[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 208 (Wednesday, December 9, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7291-S7292]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                              Coronavirus

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I am hoping that we will be able to pass a 
COVID relief bill before Christmas. As the leader has said earlier, we 
don't need to resolve all of our differences to pass a bill. We can 
pass targeted legislation that focuses on the priorities that we all 
agree need to be addressed. As the leader pointed out earlier this 
morning on the floor, Republicans here in the Senate have tried 
repeatedly, going back to last summer, to move legislation that is 
targeted, that is fiscally responsible, and that addresses the key 
needs that are being experienced and the challenges that are being felt 
by the American people during the pandemic.
  In fact, as recently as October, we had a majority of U.S. Senators 
here on the floor that attempted to get on a bill--a targeted, fiscally 
responsible bill--that addressed the needs that our small businesses 
have, with additional funding for the PPP program; that provided an 
extension for unemployment insurance for people who were unemployed; 
that provided funding for vaccine distribution; that also provided 
funding for frontline workers and, I should add, funding for schools 
and universities. It was a very targeted, fiscally responsible bill. It 
was voted on here in the Senate not only once but twice.
  Both in September and October, we brought a bill to the floor and 
couldn't even get on it because the Democratic leadership decided to 
block that bill. So we didn't even have a debate. Not only could we not 
get a vote on something that represented a good-faith effort at 
addressing the key needs that are being felt by the American people as 
a result of the pandemic, but we couldn't even get on the bill to 
debate it.
  So we are trying yet one more time, and I hope this time we will meet 
with success because I do believe that we need to pass COVID relief 
before the end of the year, and I hope Members of the Democratic 
leadership will decide that they are willing to move forward to meet 
our country's most critical COVID priorities


              Remote and Mobile Worker Relief Act of 2020

  Mr. President, on the subject of COVID relief, there is another issue 
that we should address before the end of the year, and that is tax 
relief for remote and mobile workers. The complicated tax situation 
facing mobile workers has been an issue for a while now, but it has 
been thrown into especially sharp relief by the pandemic.
  As everyone knows, medical professionals around the country have 
traveled to hard-hit areas this year to help hospitals deal with the 
influx of COVID cases. But what many people don't realize is that these 
medical professionals, like other mobile workers, are likely to face a 
complicated tax situation this year as a result. For the majority of 
Americans, State income tax is fairly uncomplicated. Most Americans 
work in the same State in which they reside. So there is no question as 
to which State will be taxing their income.
  For mobile workers, however--like traveling nurses or technicians or 
the medical professionals who responded to COVID in hard-hit areas--the 
situation is a lot more complicated. Like most Americans, their income 
is subject to taxation in the State in which their permanent home is 
located, but any income that they earned in a State other than their 
State of residence is also subject to taxation in the State in which 
they earned it.
  Now, individuals can generally receive a tax credit in their home 
State for income tax paid to another State, thus avoiding double 
taxation of their income. I would add, however, that for States that 
don't have an income tax--and there are many of those across the 
country, including my home State of South Dakota--there is no tax 
credit against income tax paid because there is no income tax paid in 
the home State.
  But mobile workers' income tax situation is extremely complicated, as 
they generally have to file tax returns in multiple States, and it is 
made even more complicated by the fact that States have a multitude of 
different rules governing just when income earned in their State starts 
to be taxed. Some States give up to a 60-day window before income 
earned by mobile workers in their State is subject to taxation. Other 
States start taxing mobile workers immediately.
  Navigating different States' requirements can make for a miserable 
tax season for mobile workers, and it can also be a real burden for 
their employers. It is particularly challenging for smaller businesses, 
which frequently lack the in-house tax staff and tracking capabilities 
of larger organizations.
  The situation has long cried out for a solution. For the past four 
Congresses, I have introduced legislation, the Mobile Workforce State 
Income Tax Simplification Act, to create a uniform standard for mobile 
workers. It is a bipartisan bill, and under that bill if you spend 30 
days or fewer working in a different State, you would be taxed as 
normal by your home State. If you spend more than 30 days working in a 
different State, you would be subject to that other State's income tax 
in addition to income tax from your home State.
  In June of this year, I introduced an updated version of my mobile 
workforce bill: the Remote and Mobile Worker Relief Act. Like my 
original mobile workforce bill, the Remote and Mobile Worker Relief Act 
would create a uniform 30-day standard governing State income tax 
liability for mobile workers. But my new bill goes further and 
addresses some of the particular challenges faced by mobile and remote 
workers as a result of the coronavirus.
  The Remote and Mobile Worker Relief Act would establish a special 90-
day standard for healthcare workers who travel to another State to help 
during the pandemic. This should ensure that these workers don't face 
an expected tax bill for the contributions that they make to fighting 
the coronavirus.
  My new bill also addresses the possible tax complications that could 
face remote workers as a result of the pandemic. During the coronavirus 
crisis, many workers who usually travel to their offices every day have 
ended up working from home. This doesn't present a tax problem for most 
employees, but it does present a possible problem for workers who live 
in a different State than the one in which they work.
  Under current State law, these workers usually pay most or all of 
their State income taxes to the State in which they earn this income 
rather than their State of residence. However, now that some workers 
who usually work in a different State have been working from home, 
there is a risk that their State of residence could consider the 
resulting income as allocated to and taxable by it as well. That could 
mean a higher tax bill for a lot of workers.
  My bill would preempt this problem by codifying the prepandemic 
status quo. Under my bill, if you planned to work in North Carolina but 
had to work from home in South Carolina during the pandemic, your 
income would still be taxed as if you were going in to the office in 
North Carolina every day, just as it would have been if the pandemic 
had never happened.

[[Page S7292]]

  Relief for mobile workers is a bipartisan idea. A version of my 
original mobile workforce bill has passed the House of Representatives 
multiple times, and the only reason it hasn't advanced so far in the 
U.S. Senate is because of the opposition of a handful of States, like 
New York, that aggressively tax temporary workers.
  New York, of course, was the epicenter of the pandemic in the United 
States early on, and medical professionals from across the country came 
to New York to work and to help out. Now, one would think that their 
presence would be an occasion for profound gratitude, but New York 
Governor Andrew Cuomo apparently also regards them as an opportunity 
for a tax windfall. That is right. Despite the fact that these workers 
provided indispensable help to New York in the worst period during the 
pandemic, in May Governor Cuomo announced that these workers would 
nevertheless be subject to New York's substantial income tax for the 
time that they spent working in the State.
  It is unconscionable that we would allow healthcare professionals who 
risked their lives--risked their own lives--to care for individuals in 
coronavirus-stricken States to be punished with unexpected tax bills. 
And we need to make sure that Americans who work from home to help slow 
the spread of the virus don't face a complicated tax situation or an 
unexpectedly high tax bill as a result.
  It would be wonderful to see the Democratic leader who, of course, 
hails from New York, speak up to endorse remote and mobile worker 
relief. He should make it clear whether he agrees with Governor Cuomo's 
decision to cash in on COVID relief workers' assistance or whether he 
thinks these vital medical professionals should be spared unexpected 
tax bills.
  I really hope that he is not actively standing in the way of my bill 
in order to protect Governor Cuomo's efforts to boost New York's 
coffers at healthcare workers' expense. I encourage him to make it 
clear where he stands on this issue.
  I intend to do everything I can to ensure that my bill receives a 
vote in the Senate before Christmas. Passing this legislation would 
spare a lot of workers a lot of misery when April comes around.
  Americans have been through enough this year. Let's not add 
unexpected tax bills to the equation

                          ____________________