduction for the taxable year for 
     such person under section 151'' and inserting ``if the 
     taxpayer included such person's TIN on the return of tax for 
     the taxable year''.
       (6) Section 2(b)(1)(B) is amended by striking ``if the 
     taxpayer is entitled to a deduction for the taxable year for 
     such father or mother under section 151'' and inserting ``if 
     such father or mother is a dependent of the taxpayer and the 
     taxpayer included such father or mother's TIN on the return 
     of tax for the taxable year''.
       (7) Section 2(b)(3)(B) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``section 152(d)(2)'' in clause (i) and 
     inserting ``section 7706(d)(2)'', and
       (B) by striking ``section 152(d)'' in clause (ii) and 
     inserting ``section 7706(d)''.
       (8) Section 21(b)(1)(A) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(a)(1)'' and inserting ``section 7706(a)(1)''.
       (9) Section 21(b)(1)(B) is amended by striking ``section 
     152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (10) Section 21(e)(5)(A) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(e)'' and inserting ``section 7706(e)''.
       (11) Section 21(e)(5) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(e)(4)(A)'' in the matter following subparagraph (B) and 
     inserting ``section 7706(e)(4)(A)''.
       (12) Section 21(e)(6)(A) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(A) who is a dependent of either the taxpayer or the 
     taxpayer's spouse for the taxable year, or''.
       (13) Section 21(e)(6)(B) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(f)(1)'' and inserting ``section 7706(f)(1)''.
       (14) Section 25A(f)(1)(A)(iii) is amended by striking 
     ``with respect to whom the taxpayer is allowed a deduction 
     under section 151''.
       (15) Section 25A(g)(3) is amended by striking ``If a 
     deduction under section 151 with respect to an individual is 
     allowed to another taxpayer'' and inserting ``If an 
     individual is a dependent of another taxpayer''.
       (16) Section 25B(c)(2)(A) is amended by striking ``any 
     individual with respect to whom a deduction under section 151 
     is allowed to another taxpayer'' and inserting ``any 
     individual who is a dependent of another taxpayer''.
       (17) Section 25B(c)(2)(B) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(f)(2)'' and inserting ``section 7706(f)(2)''.
       (18) Section 32(c)(1)(A)(ii)(III) is amended by striking 
     ``a dependent for whom a deduction is allowable under section 
     151 to another taxpayer'' and inserting ``a dependent of 
     another taxpayer''.
       (19) Section 32(c)(3) is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) by striking ``section 152(c)'' and inserting ``section 
     7706(c)'', and
       (ii) by striking ``section 152(e)'' and inserting ``section 
     7706(e)'',
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``unless the taxpayer 
     is entitled to a deduction under section 151 for such taxable 
     year with respect to such individual (or would be so entitled 
     but for section 152(e)'' and inserting ``if such individual 
     is not treated as a dependent of such taxpayer for such 
     taxable year by reason of section 7706(b)(2) (determined 
     without regard to section 7706(e))'', and
       (C) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``section 
     152(c)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``section 7706(c)(1)(B)''.
       (20) Section 35(d)(1)(B) is amended by striking ``with 
     respect to whom the taxpayer is entitled to a deduction under 
     section 151(c)'' and inserting ``if the taxpayer included 
     such person's TIN on the return of tax for the taxable 
     year''.
       (21) Section 35(d)(2) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``section 152(e)'' and inserting ``section 
     7706(e)'', and
       (B) by striking ``section 152(e)(4)(A)'' and inserting 
     ``section 7706(e)(4)(A)''.
       (22) Section 36B(b)(2)(A) is amended by striking ``section 
     152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (23) Section 36B(b)(3)(B) is amended by striking ``unless a 
     deduction is allowed under section 151 for the taxable year 
     with respect to a dependent'' in the flush matter at the end 
     and inserting ``unless the taxpayer has a dependent for the 
     taxable year (and the taxpayer included such dependent's TIN 
     on the return of tax for the taxable year)''.
       (24) Section 36B(c)(1)(D) is amended by striking ``with 
     respect to whom a deduction under section 151 is allowable to 
     another taxpayer'' and inserting ``who is a dependent of 
     another taxpayer''.
       (25) Section 36B(d)(1) is amended by striking ``equal to 
     the number of individuals for whom the taxpayer is allowed a 
     deduction under section 151 (relating to allowance of 
     deduction for personal exemptions) for the taxable year'' and 
     inserting ``the sum of 1 (2 in the case of a joint return) 
     plus the number of individuals who are dependents of the 
     taxpayer for the taxable year''.
       (26) Section 36B(e)(1) is amended by striking ``1 or more 
     individuals for whom a taxpayer is allowed a deduction under 
     section 151 (relating to allowance of deduction for personal 
     exemptions) for the taxable year (including the taxpayer or 
     his spouse)'' and inserting ``1 or more of the taxpayer, the 
     taxpayer's spouse, or any dependent of the taxpayer''.
       (27) Section 42(i)(3)(D)(ii)(I) is amended by striking 
     ``section 152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (28) Section 45R(e)(1)(A)(iv) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``section 152(d)(2)'' and inserting 
     ``section 7706(d)(2)'', and
       (B) by striking ``section 152(d)(2)(H)'' and inserting 
     ``section 7706(d)(2)(H)''.
       (29) Section 51(i)(1) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``section 152(d)(2)'' in subparagraphs (A) 
     and (B) and inserting ``section 7706(d)(2)'', and
       (B) by striking ``section 152(d)(2)(H)'' in subparagraph 
     (C) and inserting ``section 7706(d)(2)(H)''.
       (30) Section 56(b)(1)(D), as amended by the preceding 
     provisions of this Act, is amended--
       (A) by striking ``, the deduction for personal exemptions 
     under section 151,'', and
       (B) by striking ``and deduction for personal exemptions'' 
     in the heading thereof.
       (31) Section 63(b) is amended by adding ``and'' at the end 
     of paragraph (1), by striking paragraph (2), and by 
     redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2).
       (32) Section 63(c), as amended by section 121, is amended 
     by striking paragraph (3) and redesignating paragraphs (4), 
     (5), and (6) as paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), respectively.
       (33) Section 63(c)(4), as redesignated, is amended--
       (A) by striking ``with respect to whom a deduction under 
     section 151 is allowable to'' and inserting ``who is a 
     dependent of'', and
       (B) by striking ``certain'' in the heading thereof.
       (34) Section 63(d) is amended by adding ``and'' at the end 
     of paragraph (1), by striking paragraph (2), and by 
     redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2).
       (35) Section 63(f) is amended by striking all that precedes 
     paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(f) Additional Standard Deduction for the Aged and 
     Blind.--
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (c)(1), the 
     additional standard deduction is, with respect to a taxpayer 
     for a taxable year, the sum of--
       ``(A) $600 if the taxpayer has attained age 65 before the 
     close of such taxable year, and
       ``(B) $600 if the taxpayer is blind as of the close of such 
     taxable year.
       ``(2) Application to married individuals.--
       ``(A) Joint returns.--In the case of a joint return, 
     paragraph (1) shall be applied separately with respect to 
     each spouse.
       ``(B) Certain married individuals filing separately.--In 
     the case of a married individual filing a separate return, 
     if--
       ``(i) the spouse of such individual has no gross income for 
     the calendar year in which the taxable year of such 
     individual begins,
       ``(ii) such spouse is not the dependent of another taxpayer 
     for a taxable year beginning in the calendar year in which 
     such individual's taxable year begins, and
       ``(iii) the TIN of such spouse is included on such 
     individual's return of tax for the taxable year,

     the additional standard deduction shall be determined in the 
     same manner as if such individual and such individual's 
     spouse filed a joint return.''.
       (36) Section 63(f)(3) is amended by striking ``paragraphs 
     (1) and (2)'' and inserting ``subparagraphs (A) and (B) of 
     paragraph (1)''.
       (37) Section 72(t)(2)(D)(i)(III) is amended by striking 
     ``section 152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (38) Section 72(t)(7)(A)(iii) is amended by striking 
     ``section 152(f)(1)'' and inserting ``section 7706(f)(1)''.
       (39) Section 105(b) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``as defined in section 152'' and inserting 
     ``as defined in section 7706'',
       (B) by striking ``section 152(f)(1)'' and inserting 
     ``section 7706(f)(1)'' and
       (C) by striking ``section 152(e)'' and inserting ``section 
     7706(e)''.
       (40) Section 105(c)(1) is amended by striking ``section 
     152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (41) Section 125(e)(1)(D) is amended by striking ``section 
     152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (42) Section 129(c)(1) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) who is a dependent of such employee or of such 
     employee's spouse, or''.
       (43) Section 129(c)(2) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(f)(1)'' and inserting ``section 7706(f)(1)''.
       (44) Section 132(h)(2)(B) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``section 152(f)(1)'' and inserting 
     ``section 7706(f)(1)'', and

[[Page H9163]]

       (B) by striking ``section 152(e)'' and inserting ``section 
     7706(e)''.
       (45) Section 139D(c)(5) is amended by striking ``section 
     152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (46) Section 139E(c)(2) is amended by striking ``section 
     152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (47) Section 162(l)(1)(D) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(f)(1)'' and inserting ``section 7706(f)(1)''.
       (48) Section 170(g)(1) is amended by striking ``section 
     152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (49) Section 170(g)(3) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(d)(2)'' and inserting ``section 7706(d)(2)''.
       (50) Section 172(d) is amended by striking paragraph (3).
       (51) Section 213(a) is amended by striking ``section 152'' 
     and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (52) Section 213(d)(5) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(e)'' and inserting ``section 7706(e)''.
       (53) Section 213(d)(11) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(d)(2)'' in the matter following subparagraph (B) and 
     inserting ``section 7706(d)(2)''.
       (54) Section 220(b)(6) is amended by striking ``with 
     respect to whom a deduction under section 151 is allowable 
     to'' and inserting ``who is a dependent of''.
       (55) Section 220(d)(2)(A) is amended by striking ``section 
     152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (56) Section 221(d)(4) is amended by striking ``section 
     152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (57) Section 222(c)(3) is amended by striking ``with 
     respect to whom a deduction under section 151 is allowable 
     to'' and inserting ``who is a dependent of''.
       (58) Section 223(b)(6) is amended by striking ``with 
     respect to whom a deduction under section 151 is allowable 
     to'' and inserting ``who is a dependent of''.
       (59) Section 223(d)(2)(A) is amended by striking ``section 
     152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (60) Section 401(h) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(f)(1)'' in the last sentence and inserting ``section 
     7706(f)(1)''.
       (61) Section 402(l)(4)(D) is amended by striking ``section 
     152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (62) Section 409A(a)(2)(B)(ii)(I) is amended by striking 
     ``section 152(a)'' and inserting ``section 7706(a)''.
       (63) Section 441(f)(2)(B)(iii) is amended by striking ``, 
     but only the adjusted amount of the deductions for personal 
     exemptions as described in section 443(c)''.
       (64) Section 443 is amended--
       (A) in subsection (b)--
       (i) by striking paragraph (3), and
       (ii) by striking ``modified taxable income'' and inserting 
     ``taxable income'' each place such term appears,
       (B) by striking subsection (c), and
       (C) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections 
     (c) and (d), respectively.
       (65) Section 501(c)(9) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(f)(1)'' and inserting ``section 7706(f)(1)''.
       (66) Section 529(e)(2)(B) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(d)(2)'' and inserting ``section 7706(d)(2)''.
       (67) Section 529A(e)(4) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``section 152(d)(2)(B)'' and inserting 
     ``section 7706(d)(2)(B)'', and
       (B) by striking ``section 152(f)(1)(B)'' and inserting 
     ``section 7706(f)(1)(B)''.
       (68) Section 643(a)(2) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``(relating to deduction for personal 
     exemptions)'' and inserting ``(relating to basic 
     deduction)'', and
       (B) by striking ``Deduction for personal exemption'' in the 
     heading thereof and inserting ``Basic deduction''.
       (69) Section 703(a)(2) is amended by striking subparagraph 
     (A) and by redesignating subparagraphs (B) through (F) as 
     subparagraphs (A) through (E), respectively.
       (70) Section 874 is amended by striking subsection (b) and 
     by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (b).
       (71) Section 891 is amended by striking ``under section 151 
     and''.
       (72) Section 904(b)(1) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) Deduction for estates and trusts.--For purposes of 
     subsection (a), the taxable income of an estate or trust 
     shall be computed without any deduction under section 
     642(b).''.
       (73) Section 931(b)(1) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) any deduction from gross income, or''.
       (74) Section 933 is amended--
       (A) by striking ``as a deduction from his gross income any 
     deductions (other than the deduction under section 151, 
     relating to personal exemptions)'' in paragraph (1) and 
     inserting ``any deduction from gross income'', and
       (B) by striking ``as a deduction from his gross income any 
     deductions (other than the deduction for personal exemptions 
     under section 151)'' in paragraph (2) and inserting ``any 
     deduction from gross income''.
       (75) Section 1212(b)(2)(B)(ii) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(ii) in the case of an estate or trust, the deduction 
     allowed for such year under section 642(b).''.
       (76) Section 1361(c)(1)(C) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(f)(1)(C)'' and inserting ``section 7706(f)(1)(C)''.
       (77) Section 1402(a) is amended by striking paragraph (7).
       (78) Section 2032A(c)(7)(D) is amended by striking 
     ``section 152(f)(2)'' and inserting ``section 7706(f)(2)''.
       (79) Section 3402(m)(1) is amended by striking ``other than 
     the deductions referred to in section 151 and''.
       (80) Section 3402(r)(2) is amended by striking ``the sum 
     of--'' and all that follows and inserting ``the basic 
     standard deduction (as defined in section 63(c)) for an 
     individual to whom section 63(c)(2)(C) applies.''.
       (81) Section 5000A(b)(3)(A) is amended by striking 
     ``section 152'' and inserting ``section 7706''.
       (82) Section 5000A(c)(4)(A) is amended by striking ``the 
     number of individuals for whom the taxpayer is allowed a 
     deduction under section 151 (relating to allowance of 
     deduction for personal exemptions) for the taxable year'' and 
     inserting ``the sum of 1 (2 in the case of a joint return) 
     plus the number of the taxpayer's dependents for the taxable 
     year''.
       (83) Section 6013(b)(3)(A) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``had less than the exemption amount of 
     gross income'' in clause (ii) and inserting ``had no gross 
     income'',
       (B) by striking ``had gross income of the exemption amount 
     or more'' in clause (iii) and inserting ``had any gross 
     income'', and
       (C) by striking the flush language following clause (iii).
       (84) Section 6014(a) is amended by striking ``section 
     6012(a)(1)(C)(i)'' and inserting ``section 
     6012(a)(1)(B)(iii)''.
       (85) Section 6014(b)(4) is amended by striking ``63(c)(5)'' 
     and inserting ``63(c)(4)''.
       (86) Section 6103(l)(21)(A)(iii) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(iii) the number of the taxpayer's dependents,''.
       (87) Section 6213(g)(2)(H) is amended by striking ``section 
     21 (relating to expenses for household and dependent care 
     services necessary for gainful employment) or section 151 
     (relating to allowance of deductions for personal 
     exemptions)'' and inserting ``subsection (a)(1)(B), 
     (b)(1)(A)(ii), or (b)(1)(B) of section 2 or section 21, 
     35(d)(1)(B), 36B(b)(3)(B), or 63(f)(2)(B)''.
       (88) Section 6334(d) is amended--
       (A) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
       ``(2) Exempt amount.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the term 
     `exempt amount' means an amount equal to--
       ``(i) the sum of the amount determined under subparagraph 
     (B) and the standard deduction, divided by
       ``(ii) 52.
       ``(B) Amount determined.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), 
     the amount determined under this subparagraph is--
       ``(i) the dollar amount in effect under section 
     7706(d)(1)(B), multiplied by
       ``(ii) the number of the taxpayer's dependents for the 
     taxable year in which the levy occurs.
       ``(C) Verified statement.--Unless the taxpayer submits to 
     the Secretary a written and properly verified statement 
     specifying the facts necessary to determine the proper amount 
     under subparagraph (A), subparagraph (A) shall be applied as 
     if the taxpayer were a married individual filing a separate 
     return with no dependents.'', and
       (B) by striking paragraph (4).
       (89) Section 7702B(f)(2)(C)(iii) is amended by striking 
     ``section 152(d)(2)'' and inserting ``section 7706(d)(2)''.
       (90) Section 7703(a) is amended by striking ``part V of 
     subchapter B of chapter 1 and''.
       (91) Section 7703(b)(1) is amended by striking ``section 
     152(f)(1))'' and all that follows and inserting ``section 
     7706(f)(1)) who is a dependent of such individual for the 
     taxable year (or would be but for section 7706(e)),''.
       (92) Section 7706(a), as redesignated by this section, is 
     amended by striking ``this subtitle'' and inserting 
     ``subtitle A''.
       (93)(A) Section 7706(d)(1)(B), as redesignated by this 
     section, is amended by striking ``the exemption amount (as 
     defined in section 151(d))'' and inserting ``$4,150''.
       (B) Section 7706(d), as redesignated by this section, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(6) Inflation adjustment.--In the case of any taxable 
     year beginning in a calendar year beginning after 2018, the 
     $4,150 amount in paragraph (1)(B) shall be increased by an 
     amount equal to--
       ``(A) such dollar amount, multiplied by
       ``(B) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under 
     section 1(c)(2)(A) for the calendar year in which such 
     taxable year begins, determined by substituting `calendar 
     year 2017' for `calendar year 2016' in clause (ii) thereof.

     If any increase determined under the preceding sentence is 
     not a multiple of $50, such increase shall be rounded to the 
     next lowest multiple of $50.''.
       (94) Section 7706(e)(3), as redesignated by this section, 
     is amended by inserting ``(as in effect before its repeal)'' 
     after ``section 151''.
       (95) Section 7706(f)(6)(B), as redesignated by this 
     section, is amended by striking clause (i) and designating 
     clauses (ii), (iii), and (iv) as clauses (i), (ii), and 
     (iii), respectively.
       (96) The table of parts for subchapter B of chapter 1 is 
     amended by striking the item relating to part V.
       (97) The table of sections for chapter 79 is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new item:

``Sec. 7706. Dependent defined.''.

       (g) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

     SEC. 142. LIMITATION ON DEDUCTION FOR STATE AND LOCAL, ETC. 
                   TAXES.

       (a) In General.--Section 164(b)(6) is amended by striking 
     all that precedes ``The preceding sentence'' and inserting 
     the following:
       ``(6) Limitation on individual deductions.--In the case of 
     an individual--
       ``(A) no deduction shall be allowed under this chapter for 
     foreign real property taxes paid or accrued during the 
     taxable year, and
       ``(B) the aggregate amount of the deduction allowed under 
     this chapter for taxes described in paragraphs (1), (2), and 
     (3) of subsection (a) and paragraph (5) of this subsection 
     paid or accrued by the taxpayer during the taxable year shall 
     not exceed $10,000 ($5,000 in the case of a married 
     individual filing a separate return).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

[[Page H9164]]

  


     SEC. 143. LIMITATION ON DEDUCTION FOR QUALIFIED RESIDENCE 
                   INTEREST.

       (a) Interest on Home Equity Indebtedness.--Section 
     163(h)(3)(A) is amended by striking ``during the taxable year 
     on'' and all that follows through ``residence of the 
     taxpayer.'' and inserting ``during the taxable year on 
     acquisition indebtedness with respect to any qualified 
     residence of the taxpayer.''.
       (b) Limitation on Acquisition Indebtedness.--Section 
     163(h)(3)(B)(ii) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(ii) Limitation.--The aggregate amount treated as 
     acquisition indebtedness for any period shall not exceed the 
     excess (if any) of--

       ``(I) $750,00 ($375,000, in the case of a married 
     individual filing a separate return), over
       ``(II) the sum of the aggregate outstanding pre-October 13, 
     1987, indebtedness (as defined in subparagraph (D)) plus the 
     aggregate outstanding pre-December 15, 2017, indebtedness (as 
     defined in subparagraph (C)).''.

       (c) Treatment of Indebtedness Incurred on or Before 
     December 15, 2017.--Section 163(h)(3)(C) is amended to read 
     as follows:
       ``(C) Treatment of indebtedness incurred on or before 
     december 15, 2017.--
       ``(i) In general.--In the case of any pre-December 15, 
     2017, indebtedness, subparagraph (B)(ii) shall not apply and 
     the aggregate amount of such indebtedness treated as 
     acquisition indebtedness for any period shall not exceed the 
     excess (if any) of--

       ``(I) $1,000,000 ($500,000, in the case of a married 
     individual filing a separate return), over
       ``(II) the aggregate outstanding pre-October 13, 1987, 
     indebtedness (as defined in subparagraph (D)).

       ``(ii) Pre-december 15, 2017, indebtedness.--For purposes 
     of this subparagraph--

       ``(I) In general.--The term `pre-December 15, 2017, 
     indebtedness' means indebtedness (other than pre-October 13, 
     1987, indebtedness) incurred on or before December 15, 2017.
       ``(II) Binding written contract exception.--In the case of 
     a taxpayer who enters into a written binding contract before 
     December 15, 2017, to close on the purchase of a principal 
     residence before January 1, 2018, and who purchases such 
     residence before April 1, 2018, the term `pre-December 15, 
     2017, indebtedness' shall include indebtedness secured by 
     such residence.

       ``(iii) Refinancing indebtedness.--

       ``(I) In general.--In the case of any indebtedness which is 
     incurred to refinance indebtedness, such refinanced 
     indebtedness shall be treated for purposes of this 
     subparagraph as incurred on the date that the original 
     indebtedness was incurred to the extent the amount of the 
     indebtedness resulting from such refinancing does not exceed 
     the amount of the refinanced indebtedness.
       ``(II) Limitation on period of refinancing.--Subclause (I) 
     shall not apply to any indebtedness after the expiration of 
     the term of the original indebtedness or, if the principal of 
     such original indebtedness is not amortized over its term, 
     the expiration of the term of the 1st refinancing of such 
     indebtedness (or if earlier, the date which is 30 years after 
     the date of such 1st refinancing).''.

       (d) Coordination With Treatment of Indebtedness Incurred on 
     or Before October 13, 1987.--Section 163(h)(3)(D) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking clause (ii) and redesignating clauses (iii) 
     and (iv) as clauses (ii) and (iii), respectively, and
       (2) in clause (iii) (as so redesignated)--
       (A) by striking ``clause (iii)'' in the matter preceding 
     subclause (I) and inserting ``clause (ii)'', and
       (B) by striking ``clause (iii)(I)'' in subclauses (I) and 
     (II) and inserting ``clause (ii)(I)''.
       (e) Coordination With Exclusion of Income From Discharge of 
     Indebtedness.--Section 108(h)(2) is amended by striking 
     ``$1,000,000 ($500,000'' and inserting ``$750,000 
     ($375,000''.
       (f) Conforming Amendment.--Section 163(h)(3) is amended by 
     striking subparagraph (F).
       (g) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

     SEC. 144. MODIFICATION OF DEDUCTION FOR PERSONAL CASUALTY 
                   LOSSES.

       (a) In General.--Section 165(h)(5)(A) is amended by 
     striking ``in a taxable year beginning after December 31, 
     2017, and before January 1, 2026,''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 165(h)(5)(B) is amended by striking ``for any 
     taxable year to which subparagraph (A) applies''.
       (2) Section 165(h)(5) is amended by striking ``for taxable 
     years 2018 through 2025'' in the heading thereof and 
     inserting ``to losses attributable to federally declared 
     disasters''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to losses sustained in taxable years beginning 
     after December 31, 2017.

     SEC. 145. TERMINATION OF MISCELLANEOUS ITEMIZED DEDUCTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 67 is amended--
       (1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
       ``(a) In General.--In the case of an individual, 
     miscellaneous itemized deductions shall not be allowed.'', 
     and
       (2) by striking subsection (g).
       (b) Movement of Definition of Adjusted Gross Income for 
     Estates and Trusts.--
       (1) Section 67 is amended by striking subsection (e).
       (2) Section 641 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(d) Computation of Adjusted Gross Income.--For purposes 
     of this title, the adjusted gross income of an estate or 
     trust shall be computed in the same manner as in the case of 
     an individual, except that--
       ``(1) the deductions for costs which are paid or incurred 
     in connection with the administration of the estate or trust 
     and which would not have been incurred if the property were 
     not held in such trust or estate, and
       ``(2) the deductions allowable under sections 642(b), 651, 
     and 661,

     shall be treated as allowable in arriving at adjusted gross 
     income.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 56(b)(1)(A) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(A) Certain taxes.--No deduction (other than a deduction 
     allowable in computing adjusted gross income) shall be 
     allowed for any taxes described in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) 
     of section 164(a) or clause (ii) of section 164(b)(5)(A).''.
       (2) Section 56(b)(1)(C), as amended by the preceding 
     provisions of this Act, is amended by striking ``subparagraph 
     (A)(ii)'' and inserting ``subparagraph (A)''.
       (3) Section 62(a) is amended by striking ``subtitle'' in 
     the matter preceding paragraph (1) and inserting ``title''.
       (4) Section 641(c)(2)(E) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(E) Section 642(c) shall not apply.''.
       (5) Section 1411(a)(2) is amended by striking ``(as defined 
     in section 67(e))''.
       (6) Section 6654(d)(1)(C) is amended by striking clause 
     (iii).
       (7) Section 67 is amended in the heading, by striking ``2-
     percent floor on'' and inserting ``denial of''.
       (8) The table of sections for part 1 of subchapter B of 
     chapter 1 is amended by striking the item relating to section 
     67 and inserting the following new item:

``Sec. 67. Denial of miscellaneous itemized deductions.''.

       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

     SEC. 146. REPEAL OF OVERALL LIMITATION ON ITEMIZED 
                   DEDUCTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Part 1 of subchapter B of chapter 1 is 
     amended by striking section 68 (and the item relating to such 
     section in the table of sections for such part).
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 1(f)(7)(A), as amended by sections 121 and 141, 
     is amended by striking ``or section 68(b)(2)''.
       (2) Section 56(b)(1), as amended by the preceding 
     provisions of this Act, is amended by striking subparagraph 
     (E).
       (3) Section 164(b)(5)(H)(ii)(III) is amended by striking 
     ``(as determined under section 68(b))''.
       (4) Section 164(b)(5)(H) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new clause:
       ``(iii) Applicable amount defined.--For purposes of clause 
     (ii), the term `applicable amount' means--

       ``(I) $300,000 in the case of a joint return or a surviving 
     spouse,
       ``(II) $275,000 in the case of a head of household,
       ``(III) $250,000 in the case of an individual who is not 
     married and who is not a surviving spouse or head of 
     household, and
       ``(IV) \1/2\ the amount applicable under subclause (I) in 
     the case of a married individual filing a separate return.

     For purposes of this paragraph, marital status shall be 
     determined under section 7703. In the case of any taxable 
     year beginning in calendar years after 2017, each of the 
     dollar amounts in this clause shall be increased by an amount 
     equal to such dollar amount, multiplied by the cost-of-living 
     adjustment determined under section 1(f)(3) for the calendar 
     year in which the taxable year begins, determined by 
     substituting `2012' for `2016' in subparagraph (A)(ii) 
     thereof. If any amount after adjustment under the preceding 
     sentence is not a multiple of $50, such amount shall be 
     rounded to the next lowest multiple of $50.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

     SEC. 147. TERMINATION OF EXCLUSION FOR QUALIFIED BICYCLE 
                   COMMUTING REIMBURSEMENT.

       (a) In General.--Section 132(f)(1) is amended by striking 
     subparagraph (D).
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 132(f)(2) is amended by adding ``and'' at the 
     end of subparagraph (A), striking ``, and'' at the end of 
     subparagraph (B) and inserting a period, and striking 
     subparagraph (C).
       (2) Section 132(f)(4) is amended by striking ``(other than 
     a qualified bicycle commuting reimbursement)''.
       (3) Section 132(f) is amended by striking paragraph (8).
       (4) Section 274(l)(2) is amended by striking ``after 
     December 31, 2017, and before January 1, 2026''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

     SEC. 148. QUALIFIED MOVING EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT EXCLUSION 
                   LIMITED TO MEMBERS OF ARMED FORCES.

       (a) In General.--Section 132(g) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``by an individual'' in paragraph (1) and 
     inserting ``by a qualified military individual'', and
       (2) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(2) Qualified military individual.--For purposes of this 
     subsection, the term `qualified military individual' means a 
     member of the Armed Forces of the United States on active 
     duty who moves pursuant to a military order and incident to a 
     permanent change of station.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

     SEC. 149. DEDUCTION FOR MOVING EXPENSES LIMITED TO MEMBERS OF 
                   ARMED FORCES.

       (a) In General.--Section 217 is amended--

[[Page H9165]]

       (1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
       ``(a) Deduction Allowed.--There shall be allowed as a 
     deduction moving expenses paid or incurred during the taxable 
     year by a member of the Armed Forces of the United States on 
     active duty who moves pursuant to a military order and 
     incident to a permanent change of station.'',
       (2) by striking subsections (c), (d), (f), and (g) and 
     redesignating subsections (h), (i), (j), and (k) as 
     subsections (c), (d), (f) and (g), respectively, and
       (3) by inserting after subsection (d), as so redesignated, 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Expenses Furnished in Kind.--Any moving and storage 
     expenses which are furnished in kind (or for which 
     reimbursement or an allowance is provided, but only to the 
     extent of the expenses paid or incurred)--
       ``(1) to such member, his spouse, or his dependents, shall 
     not be includible in gross income, and no reporting with 
     respect to such expenses shall be required by the Secretary 
     of Defense or the Secretary of Transportation, as the case 
     may be, and
       ``(2) to such member's spouse and his dependents with 
     regard to moving to a location other than the one to which 
     such member moves (or from a location other than the one from 
     which such member moves), this section shall apply with 
     respect to the moving expenses of his spouse and dependents 
     as if his spouse commenced work as an employee at a new 
     principal place of work at such location.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Subsections (d)(3)(C) and (e) of section 23 are each 
     amended by striking ``section 217(h)(3)'' and inserting 
     ``section 217(c)(3)''.
       (2) Section 7872(f) is amended by striking paragraph (11).
       (3) Section 217 is amended in the heading by striking 
     ``moving expenses'' and inserting ``certain moving expenses 
     of members of armed forces''.
       (4) The table of sections for part VII of subchapter B of 
     chapter 1 is amended by striking the item relating to section 
     217 and inserting the following new item:

``Sec. 217. Certain moving expenses of members of Armed Forces.''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

     SEC. 150. LIMITATION ON WAGERING LOSSES.

       (a) In General.--Section 165(d) is amended by striking ``in 
     the case of taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, 
     and before January 1, 2026,''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

         Subtitle F--Increase in Estate and Gift Tax Exemption

     SEC. 151. INCREASE IN ESTATE AND GIFT TAX EXEMPTION.

       (a) In General.--Section 2010(c)(3) is amended in 
     subparagraph (A), by striking ``$5,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$10,000,000''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 2001(g) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(g) Modifications to Gift Tax Payable to Reflect 
     Different Tax Rates.--For purposes of applying subsection 
     (b)(2) with respect to 1 or more gifts, the rates of tax 
     under subsection (c) in effect at the decedent's death shall, 
     in lieu of the rates of tax in effect at the time of such 
     gifts, be used both to compute--
       ``(1) the tax imposed by chapter 12 with respect to such 
     gifts, and
       ``(2) the credit allowed against such tax under section 
     2505, including in computing--
       ``(A) the applicable credit amount under section 
     2505(a)(1), and
       ``(B) the sum of the amounts allowed as a credit for all 
     preceding periods under section 2505(a)(2).''.
       (2) Section 2010(c)(3) is amended by striking subparagraph 
     (C).
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to estates of decedents dying and gifts made 
     after December 31, 2017.

    TITLE II--INCREASED EXEMPTION FOR ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX MADE 
                               PERMANENT

     SEC. 201. INCREASED EXEMPTION FOR INDIVIDUALS.

       (a) In General.--Section 55(d)(1) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``$78,750'' in subparagraph (A) and 
     inserting ``$109,400'', and
       (2) by striking ``$50,600'' in subparagraph (B) and 
     inserting ``$70,300''.
       (b) Phase-out of Exemption Amount.--Section 55(d)(2) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``$150,000'' in subparagraph (A) and 
     inserting ``$1,000,000'', and
       (2) by striking subparagraphs (B) and (C) and by inserting 
     the following new subparagraphs:
       ``(B) 50 percent of the dollar amount applicable under 
     subparagraph (A) in the case of a taxpayer described in 
     paragraph (1)(B) or (1)(C), and
       ``(C) $75,000 in the case of a taxpayer described in 
     paragraph (1)(D).'',
       (c) Inflation Adjustment.--Section 55(d)(3) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(3) Inflation adjustment.--In the case of any taxable 
     year beginning in a calendar year after 2018, each dollar 
     amount described in clause (i) or (ii) of subparagraph (B) 
     shall be increased by an amount equal to--
       ``(A) such dollar amount, multiplied by
       ``(B) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under 
     section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which the taxable 
     year begins, determined by substituting--
       ``(i) in the case of a dollar amount contained in paragraph 
     (1)(D) or (2)(C) or in subsection (b)(1)(A), `calendar year 
     2011' for `calendar year 2016' in subparagraph (A)(ii) 
     thereof, and
       ``(ii) in the case of a dollar amount contained in 
     paragraph (1)(A), (1)(B), or (2)(A), `calendar year 2017' for 
     `calendar year 2016' in subparagraph (A)(ii) thereof.

     Any increased amount determined under this paragraph shall be 
     rounded to the nearest multiple of $100 ($50 in the case of 
     the dollar amount contained in paragraph (2)(C)).''.
       (d) Conforming Amendment.--Section 55(d) is amended by 
     striking paragraph (4).
       (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2017.

                      TITLE III--BUDGETARY EFFECTS

     SEC. 301. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.

       (a) IStatutory PAYGO Scorecards.--The budgetary effects of 
     this Act shall not be entered on either PAYGO scorecard 
     maintained pursuant to section 4(d) of the Statutory Pay-As-
     You-Go Act of 2010.
       (b) ISenate PAYGO Scorecards.--The budgetary effects of 
     this Act shall not be entered on either PAYGO scorecard 
     maintained for purposes of section 4106 of H. Con. Res. 71 
     (115th Congress).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 
1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady) and the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.


                             General Leave

  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 6760, currently under 
consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, for far too long, hardworking American taxpayers watched 
as an entitled Federal Government took a bigger and bigger slice from 
their family's budget. But that changed last year. With the Tax Cuts 
and Jobs Act, we choose you, the hardworking taxpayers of this country.
  With our new Tax Code, we were determined to let you keep more of 
what you worked so hard to earn, and, boy, have the results been 
incredible.
  Eight months later, we have seen an economic turnaround with more 
jobs, bigger paychecks, and historic Main Street optimism. We have gone 
from asking, ``Where are the jobs?'' to asking, ``Where are the 
workers?''
  One Main Street small-business owner recently told me that, thanks to 
the new Tax Code, they are hiring more, giving bonuses, buying more 
equipment, and, as he said, they are set to have their best year ever.
  This has meant real change for real people, with nearly 1.7 million 
new jobs created just since January, and paychecks rising at their 
fastest rate in 9 years.
  While this economic turnaround for America has come as a shock to 
opponents of the new Tax Code here in Washington, it is no surprise to 
millions of hardworking families and small businesses across America 
who were overtaxed and overregulated far too long.
  Thanks to our new pro-growth Tax Code, there is new hope and a new 
optimism in America that wasn't here before. To call it a sudden change 
from the sluggish Obama-era economy would be an understatement. For a 
decade, it was like America's economy was going through a 25-mile-per-
hour zone.
  Now that the high taxes and the uncompetitive regulations of our 
Democratic friends are gone, we are on an open highway again. It is 
critical that we keep this strong momentum going, especially for 
Americans who were hit hardest by the Great Recession.
  That is what this bill before us today is all about. By making the 
new code permanent for our families and small businesses, the 
Protecting Family and Small Business Tax Cuts Act will keep America's 
economy booming and middle class families growing again.
  In fact, the nonpartisan Tax Foundation estimates that this bill will 
add 1.5 million new jobs and increase America's economy over 2 percent. 
That is on top, as I said, of the 1.7 million new jobs we have already 
seen created since President Trump signed the new Tax Code into law.

[[Page H9166]]

  We don't want to go back to the bad old days of higher taxes, with 
Washington taking more of what our single moms, our hardworking 
parents, and our Main Street-owned business owners have worked so hard 
to earn. We don't want to go back to the bad old days when Main Street 
wasn't hiring, jobs were going overseas, and our economic growth was 
puttering along.
  So given the choice between keeping taxes high and allowing families 
to keep more of their money, Republicans chose, and continue to choose, 
the American people.
  I thank Representative Rodney Davis for introducing this bill, and 
Representative Mark Meadows and Representative Mark Walker, along with 
all of our Republican Ways and Means members, for being the original 
cosponsors and leaders of this bill.
  In closing, empowering families to run their own lives is at the 
heart of the American Dream. It is the key to America's economic 
success, and it is the reason that 8 months after tax reform became 
law, Americans are more hopeful about their future and the American 
Dream.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Republican tax sham.
  It has been 8 months since the Republicans passed their massive, 
unpaid-for tax cut without a single Democratic vote. At that time, 
Democrats and independent experts warned that their so-called tax 
reform plan that wasn't paid for and that was so heavily skewed to the 
wealthy and big corporations would harm our economy and damage 
important programs like Medicare and Social Security.
  Now we are beginning to see what many of us feared coming true. 
Health insurance companies in State after State are announcing higher 
premiums for next year, while health coverage for those living with 
preexisting conditions happens to be on the chopping block.
  To make matters worse, the Medicare trustees have cut 3 years off the 
life of the Medicare trust fund because of the Republican tax bill.
  Think of it: This vote this morning will add $631 billion to the 
national debt, on top of the $2.3 trillion that they have already 
embraced with the recklessness of their tax package.
  But instead of backing away from this mistake, they are doubling down 
this morning. Their second round of tax cuts for the wealthy will 
further compromise the future of Medicare and Social Security, 
depriving seniors of the benefits that they have earned.
  Today's bill will, once again, demonstrate that they are hardly the 
party of fiscal rectitude or conservatism. The original tax bill, as I 
noted a moment ago, adds $2.3 trillion to the debt.
  So that people understand, this is all borrowed money that will go to 
corporations and high-income earners, who undoubtedly will receive the 
bulk of these benefits in the tax cut.
  Now, Republicans want to give the most well-off and well-connected 
Americans even more tax cuts with their new proposal, again, 
emphasizing the following: an additional $3 trillion of debt, all based 
upon borrowed money.
  The Republicans are doubling down on this tax law's attack and, once 
again, harming the American middle class. There is virtually nothing in 
here that comes to the aid of the middle class, because they give it to 
them on one hand and take it away on the other.
  This proposal would make permanent the $10,000 cap on the State and 
local tax deduction for individuals, even while corporations will face 
no limits on their SALT deductions. This, at the same time, we should 
recognize, eliminates many tax incentives and pretty important 
incentives for middle class families to get ahead.
  So, once again, this package, like the one before it, is being rushed 
through with no hearings, with no witnesses, and with no input from 
stakeholders. A rushed and lopsided process resulted in the disaster 
that we voted on just weeks ago. In fact, my staff has identified more 
than 100 problems with this proposal, and we are happy to share those 
with any who are interested.
  This provision that we are voting on today is reckless, and it is a 
cut for the wealthy that leaves behind hardworking families.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), the leader and the original 
sponsor of this bill.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong 
support of my bill, H.R. 6760, the Protecting Family and Small Business 
Tax Cuts Act of 2018.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Brady, the entire Ways and Means 
Committee, and the Ways and Means staff for their hard work in getting 
tax reform 2.0 to the House floor.
  Last December, this Congress passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. That 
legislation was the first major tax reform in 31 years and delivered on 
our promise to bring tax relief to middle class families across the 
country.
  In fact, in my district in central Illinois, the average family of 
four making the median income of $78,500 will see a tax cut of roughly 
$2,200 this year. That is certainly not crumbs, Mr. Speaker.
  Since passage of tax reform, we have seen historic growth in our 
economy. It currently sits at 3.9 percent unemployment, with 
approximately 6.6 million open jobs, and a GDP last quarter of 4.2 
percent. With companies raising wages and increasing benefits, it is no 
wonder 90 percent of workers are seeing bigger paychecks, thanks to 
last year's tax cuts.
  Unfortunately, last year, the constraints of the budget 
reconciliation process in the Senate forced us to sunset many of the 
provisions found within that act. H.R. 6760 simply makes those 
sunsetting provisions permanent.
  These provisions include the expanded child tax credit, which we 
increased from $1,000 to $2,000; the new double standard deduction; and 
the improved tax brackets, which have lowered rates for all taxpayers.
  As the economy continues to reach new heights, H.R. 6760 represents 
our continued commitment to the millions of hardworking middle class 
Americans who have benefited from the tax cuts enacted last year.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support middle class families by 
voting for this bill.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Thompson), a very valued member of the Ways and Means 
Committee.
  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this 
bill.
  This bill represents a gross disregard for the responsibilities 
entrusted to us by our constituents. We are the stewards of Medicare, a 
critical support for nearly every American at some point in their 
lives. This bill will trigger hundreds of millions of dollars in 
across-the-board cuts to that important program.
  We are responsible for the Federal Tax Code, a charge that requires 
us to consider tax proposals fully and fairly. Yet, we will vote on 
this unpaid-for tax bill developed behind closed doors without the 
benefit of a single hearing. Most important, we are the custodians of 
the Federal budget.
  With passage of this bill, Republicans will have added more than $3 
trillion to our national debt in less than a year. This is a handout 
for the rich at the expense of our children and our grandchildren. It 
is an excuse for the majority party to ransack Medicare and Social 
Security. It is dangerous, and it is reckless. We should vote ``no'' on 
this bill.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to yield 3 minutes 
to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Walker), one of the three 
original leaders of this bill.
  Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act has transformed 
the economy, delivering economic growth in the form of more jobs, 
bigger paychecks, increased investment, and historically high small 
business optimism.
  Today, I rise in support as an original cosponsor of H.R. 6760, the 
Protecting Family and Small Business Tax Cuts Act of 2018.
  I thank Chairman Brady for his tireless work over the last year and a 
half to make this legislation possible, continuing to build on the 
success of the

[[Page H9167]]

Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by locking in those tax cuts for individuals, 
families, and small businesses.
  Today's bill makes permanent the transformational tax reforms 
included in the legislation we enacted last December.
  Mr. Speaker, locking in those important reforms provides certainty 
and enhances growth. In fact, according to the Tax Foundation's 
analysis, making these reforms permanent will create 1.5 million new 
jobs, increase wages by nearly a full percentage point, and increase 
the overall GDP by 2.2 percent. Those are facts.

  Locking in these important reforms reduces burdensome complexity. 
Because of this legislation, the vast majority of individuals and 
families will choose the enhanced standard deduction and will no longer 
need to do the recordkeeping required for itemizing deductions.
  The alternative minimum tax, which requires individuals and families 
to calculate their tax twice each year and pay the higher amount, will 
be eliminated for close to 96 percent of those who have had to pay in 
2017. A recent Tax Foundation study shows that a reduction in time 
spent on tax compliance that is expected to come from the 
simplification in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act will, indeed, translate 
into savings of $3.1 billion to $5.4 billion for individuals and 
families.
  Locking in these important reforms will fuel the small businesses 
that fuel the American economy.
  The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act delivered lower tax rates in a new 20 
percent deduction for pass-through business income. Today's bill locks 
in those benefits.
  Mr. Speaker, now is the time to keep our economy booming and protect 
the family and small business tax reforms delivered last December. I 
urge my colleagues to support this and help lock in these benefits for 
all Americans by passing H.R. 6760.

                              {time}  0930

  Mr. NEAL. A reminder, Mr. Speaker, that this is $3 trillion of 
borrowed money to provide for a tax cut for the wealthy.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Levin), who is a longtime and valuable member of the Ways and Means 
Committee.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask so-called fiscal conservatives: Why add 
to the deficit $3 trillion?
  I guess it is consistency. If you dig a hole, dig it deeper.
  Oh, it is for workers.
  Workers? One-half of the top percent get 50 percent of the benefit. 
It won't pass the Senate.
  So why do it?
  They thought it would be politically helpful. Now it is turning out 
it won't be. It is going to be immigration. This is a desperate move. 
It is desperately wrong.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge we vote ``no.''
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Nebraska (Mr. Smith), who is one of our key members on the Ways 
and Means Committee from rural communities on this tax reform bill.
  Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his time 
and certainly his leadership on this issue.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this bill to make permanent 
the tax cuts for families and small businesses we passed last year 
through the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. I am particularly pleased this bill 
also makes permanent the grain glitch fix we enacted last spring.
  This important provision ensures producers and buyers across 
agriculture could benefit from tax reform as intended. This bill also 
continues the treatment of property taxes on agricultural land and 
property as a fully deductible business expense, which is vital to ag 
producers in Nebraska's Third Congressional District as well as across 
the country.
  The initial version of tax reform we moved out of the Ways and Means 
Committee and passed in this House last year provided permanent tax 
relief, and our families, farmers, ranchers, and small businesses 
deserve the certainty of knowing their taxes will not increase. I am 
disappointed we could not get this permanence through the Senate last 
year, but I am pleased we have another opportunity to do so.
  This year our economy is booming with economic growth continuing 
above 3 percent, and the certainty of permanence will allow our small 
businesses to make future investments and families to know they can 
keep more of their paychecks as well as plan for the future.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge strong support for this bill.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis), who is a very valuable member of the 
Ways and Means Committee and the voice of Chicago.
  Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong 
opposition to another tax giveaway to the wealthiest in this country 
who need it the least.
  The Republicans' tax cut already has damaged the health of the 
Medicare trust fund. This bill is more of the same.
  After decades of wage stagnation, when over 41 million laborers earn 
less than $12 an hour, when almost none of their employers offer health 
insurance, when more than one-quarter of Americans struggle to cover 
housing costs, this Republican bill helps millionaires giving an 
average tax cut of over $39,000 to the top 1 percent.
  The Republican plan will permanently double tax over 40 million 
families due to the cap on the State and local income tax deduction.
  The Republican plan permanently takes away critical personal 
exemptions from millions of families with children which we need to 
help. We need to help hardworking, middle-class citizens. We don't need 
to give $39,000 tax breaks to the wealthy.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I'm very proud to yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith), who is a key member of our 
Ways and Means Committee and who played, again, such a leadership role 
on tax reform for small businesses and agriculture.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this 
legislation.
  Last year, Congress partnered with our President, President Trump, to 
lower taxes and put more money in the hands of our American people. I 
heard from the other side how the tax cut was just basically crumbs and 
scraps. But in my district in southern Missouri, the Tax Cuts and Jobs 
Act makes a real difference.
  In the 9 months that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act has passed, I have 
traveled throughout my district, and I have seen small businesses in 
West Plains, Missouri that told me: Congressman, because of the Tax 
Cuts and Jobs Act, I can now build a new building.
  I have spoken to workers in St. James, in Rolla, in Caruthersville, 
in Cape Girardeau, in Perryville, in Sikeston, in Malden, in Bernie, in 
Gainesville, in Theodosia, and all the other 29 counties in our 
congressional district of how their wages have increased and how these 
employees have benefited from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
  I have spoken to mothers who, because of their wages being increased, 
were able to purchase new child seats in their cars. These were real 
tax breaks. These were real advantages. For people in my congressional 
district, the median income is $40,000 a year. It is not scraps. It is 
not crumbs. It makes a real difference. It is car payments, it is house 
payments, and it is food on the table.
  Mr. Speaker, we need to make sure that this is permanent. This bill 
was not permanent because of some arcane Senate rules that allowed it 
to just be temporary. I am hoping that the other side will join us 
today in making sure that we deliver this tax relief permanently for 
families in southeast Missouri and families throughout this country.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, a reminder, this is $3 trillion of borrowed 
money for this tax plan that the Republicans are offering.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Kind), who is a very important member of the Ways and Means Committee.
  Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this legislation 
because this bill today, again, shatters one of the greatest cons ever 
perpetrated on the American people, that the modern-day national 
Republican Party is the party of fiscal responsibility.

[[Page H9168]]

  The three bills that we have before us this week, coupled with the 
tax cut version that passed last year, will add over $5 trillion to our 
national debt at a time when 70 million baby boomers are fully invested 
in Social Security and Medicare, giving them the excuse later on to 
come back and say that we have to cut Social Security and Medicare 
because we don't have revenue anymore.
  If we are entrusted with the majority next year, we will do tax 
reform the right way. We will simplify it, we will make it more 
competitive, we will certainly make it fair, and we will do it fiscally 
responsibly by shutting down extraneous loopholes in the Code to pay 
for it. We will do it with hearings and with the proper feedback which 
was lacking here.
  For all these reasons, Mr. Speaker, we should reject this bill and do 
tax reform the right way.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from South Dakota (Mrs. Noem), who is a key member of the 
Ways and Means Committee.
  Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to clarify.
  I firmly disagree with my colleague on the other side of the aisle 
who just talked about Social Security and Medicare. In fact, the 
economic statistics that have recently come back have talked about how 
the Medicare trust fund and how Social Security are actually doing 
better since we did this historic tax cut bill because more people are 
working. They are earning more money. They are paying into those 
programs, and those programs are more secure into the future because we 
did historic tax reform.
  Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of the Protecting Family and 
Small Business Tax Cuts Act--a key component of tax reform 2.0. I 
strongly support this legislation, because I worked on it for many 
years, but also because of the stories I hear across South Dakota every 
day.
  I had, several months ago, a single mom of two kids come up to me. 
She is a bank teller. She told me that because of tax reform that her 
check is $80 bigger every 2 weeks. That meant that her 10-year-old son 
could get new basketball shoes this year instead of going out and 
trying to find some that were used from another student who had 
outgrown them.
  I also had another woman from Platte, South Dakota, contact my office 
and tell me that because of tax reform and tax cuts--her family doesn't 
usually get much money. They don't make a lot of money. Their wages 
aren't great. But because of that bill, they have more money in their 
pockets today. It has made a huge difference in paying their day-to-day 
bills.
  Mr. Speaker, there are dozens of other stories that I could tell you 
from folks across the State of South Dakota of the benefits of tax 
reform. Our energy costs have gone down. Our utility bills have gone 
down. Companies have paid increasing wages for families. They have also 
paid out bonuses. The tax cuts have been life changing for many in our 
State.
  With that passage and with the passage of this bill today, we will 
have the opportunity to ensure the upward economic trajectory we have 
experienced because of a permanent culture of growth and stability that 
is rooted in the Tax Code.
  So tax reform 2.0 is going to make sure that with the benefits 
families are enjoying today they will still be able to enjoy them long 
into the future. While no tax plan is perfect in everybody's eyes, I am 
optimistic that this package today will have a huge benefit for the 
people of South Dakota. Our Tax Code should help people, not punish 
them.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in support of my 
legislation today.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, a reminder that this adds $3 trillion of debt 
that is all borrowed money.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
Blumenauer), who is a champion of all issues related to infrastructure 
in America.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I heard the gentlewoman from South 
Dakota talk about all the stories that she could tell. Sadly, that is 
what our Republican friends have done. They want to tell stories 
cherry-picked, but they are afraid to have hearings from the people 
whom this affects. We haven't heard from the experts, from the 
academics, and from people in business. They were afraid to have 
hearings on their tax bill, rushing it through, and they didn't even 
know what was in it. Now they are doubling down, adding another 
trillion dollars of debt without having a foundation factually to let 
the people know what is going on.
  Look at their budget. They have declared war on Social Security and 
on Medicare. They understand that it is not sustainable. The tax cuts 
don't pay for themselves. They are putting at risk things that America 
cares about like Social Security and like Medicare--fundamental issues 
that matter.
  I hope that if the American public entrusts us with the control of 
Congress next year that we will go forward, listen to them, make it 
transparent, and base it on facts.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, because of tax reform, Main Street 
businesses are booming. The chairman of the Small Business Committee 
has played a key role in that.
  Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the gentlemen from Ohio 
(Mr. Chabot).
  Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding and for 
his leadership on this very important issue.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6760, the Protecting Family 
and Small Business Tax Cuts Act. As chairman of the House Small 
Business Committee, I have closely examined the effects that the Tax 
Cuts and Jobs Act that we previously passed has had on America's small 
businesses, on startups, and on entrepreneurs.
  From a Small Business Committee hearing that I chaired in July that 
reviewed the impact of that law on Main Street companies to the many 
small business optimism surveys that are published on a monthly 
business, the results are in, and they are positive for our Nation's 30 
million small businesses that about half of the workers in this country 
work for. They work for small businesses.
  The tax cuts have provided small businesses with the opportunity to 
invest in their workers, invest in their equipment, and invest in their 
dreams. A small business owner in my district in southern Ohio recently 
testified: ``The recent tax reduction will have a positive impact on 
our employees in 2018 and beyond.''
  The shops on Main Street all across America are transforming our 
communities and neighborhoods with job growth and business expansion, 
and that means jobs for more Americans.
  With our economic engines starting to rev, Congress should take the 
next step in the tax debate, which is making the tax cuts for our 
Nation's job creators permanent. That is what we are doing here today.
  Making section 199A, the small business pass-through provision, 
stronger will be a benefit to small businesses from my State of Ohio 
and to our States all across the country, from coast to coast.
  I applaud the work of Mr. Davis, Mr. Brady, and the other members of 
the Ways and Means Committee on this issue. It has been very important. 
When our Nation's small businesses, entrepreneurs, and startups are 
thriving, so are their employees, the families of those employees, and 
America's consumers.

                              {time}  0945

  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, this is the sequel to ``Weekend at 
Bernie's.'' But this doesn't work.
  The headline yesterday in The Washington Post was: GOP Campaigns 
Ditch Touting Tax Law in Ads. The first one stunk. This is even worse.
  Republican economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a good, good guy, said this 
past May: ``There's just no evidence that the tax cuts actually pay for 
themselves.''
  Of course they don't. That is why you are targeting healthcare. That 
is why you are targeting Medicare. That is why you are targeting Social 
Security. You already targeted Medicaid.
  In New Jersey--we are still a State--the average SALT deduction 
claimed in 2016 was more than the $10,000 limit. In my district, the 
average is over $18,000. One of the counties in my district is $24,000.

[[Page H9169]]

  What have you done? That means the average taxpaying household--New 
Jersey, listen up--now has to pay income tax on an additional $14,000 
worth of income.
  We may have 12 Democrats by the end of the election.
  If they are a middle-class family being taxed at 24 percent, that is 
an extra $3,400 they have to come up with at tax time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from New Jersey an 
additional 1 minute.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, for hundreds of thousands of New Jersey 
families, that is a mortgage payment; that is a tuition bill; that is 
money for unexpected medical bills. Instead, it is going to be moving 
to pay more bills in Montana and South Dakota.
  I offered an amendment to restore the full SALT. So every Member who 
votes for this monstrosity today is voting to make the SALT caps 
forever and to impose a permanent tax on middle-class families. It is 
mind-boggling that a Member would want to hammer his constituents like 
that.
  I ask my colleagues: How could you vote to punish your middle-class 
constituents to give even more money to the 1 percent?
  What is even more fascinating, a number of people on the other side, 
Mr. Speaker, no wonder they are voting for this thing today. They get 
less than 1 percent of the donations from folks like you and me. So 
that is why they are tuned in to corporate America.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Allen), who started a small business at age 25 and 
built it up from the ground up.
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his leadership on 
this important bill.
  Yes, I came from the small business world. Let me tell you, in my 
district, the small businesses are back, and I am proud to support tax 
reform 2.0, legislation that will build upon the tremendous success of 
the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that was signed into law last year.
  After 31 years under an old, outdated, and burdensome Tax Code that 
stifled our economy and plagued our job creators, America simply needed 
a change. I am happy to say that we delivered on our promise of 
comprehensive tax reform to the American people, and we are seeing new 
levels of economic growth and optimism around the country--and we are 
not done yet.
  In the month of August alone, Georgia added over 12,000 jobs, and the 
unemployment rate fell below 3.8 percent. We are committed to keeping 
this momentum going.
  Tax reform 2.0 will lock in the middle-class and small business tax 
cuts permanently, allowing families to more easily save their hard-
earned money for retirement, helping local businesses promote 
retirement plans to workers, promoting startup businesses, and much 
more.
  As a cosponsor of tax reform 2.0, I encourage all my colleagues to 
join me today in supporting this important legislation that will 
unleash the economic engine that is the American family and small 
business.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Sanchez), the vice chair of the Democratic Caucus.
  Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, I stand here today saddened, but, quite 
frankly, not shocked, at the irresponsibility of my colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle. I guess their giveaway to the ultrawealthy 
wasn't enough last time around, so they have come back for round two: a 
fake tax reform 2.0.
  When the bill for this new gimmick eventually comes due, I am 
terrified Republicans will pay for it by gutting Social Security and 
Medicare, two earned benefit programs on which my constituents rely.
  I have heard a lot of rhetoric about how today's bill will help the 
middle class, but the only thing that today's legislation guarantees is 
adding at least $3 trillion more to the deficit over just a period of 
10 years.
  And who picks up the tab? Middle-class Americans, that is who. They 
are working families who are being priced out of home ownership, saving 
for retirement, or trying to put their kids through school.
  I urge my colleagues to vote down this terrible bill and let common 
sense reign.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Doggett).
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, today's sorry's sequel is as phony as the 
original Republican tax sham. It comes from an administration for whom 
truth is a stranger, clocked in, by one analysis, at 7\1/2\ lies, on 
the average, per day. But even for such an administration, this bill is 
based on a true whopper.
  Here we have it from the Executive Office of the President telling us 
as his official administration policy that for every American family, 
the average household income will be increased by at least $4,000, 
annually. Yet today, fewer than 5 percent of American families have 
gotten a dime increase in their income as a result of this bill. Truly, 
a giant whopper.
  But like the promise that Mexico would pay for the wall, that drug 
companies would bring down their prices, all we have is more 
misrepresentation today.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Texas an additional 
1 minute.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Corporate giants who got giant tax breaks gave them back 
to some of their shareholders and their CEOs, but they didn't increase 
wages for workers or give more than a handful any compensation as a 
result of this.
  Now, here on election eve, we have a proposal where they are telling 
the American taxpayers: We promise relief in seven years, which is what 
this bill does. Families can't put off rising healthcare costs or their 
other needs for seven years.
  But there is one American family who does really well out of this 
bill. It is the family of Donald J. Trump. They got a special provision 
written into the bill that this proposal freezes into permanent law 
that gives them a tax windfall, most likely of millions of dollars.
  That is what this bill was all about: helping Donald Trump, his 
cronies, and allies, not helping the American people.
  The first tax bill was a hit-and-run job. With this second bill, 
Republicans back up and run over working families again. Democrats need 
to take the wheel and help Americans get some money in their own 
wallet.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Speaker, let me just fact-check my colleague from Texas.
  Since the tax reform bill became law on New Year's Day, 1.7 million 
jobs have been created in America, with wages rising at the fastest 
rate in 9 years.
  Today, following these new policies, the median income for a married 
couple with two kids has $3,200 more in their take-home pay than it did 
just 12 months ago.
  I will remind the voters in Mr. Doggett's district that an average 
family of four making $60,000 a year sees a tax cut of $1,131 that my 
Democratic colleagues want to steal back.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Alabama (Ms. Sewell).
  Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, less than a year after the first 
disastrous tax bill, here we are voting on another bill that will 
double down on this betrayal and put hardworking families who are 
working every day to make ends meet even further into debt.
  As my constituents remember, the first tax law cost us $2.3 trillion. 
Those working to reach the middle class will see less investment in 
their communities; will see their Social Security, Medicare, and 
Medicaid shrink; and will see the costs of healthcare insurance rise.
  It is unconscionable that Republicans are trying to pass another 
batch of tax cuts that will add another $650 billion to the $2.3 
trillion they have already spent through the Tax Code. This will end up 
costing us $5 trillion over the next 20 years.
  Vote ``no'' on this reckless tax cut.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from

[[Page H9170]]

Arizona (Mr. Schweikert), a key leader and member of the Ways and Means 
Committee.
  Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Speaker, before comments, this was my first term 
on the Ways and Means Committee. I will tell you that, both on the 
Democratic side and the Republican side, is a group of very special 
Members, having been on other committees, even in moments like this, 
where we see the world very differently. Everyone is freaky smart, 
incredibly respectful, and if they could see what goes on in the back 
where we actually get along, it is a very special committee. But the 
fact of the matter is we sort of see the world very differently.
  Have you ever had that moment where you were walking up to the podium 
and you were going to read something? I was going to originally read 
the comments from a number of Members, particularly on the other side, 
who were incredibly critical of the fact that many of these tax cuts 
expired and now they are complaining that we are extending them. We do 
have this sort of body where we race to whatever the current argument 
is. But that would actually be a little hard to do, right after saying 
such nice things about everyone. So let's actually have a couple of 
comments on the reality of what we see in the math.
  Do you remember when the tax bill passed, the math was that we needed 
a 0.4 percent growth in GDP over 10 years and the tax reform paid for 
itself? How are we doing so far?
  We have had, now, multiple revisions upward. Something is working out 
there in our society when you see more jobs than workers; when you see, 
in my community, the populations that have had a really rough decade 
with the growth recession of the last decade, they have jobs. There are 
good things happening.
  You would think there would be almost this joy on both the left and 
the right when you see job training in our Arizona prisons. We actually 
brought one of the three-time convicted felons to testify in the Ways 
and Means Committee. It is so hard for this body to actually give a 
little and say: Look at the great societal things that are happening 
right now.
  Also, we have the backup on the math. If we do not have substantial 
economic growth this decade and next, we can't keep our societal 
promises.
  I would like to argue, when we get beyond this, we have the 
conversation of: What does tax reform do for future economic expansion? 
Again, yes, we are going to have to talk about a lot of difficult 
things to keep that economic expansion, but the baseline math--and I 
know we are only 8, 9 months into the data--it is working. Could we at 
least have a little sound of joy for what is working?
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Pelosi), the highly effective Democratic leader.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
thank him for his extraordinary leadership in representing the House 
Democrats as the ranking member on the Ways and Means Committee. He 
brings to that position the values shared by the American people of 
fairness, transparency, and openness in what goes on here in Congress, 
and doing so in a way that is accountable to the American people. So I 
thank him for his leadership.

                              {time}  1000

  Sadly, I come to the floor again to talk against, yet again, another 
Republican tax scam. The gentleman who just spoke talked about how we 
should be filled with joy--filled with joy.
  Well, if we are talking about emotion, let us talk about St. 
Augustine. St. Augustine, 17 centuries ago--17 centuries ago, 1,700 
years ago--said: ``A State which is not governed according to justice 
is just a bunch of thieves.''
  Pope Benedict, who quoted Augustine, said: ``The State must 
inevitably face the question of how justice can be achieved here and 
now.'' Benedict cautioned against the danger of certain ethical 
blindness caused by the dazzling effect of power and special interest. 
That is what they talked about.
  This is about justice, justice for our country in terms of economic 
justice, justice in our society in terms of everyone participating in 
the prosperity of America and not, yet again, the warmed-over stew of 
trickle-down economics. If you give 83 percent of the benefits to the 
top 1 percent--glory, alleluia--it may trickle down on you. If it does 
not, so be it. That is what the former speaker said: So be it.
  Let me quote some of the Republicans, enforcing what I said earlier. 
Who are these tax scams for?
  Congressman Chris Collins said: ``My donors are basically saying, 
`Get it done or don't ever call me again.'''
  Senator Lindsey Graham said the financial contributions will stop if 
this--and I say--if this tax scam fails.
  Here we are again. Here we are again at a time, on this last day of 
the session, as this body prepares to pack its bags and return home for 
the next 6 weeks, the GOP's priorities have been laid bare, as we waste 
our final moments debating a new version of the Republicans' same old 
tax scam, with no accountability, no transparency, and no fairness for 
the American people.
  The first GOP tax scam for the rich added $2 trillion to the national 
debt, when you talk about the tax cut plus the interest on the debt, 
sticking our children with a bill for massive tax breaks for Big 
Pharma, big banks, big corporations, making it more profitable for them 
to ship jobs overseas, and the wealthiest 1 percent.
  People across America have raised their voices to condemn the 
Republicans' plan to spend trillions on tax cuts for the wealthy. What 
is so sad about it is, in their first tax scam, they decided that they 
would set up a thing where the individual mandate was repealed and, 
therefore, the benefit of preexisting condition no longer barring you 
from having access to health insurance. Their first tax scam was an 
assault on the preexisting condition benefit in the Affordable Care 
Act.
  Not only that--that was not good enough for them--the President went 
further in his budget and said: We have increased the debt. Now we have 
to pay for it, because, contrary to the illusion that our Republicans 
like to present, these tax breaks do not ever pay for themselves.
  Don't take it from me. Those who have worked even with Jack Kemp have 
said: Anybody who tells you that these tax breaks pay for themselves is 
telling you something that is not true, is nonsense, and is BS, except 
he said the whole word in our testimony.
  So here they are. Now they have to pay for it. Where are they going 
to get the money? They have just given 83 percent of the benefits to 
the top 1 percent, a big tax break for corporations, enabling them to 
send jobs overseas. And who is going to pay for it?
  Well, in the President's budget, to make up for the $2 billion plus, 
they cut $500 billion from Medicare; $1.4 trillion from Medicaid, 
legislation that is not just about poor children but middle-income 
seniors, a benefit for middle-income seniors; $214 billion from food 
stamps, a benefit needed by our seniors, by our veterans, by our poor 
children in America. All of this is to pay for tax cuts for the rich.
  So here we are again. Imagine what the Republicans will try to do 
after adding trillions more to the deficit. Their intentions are clear. 
The President's adviser--whatever his title is now--Larry Kudlow, his 
top economic chief, said: If Republicans control Congress, they will 
immediately move to cut the larger entitlements, probably next year.
  In budget after budget, Republicans have made their plan perfectly 
clear: Add trillions to the deficit with their GOP tax scams for the 
rich, and then use those deficits to justify slashing Medicare, 
Medicaid, and, actually, disability benefits for people on Social 
Security.
  Added $2 trillion to the debt with their first tax scam, putting 
forward a budget that would, again, claw millions of dollars back from 
seniors and hardworking Americans, and now they want to do it again.
  Well, don't take it from me. AARP wrote a letter to Congress 
yesterday to warn against the grievous damage that would be done by the 
second phase of Republicans' deficit-exploding tax scam.
  They wrote: ``We have grave concerns about H.R. 6760. AARP is 
troubled by the further negative effect this bill will have on the 
Nation's ability to fund critical priorities.''
  They then said: ``The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that

[[Page H9171]]

H.R. 6760 will reduce Federal revenue by approximately $631 billion 
over the 10-year budget window. This is in addition to the $1.5 
trillion reduction in revenue over the 10-year budget window resulting 
from last year's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.''
  Revenue, revenue that can be used for investment. Think of what we 
could have done with those resources to build the infrastructure of 
America, a small piece of it to address the pension crisis in America, 
the recognition that investments in education are the best investments 
we can make, because nothing brings more to the Treasury than 
investments in education. Instead, we have this.
  The AARP goes on to say: ``Additional increases of this magnitude in 
the deficit will inevitably lead to calls for greater spending cuts, 
which are likely to include cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and other 
important programs serving older Americans.''

  The letter concludes: ``AARP cannot support H.R. 6760.''
  Again, here we are. They give this big tax break. They say people are 
going to get raises and bonuses.
  Some got bonuses. That is good. If you worked there a long time and 
the rest, you got a bonus. But it didn't add to your base salary, which 
would have been the important increase for people to make.
  One estimate by Goldman Sachs was that there would be, following the 
former tax bill, $1 trillion in buybacks; in other words, corporations 
buying back their stock--not investing in their workforce, not 
recognizing that their success depends on the productivity of the 
workforce and that any increase in productivity should also include an 
increase in the wages of the workers, but, instead, an increase in the 
compensation for the CEO.
  It is shameful.
  To conclude on that point, there is a better way to do this. There 
could have been, instead of as they did with the first tax scam and now 
this one--the first one in the dark of night and in the speed of light, 
putting forth a bill that they almost didn't even know what they were 
voting for. That did a grave injustice to our Nation for what it 
deprives us of by giving these tax breaks at the high end.
  There is a way to do it. Mr. Neal has suggested it over and over 
again. Let's see what we have done before.
  Ronald Reagan, Tip O'Neill, 1986, almost a year of hearings and 
transparency and openness where the public could see and people could 
understand what it meant to them in their lives.
  Instead, they just go into those rooms, and say: How can we, how can 
we, how can we milk the public? How can we exploit the taxpayer by 
adding to the wealth of the wealthiest 1 percent in our country?
  It is shameful.
  As St. Augustine said, unless a government is formed to promote 
justice, it is just a bunch of thieves.
  We are robbing from our children's future with this national debt. We 
are robbing from the participation in the full benefits of our 
prosperity, of our workers, in our country. We are robbing our Nation's 
ability to be itself, to make America good again. In doing so, again, 
to have people have financial stability in their lives, so that they 
can be entrepreneurial, so that they can take risk, so that they can 
invest in their children's future.
  It is not only good for the individual taxpayer or person in our 
country; it is good for our country, because it makes us competitive in 
the world with our values and with our economy.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I note that the average middle class 
family in the 12th District of California will see a tax cut of $5,508 
each year.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Wenstrup), a key member of the Ways and Means Committee.
  Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, I find it interesting that I keep hearing 
that the tax reforms were for the rich. The only phone calls I got 
complaining about our tax reform were from the rich.
  I had one gentleman call me and actually say: For those of us with 
three or four homes, this is going to kill us.
  Are you kidding me? And you keep saying this is a tax break for the 
rich. They are the only ones complaining to me.
  As a former small-business owner, I can tell you how difficult it is 
to plan for the future. When you sit down to look at your company's 
finances, you may be worried about paying your employees' salaries or 
making the rent on time.
  So many in this body, historically, have never run a business, yet 
they have historically done a very good job of running some businesses 
into the ground. The last thing any business owner wants to think about 
is: I wonder what the Federal Government is going to do to my taxes 5, 
10, 15 years from now.
  Constant uncertainty does not work for the American people. High 
taxes don't work for the American people. People want to keep their 
money.
  The House of Representatives is prepared to remedy these concerns for 
many years to come. The Protecting Family and Small Business Tax Cuts 
Act of 2018 that is on the floor today as part of tax reform 2.0 would 
make lower tax rates for all income levels permanent.
  Critically, this bill permanently extends a major deduction for pass-
through businesses, which make up most of the small businesses in the 
U.S. This is significant peace of mind for the barbershop in town, for 
your neighbor's lawn care business, for the garage-to-Main Street 
startups, and for the millions of business dreams that, for now, are 
still dreams.

  Mr. Speaker, we now have one of the most competitive tax codes on the 
globe. Let's make certain that we keep it that way.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, might I inquire of the distinguished chairman 
how many more speakers that he has.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have one.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close when the chairman deems 
it appropriate, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from North Carolina (Mr. Meadows), one of the three original lead 
sponsors of this tax bill.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the pro-growth, 
pro-family, and pro-small business reforms in tax reform 2.0 led by my 
good friend Chairman Brady.
  I want to say a special shout-out to him but also to the Ways and 
Means staff. Let me just tell you, a lot of times we take credit for 
things that are done, but it is the staff that has done not only a 
yeoman's job but an outstanding job in doing this. And a real shout-out 
to Representative Rodney Davis, the bill's sponsor, who believes that 
it is a good thing to give more of the taxpayers' money back to them.
  You have heard arguments on the floor today, Mr. Speaker, all about 
revenue and about what this needs to do. But the revenue that we are 
talking about is actually the hardworking wages of men and women on 
Main Street. It is their money.
  I have been around this place too long. I can tell you, I would 
rather trust a mom and dad on Main Street to spend their money more 
wisely than any spenders here in Washington, D.C. It is time that we 
give it back.
  Since we signed the last tax bill, the largest in American history, 
the economy has been booming. Unemployment is at a 50-year low.

                              {time}  1015

  New job openings are setting a record pace. We are increasing wages. 
Consumer confidence, Mr. Speaker, is at its highest level in decades. 
And while these strong numbers continue to roll in, Congress needs to 
act to make sure that we are more resolved than ever to make these tax 
cuts permanent.
  You know, we talk about a vibrant economy--4.2 GDP growth. According 
to some sources, it is now at 4.4. When we look at that kind of GDP 
growth and economic growth, it means increased wages, it means job 
security, and that is what we need to make sure that we put back on the 
docket today.
  I ask my colleagues to vote for that. Vote for the men and women on 
Main Street.
  Yes, they may call this tax reform 2.0, but what I call this is 
actually make sure that we are responsible in Washington, D.C., to give 
the money back to its rightful owner, which is we, the people.
  Now, this indeed makes the tax cuts for individuals permanent, but it 
also

[[Page H9172]]

gives a whole lot of options for families saving for education and 
those baby savings accounts. It encourages small business development.
  It is time, Mr. Speaker, that we act on behalf of those who are doing 
all the hard work here in America, those small businesses and men and 
women on Main Street who deserve a break from Washington, D.C.
  I thank Chairman Brady and Rodney Davis for their leadership. I also 
look forward to working with them to deliver these tax cuts and make 
sure they are permanent.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am still trying to sort through the commentary of one 
of the previous speakers who said that he took a call from somebody who 
said: I have three or four homes, and I am not getting enough in this 
tax bill.
  That is the point of this. He doesn't need any tax relief. That is 
the very example that we have been highlighting throughout this 
morning.
  Three or four homes and they are complaining they didn't get enough? 
That is a remarkable comment for somebody to pass on in this Chamber.
  This bill was bad on policy and it was bad on procedure. Not one 
hearing on this legislation. Not one witness. So two tax bills totaling 
$3 trillion of debt, all borrowed money with the promise of higher 
interest rates coming from the Federal Reserve Board, and they are 
suggesting that that poor fellow who must be sleeping on the grates 
with three or four homes needs more tax relief. That is exactly what 
this argument was about.
  So the party of fiscal rectitude has now added $3 trillion of 
borrowed debt to provide a tax cut for that struggling individual who 
has three or four homes. Now they want to give him enough, or her 
enough, to maybe get to five or six homes with the tax bill. Only 
someone who believes, perhaps, in the argument of Bigfoot would then 
conclude that that individual needs tax relief.
  Every mainstream economist who has spoken about the debt--and this, 
by the way, cost $631 billion this morning with what they are about to 
do, borrowed money, added to the debt, added to our children's 
responsibilities and our grandchildren's responsibilities.
  And to make matters worse, Mr. Speaker, this represents a long-term 
threat, now, to Social Security and Medicare, because they are going to 
come back and say: Well, the debt is so high that we have to cut Social 
Security and we have to cut Medicare.
  They should back away from the mistake that they are making this 
morning. Go back to some hearings. Go back through some process. Go 
back to a conversation with both parties. Barack Obama was at 28 
percent, the corporate rate. We could have found a common point of 
agreement on this.
  This sham is a reckless tax cut for that poor individual who has 
three or four homes. But at the same time, and, simultaneously, they 
leave behind the hardworking average men and women of this country.
  I urge our colleagues to oppose this legislation, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, may I ask how much time I have left.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Weber of Texas). The gentleman from 
Texas has 4 minutes remaining.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would note that the average middle-class family in my 
good friend Mr. Neal's district back home in Massachusetts will see a 
tax cut of nearly $2,000 each year.
  So let's fact-check a couple of these claims today. Let's fact-check 
a few things, starting with my friend Mr. Neal's point about Dr. 
Wenstrup's call.
  That gentleman wasn't complaining he didn't get enough tax cuts. He 
said his taxes would go up significantly. And he is correct, because 
under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, this relief goes to middle-class 
families and low-income families working their way up.
  In fact, after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, millionaires of America who 
used to shoulder 19 percent of the tax burden now will shoulder 20 
percent of the tax burden. They will carry more because this tax reform 
was designed for middle-class, working families.
  Earlier today, we heard our respected Democratic leader say many 
things, including that the GOP tax cuts provide at least $1.3 trillion 
in tax breaks to corporations. FactCheck.org says that claim is 
misleading. In fact, of the $1\1/2\ trillion, over $1 trillion is for 
individual taxpayers.
  Leader Pelosi said 86 million middle-class families will see a tax 
increase. The Washington Post gave her 2 Pinocchios, saying most every 
U.S. taxpayer can expect some kind of tax cut according to just about 
every analysis.
  A lawmaker from Wisconsin, Democrat: Never let the GOP tell you again 
they support low taxes. They don't, unless you are already a 
billionaire or massive corporation.
  PolitiFact gave that Democratic lawmaker a pants on fire rating, 
saying this will provide tax relief for the middle class, and most 
people in low-income households will see cuts as well.

  Leader Chuck Schumer said companies are laying off American workers 
because of tax reform. PolitiFact said that was mostly false.
  A California assemblyman says GOP tax cuts are nothing more than a 
middle-class tax increase. PolitiFact just killed them, called that 
just flat-out false.
  Senator Claire McCaskill said the tax cuts are not going to be 
helpful to the vast majority of people. The Washington Post also gave 
her two Pinocchios, said that is flat wrong, says she ignores the 
immediate impact of the law, which means noticeable tax cuts for her 
constituents for a number of years.
  And, of course, dozens of Democrats continue to state 83 percent of 
all tax breaks go to the top 1 percent. FactCheck.org--down, 
misleading, because it cites projections for 2027. In fact, the only 
way that will be true is if you vote ``no'' today. If you vote ``yes,'' 
these middle-class tax cuts are permanent.
  We have heard, today, scare tactics about the impact to Social 
Security and Medicare. Let me cite the Joint Economic Committee that 
shows the Congressional Budget Office said the Medicare trust fund 
solvency improved after tax reform. The tax reform strengthened the 
major funding source for the Medicare trust fund. Americans leaving 
disability for jobs due to a stronger economy will improve Medicare 
solvency, and the number of uninsured Americans fell--fell--after tax 
reform in the individual mandate.
  And the final point, let's talk about debts and deficits, Mr. 
Speaker. This is a pleasant surprise to hear our Democrats suddenly 
concerned. They weren't, under President Obama, when they doubled the 
national debt. They added $2 trillion in just 1 year.
  I am not going to talk about sailors who drink. I will just say this. 
Democrats were concerned, didn't care about deficits when they were 
spending your money; but now that you are spending your money, all of a 
sudden, everything is changed.
  The truth of the matter is: Who do you trust, Washington to spend 
your money, or you and your family?
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from 
engaging in personalities toward Members of the Senate.
  All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 1084, the previous question is ordered 
on the bill, as amended.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                           Motion to Recommit

  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit 
at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I am in its current form.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Larson of Connecticut moves to recommit the bill H.R. 
     6760 to the Committee on Ways and Means with instructions to 
     report the same back to the House forthwith with the 
     following amendment:
       Add at the end the following new title:

                       TITLE III--EFFECTIVE DATE

     SEC. 300. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Protect Medicare and 
     Social Security Trust Funds Act of 2018''.

[[Page H9173]]

  


     SEC. 301. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, no 
     provision of this Act (or any amendment made thereby) shall 
     take effect unless and until the Chief Actuaries of the 
     Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund and of the Old-Age and 
     Survivor Insurance and Disability Insurance Trust Funds have 
     certified that the enactment of this Act will not harm the 
     financial position of any of these trust funds. Such analysis 
     shall be based on widely agreed-upon economic theory, 
     conventionally agreed-upon economic metrics of macroeconomic 
     analysis, and accepted models of distribution and growth.

  Mr. BRADY of Texas (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I reserve a 
point of order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. A point of order is reserved.
  The Clerk will continue to read.
  The Clerk continued to read.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Connecticut (Mr. Larson) is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his 
motion.
  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I want to say 
straightforwardly to my colleagues on the other side, this is as 
straightforward and it is as simple as it can be: Nothing in this bill 
can take effect unless and until the chief actuaries have certified 
that this bill will do no harm to Medicare and Social Security.
  Now, unlike Members of Congress who have a pension plan, who have a 
Thrift Savings Plan, who also have Social Security, for one-third of 
all seniors in this country, they rely on Social Security alone; and 
for two-thirds of all seniors--and that is your mothers and fathers and 
aunts and uncles and nieces and nephews and friends and family--90 
percent of their income comes from Social Security.
  Mr. Speaker, 10,000--10,000--baby boomers become eligible for Social 
Security every single day; and yet, as Mr. Neal has pointed out, the 
lack of hearings, the lack of any substantive debate on Social Security 
and Medicare. It has been nonexistent.
  I include in the Record a letter from Robert Greenstein from the 
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, and I think it bears listening 
to so that you get a full understanding and impact of what happens when 
this so-called tax reform bill takes effect and its burden is thrust 
squarely on the people who are in most need at the time.

   [From the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Sept. 10, 2018]

Greenstein: House Republican Tax Proposal Repeats Flaws in 2017 Tax Law

       CBPP released the following statement from Robert 
     Greenstein, president, on House of Republican leaders' 
     release of their ``2.0'' tax proposal:
       Today's tax proposal from House Republican leaders doubles 
     down on the fundamental flaws of the 2017 tax law by further 
     expanding deficits and once again favoring people with the 
     highest incomes. The proposal calls for making permanent the 
     2017 law's individual tax provisions. Those provisions 
     benefit households in the top 1 percent twice as much as 
     households in the bottom 60 percent, measured as a share of 
     income.
       Making these provisions permanent would cost roughly $650 
     billion over 2019 to 2028, according to the Joint Tax 
     Committee. Large as it is, this estimate significantly 
     understates the long-term cost because the bill largely 
     affects only the final three years of the 2019-2028 ``budget 
     window.'' We estimate that the legislation would cost roughly 
     $2.9 trillion over 2026 to 2035, the first full decade it 
     would be in effect.
       The revenue loss would come at a time when the baby boom 
     generation will be retiring in large numbers and moving into 
     ``old-old age,'' causing Medicare and Social Security costs 
     to rise considerably. Indeed, 2026, the year in which most of 
     the new GOP tax legislation would start having effect, is the 
     first year in which all members of the baby boom generation--
     including the youngest--will be eligible to draw Social 
     Security retirement benefits. It's also the year in which the 
     oldest baby boomers will turn 80; people in their 80s have 
     higher health care costs, on average, than younger seniors 
     do. The nation will need more revenues to help meet these and 
     other challenges, such as a decaying infrastructure, not 
     fewer revenues,
       Policymakers should fix the flaws of the 2017 tax law, not 
     extend them and compound the damage.
       The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities is a nonprofit, 
     nonpartisan research organization and policy institute that 
     conducts research and analysis on a range of government 
     policies and programs. It is supported primarily by 
     foundation grants.

  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Greenstein says: ``We 
estimate that the legislation would cost roughly $2.9 trillion over 
2026 to 2035, the first full decade it would be in effect.
  ``The revenue loss would come at a time when the baby boom generation 
will be retiring in large numbers . . . causing Medicare and Social 
Security costs to rise considerably.''
  Indeed, when this bill kicks in in 2026, it is the first year in 
which all members of the baby boom generation, including the youngest, 
will be eligible to draw on their Social Security retirement funds. It 
is also the year in which those in that generation will turn 80; and, 
as we all know, that is the time when they need medical attention the 
most and a time when the Nation will desperately need these revenues.
  My Republican colleagues are paying for this tax reform on the backs 
of American seniors, forcing devastating cuts to Social Security and 
Medicare. Under the guise of tax reform, the trillions they are adding 
to the deficit is no accident, and cutting Social Security and Medicare 
has always been the next step.
  News flash to my colleagues who refer to Social Security and Medicare 
as an entitlement: It is not an entitlement. It is the insurance that 
people have paid for, working all their life.
  And how do we know this? How do we know this, America? Because all 
they have to do is check their pay stub where it says, ``FICA,'' 
Federal Insurance Contributions Act.
  Whose? Theirs, the hardworking people of America, who understand that 
this is the insurance that they have paid for. This is what they need 
in life. And at the very critical time when the full complement of baby 
boomers are retiring, they get burdened and saddled with this debt.

                              {time}  1030

  I would like to hope that our colleagues would at least listen to 
President Trump, President Trump, who said: We're not going to hurt the 
people who are paying into Social Security their whole life, and then, 
all of a sudden they're supposed to get less?
  I hope our colleagues follow their President's lead, and understand 
the vital importance of making sure, not only that we protect Social 
Security, that we expand it at a time when it is most critical to all 
of them.
  It would be great if we ever have a public hearing on it; but I have 
a profound inclination to understand that when Mr. Neal is chairman of 
this committee, we will take this bill up.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of a point 
of order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The reservation of a point of order is 
withdrawn.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion 
to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, you know Washington. You know 
Washington. If you don't have an argument, just scare people; just 
frighten them to death. That will work.
  But people are smart. When you calm down all the rhetoric and all the 
anger and all the outrage, what we know is this: The Congressional 
Budget Office--it isn't Republican or Democrat--it found the Medicare 
Trust Fund solvency got better after tax reform.
  In fact, tax reform strengthened the major funding source for the 
Medicare Trust Fund and now, because we have more people, especially 
those disabled, going back to work, getting a job that they had hoped 
for, it is actually improving Medicare solvency. So that great big 
scare tactic just got fact-checked.
  In fact, already this year, the Federal Government is receiving $105 
billion more, Mr. Speaker, in payroll taxes and individual taxes, and 
those payroll taxes are what are the foundation of Social Security and 
Medicare.
  The truth of the matter is, as we look at this bill, both parties 
claim to be champions of hardworking taxpayers. Well, let's check.
  So, under this bill, a single mom, working her way out of poverty, 
permanently will see $1,700 more in her paycheck each year. Democrats 
who vote ``no'' will steal that money back from that single mom.
  Middle-class family of two, two teachers in my district, with two 
kids, under this bill, permanently will see a tax cut of $2636. A 
``no'' vote steals that money back from that family.
  That Main Street business, moms and pops working all hours, all 
weekends, all year, under this bill, permanently they will see a tax 
cut of $3,000

[[Page H9174]]

every year, and they can write off on their taxes that new computer, 
that new equipment, that new improvement to their store. A ``no'' vote 
hammers America's Main Street businesses.
  Young parents, struggling to raise kids, where every dollar matters, 
this bill makes sure that that doubling of the child tax credit is 
permanent, and millions more Americans, middle-class families, will get 
help raising their precious children. A ``no'' vote is to take that 
money back from those young parents. Oh, by the way, take back their 
tax-free savings for school and college for that child as well.
  And, yes, in this bill, we make sure seniors can write off more of 
their high medical expenses. Some called it the cancer tax. A ``yes'' 
vote will help millions of seniors and millions of families with high 
medical bills more easily write those taxes off. A ``no'' vote is to 
deny American seniors, American families' ability to write off those 
taxes.
  Now, we know, thanks to ObamaCare, high out-of-pocket costs is now 
the preexisting condition. This bill makes sure that we stand on the 
side of those seniors, whether they are battling cancer or some other 
menaces.
  At the end of the day, while some would say, look, we need to raise 
the SALT cap, let me just say this: That SALT cap is a $10 tax cut for 
the middle class and a $146,000 tax cut for millionaires. In other 
words, Democrats who vote ``no'' say they just want more tax cuts for 
the rich.
  And the fact of the matter is, States are seeing a $20 billion 
windfall. State governments and Governors, all they need do, don't 
pocket that money for their budget, pass it on to hard working 
taxpayers.
  At the end of the day, revenues are up. Payroll taxes are up. Social 
Security and Medicare are strengthened.
  So at the end of the day, who do you trust? Who do you trust with 
your hard-earned money? Is it Washington, so they can take it and spend 
it on their special interests? Is it you? Is it your family? Is it your 
American Dream?
  This bill is about making sure that we choose the American people. We 
choose you, the middle-class families. We choose you, Main Street 
America, to better use your money than Washington does.
  As we conclude, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank our tax team, led 
by Barbara Angus, our Chief Tax Counsel, Aharon Friedman, Randy Gartin, 
Aaron Junge, Loren Ponds, John Sandell, Donald Schneider, Victoria 
Glover, John Schoenecker, and Quinton Brady, for doing a remarkable job 
for us and for the American people.
  I urge a ``yes'' on protecting tax cuts for individuals, middle-class 
families, and small businesses.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  September 28, 2018, on Page H9174, the following appeared: The 
SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit. 
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: The SPEAKER pro 
tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit. The question 
was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 

  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________