• A bill to ban politicians from trading stocks just passed a key Senate committee.
• Lawmakers would have to sell off stocks starting next term, and the VP and president in 2029.
• Trump condemned the bill, saying it could be used against him.

A bill to ban politicians from trading stocks in office moved one step closer to a vote — but only after an hour of intense argument and insults between Republicans.

The Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee passed the bill on an 8-7 vote.

All Democrats voted for it, while every Republican voted against it except one: Josh Hawley of Missouri, who sponsored the bill.

It is unclear when or if the bill would become law — the next step would be a Senate vote. But hours after the bill passed, Trump condemned Hawley in a Truth Social post and said that the bill could be used to target him.

"I don't think real Republicans want to see their President, who has had unprecedented success, TARGETED, because of the 'whims' of a second-tier Senator named Josh Hawley!" Trump wrote.

Trump had previously said he would sign a congressional stock trading ban into law, and earlier on Wednesday, he had told reporters that he liked Hawley's bill "conceptually."

The legislation is broadly similar to a bill that passed the same committee last summer, but never received a Senate floor vote.

This version would ban members of Congress, the president, and the vice president from buying stocks immediately upon enactment, and would block them from selling stocks beginning 90 days after that.

It would then require lawmakers to divest entirely from their stock holdings at the beginning of their next term, and it would require the president and vice President to do so beginning in 2029 — after President Donald Trump's current term.

It also would not allow for blind trusts, which sets it apart from other similar bills.

"I think we have to accept that the American people think that all of us, Democrats and Republicans, are using our positions and our access to enrich ourselves," Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan said during the hearing. "People don't believe that we are here for the right reasons. We have a problem."

Senate Majority Leader John Thune has said that he believes current disclosure laws are sufficient, while House Speaker Mike Johnson has expressed cautious support for a ban.

'I'm not a billionaire, unlike others on this committee'

The bill ultimately passed despite the furious objections of several GOP senators on the committee — and tense intraparty debate.

Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who was the CEO of a plastics manufacturing company before he was elected to the Senate, argued that the stock divestiture requirements would discourage businesspeople from seeking federal office.

"We make it very unattractive for people to step up to the plate," Johnson said. "This piece of legislation, really, it's legislative demagoguery."

Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, the chairman of the committee, said that existing laws banning insider trading and requiring stock trade disclosures were sufficient, calling Hawley's bill a "solution looking for publicity."

Another key issue was how the bill would apply to the president and vice president — it would block them from buying and selling stocks, but wouldn't force them to divest any holdings during their current terms.

Trump owns individual stocks, while Vance divested from his individual stock holdings during his Senate tenure.

Paul argued that the bill would "protect Donald Trump" by not requiring divestiture before 2029, arguing that provision demonstrated that the bill was "crummy."

Meanwhile, Sen. Rick Scott of Florida said the bill was an attack on Vance and Trump.

"Trump has gone through unbelievable hell," Scott told reporters after the hearing, referring to his indictments and impeachments. He said the bill would "allow the Democrats to go after the President of the United States."

Much of the hearing was taken up by Hawley sparring with fellow Republicans on the committee. After Scott raised a question about a provision of the bill applying to illiquid assets, Hawley snapped back at him, pointing out that he supported last year's bill.

"It's the same one you voted for last year," Hawley said.

At one point, during a tense exchange with Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma over the bill's elimination of blind trusts, Hawley made a passing reference to Scott's wealth.

"I practice what I preach. I don't have individual stocks, I don't trade in stocks," Hawley said as Scott sat beside him. "I'm not a billionaire, unlike others on this committee."

Scott, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, is one of the wealthiest members of Congress. Minutes later, he said it was "disgusting" to criticize lawmakers for their wealth.

"I don't know when in this country it became a negative to make money," Scott said as he described his modest upbringing. "This idea that we're going to attack people because they make money is wrong. It's absolutely wrong."

Not surprisingly, Congress is pushing back against the Trump administration's proposal to cancel the Space Launch System, the behemoth rocket NASA has developed to propel astronauts back to the Moon.

Spending bills making their way through both houses of Congress reject the White House's plan to wind down the SLS rocket after two more launches, but the text of a draft budget recently released by the House Appropriations Committee suggests an openness to making some major changes to the program.

The next SLS flight, called Artemis II, is scheduled to lift off early next year to send a crew of four astronauts around the far side of the Moon. Artemis III will follow a few years later on a mission to attempt a crew lunar landing at the Moon's south pole. These missions follow Artemis I, a successful unpiloted test flight in 2022.

Read full article

Comments

This has been a good week for the US space agency in terms of the federal budget.

On Tuesday, a committee in the US House of Representatives passed a $24.8 billion budget bill for the coming fiscal year. Then, two days later a Senate committee passed a $24.9 billion budget for NASA. Both of these measures would keep funding more or less at the level of the current fiscal year and, for the most part, keep the space agency's programs going on their current trajectories.

These bills are not final. Both must move through the full House and Senate, and then be reconciled before going to President Trump for his signature. And time is running out, with fiscal year 2026 set to begin on October 1, just a little more than ten weeks from now.

Read full article

Comments

• The US government spent $5 trillion to stimulate the economy during the pandemic.
• Much was lost to fraud, and several bills would extend deadlines to file charges.
• A bill involving the Shuttered Venue Operators Grant, which BI previously reported on, moved forward Wednesday.

A Senate committee on Wednesday advanced a bill that would give prosecutors more time to bring fraud charges tied to two pandemic-era relief programs — including one that, as Business Insider has reported, awarded millions of dollars to wealthy musicians who used the money on private jets, luxury goods, and parties.

Federal investigators believe at least 6% of the $5 trillion allocated for pandemic relief was routed to fraudsters or people and businesses who didn't qualify. Prosecutors have brought charges over a small fraction of that spending, and could run out of time to bring charges in thousands of cases that were referred to them.

Currently, prosecutors have five years after many fraud-related crimes occur to bring charges. The bill would give them an extra five years to file criminal charges against anyone who defrauded the $28 billion Restaurant Revitalization Fund or the $14 billion Shuttered Venue Operators Grant.

Originally pitched as a lifeline for independent venues and arts groups, the SVOG program ended up awarding billions with limited guardrails, and a Business Insider investigation found that pop stars like Chris Brown, Lil Wayne, and Marshmello used the money for jets, bonuses, and a birthday bash.

Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa, who chairs the Small Business Committee that moved the bill forward, told Business Insider that the government should be "going after the people that truly didn't deserve the money."

"What we saw was a lot of celebrities that were gaming the system," she said, "that were able to take those dollars and buy jets and throw fancy parties and do things like that — boost up their wardrobe. That's not what the dollars were for."

The celebrities Business Insider reported on didn't previously reply to comment requests, except for Lil Wayne, who responded to a reporter's questions with an explicit sexual overture. The SBA has defended its fraud controls and said in late 2024 that it was still looking into some grants.

The agency has recently sent out hundreds of letters to SVOG grantees demanding that they repay their grants, according to people in the entertainment industry, but details on which grantees were targeted were not available.

Maggie Clemmons, an agency representative, told BI that the SBA is "continuously fighting to claw back fraudulently-obtained COVID funds, including within the SVOG program" and criticized "inaction" by the Biden administration.

The Restaurant Revitalization Fund, which cut checks of up to $10 million, has been scrutinized by auditors. Nearly a quarter of funds were awarded without doing enough to verify that grantees were eligible, the Small Business Administration's inspector general said last year, and the agency found that improper payments were "likely" in 53 out of 122 restaurant awards it analyzed.

The bill still needs to pass the Senate and House of Representatives before it becomes law. And even if the statute of limitations to bring charges is extended, whether prosecutors will clear out the backlog of pandemic-fraud cases is an open question. The agency's inspector general has said the SBA should also extend the time period for which grant recipients hold on to their records.

"My hope would be that given the priorities of the Department of Justice, that somewhere in that mix, we have those that will go after the fraudsters," Ernst said. "Fraud is fraud, and our taxpayers really need to know that the federal government takes it seriously."

The Ernst bill, the SBA Fraud Enforcement Extension Act, advanced without opposition from Democrats.

In 2022, lawmakers similarly extended the deadline to bring fraud charges over the Paycheck Protection Program and Economic Injury Disaster Loans from five years to 10.

Congress also allocated at least $653 billion to fund extra unemployment benefits during the pandemic. The House of Representatives passed a bill in March to allow more time to prosecute unemployment benefit fraud, but that bill hasn't advanced in the Senate.

• Lawmakers worry that military housing funds may again be diverted to domestic operations.
• Barracks have been plagued with maintenance issues for years, impacting troop morale and safety.
• The Army and Marine Corps are seeking more funding to address barracks and quality of life concerns.

As lawmakers negotiate next year's defense bill, some are sounding alarms over the possibility that funds intended to improve housing for junior troops could instead be diverted to support military operations at home.

In a hearing on Tuesday, Rep. Sara Jacobs, a California Democrat, pushed to add two stipulations into the House version of the National Defense Authorization Act aimed at safeguarding funding for military barracks and childcare centers. The proposals would have prohibited using the funds for domestic deployments of troops — specifically in support of immigration enforcement — and barred their transfer to border operations.

"This is simply saying that the money that we allocate as Congress for barracks and child development centers and quality of life infrastructure should be used for barracks and child development centers and quality of life infrastructure, not anything else," she said during the hearing.

Both additions were shot down along party lines.

Military barracks, dormitories where unmarried junior troops are housed, have long been plagued by maintenance issues. Many buildings are decades-old and have fallen into disrepair during 20 years of war in the Middle East.

"This is about actually showing our service members that we care about them," Rep. Jill Tokuda, a Democrat from Hawaii, said during the hearing, highlighting instances of barracks rooms overrun by black mold, leaky plumbing, unreliable electrical and A/C systems, and a lack of kitchens.

A 2022 government watchdog report noted how continuously delayed maintenance aggravates problems for the military's buildings around the world, valued at $1.3 trillion overall. In fiscal year 2020, for instance, the DoD's deferred maintenance backlog amounted to over $137 billion, exacerbated by "competing priorities".

A separate report the following year found widespread concerns about barracks management oversight and hazardous health risks to troops— and noted that shoddy conditions harm troop morale.

The services have taken note after coming under fire for the poor living conditions highlighted in the reports and scandalous news reports of substandard living conditions.

The Army sought $2.35 billion last year to address barracks concerns, an over 60% increase in funding from the year prior. The Marine Corps, meanwhile, has undertaken a decade-long, nearly $11 billion refurbishment program.

"The idea is not to fix it and forget it," Lt. Gen. James Adams, Deputy Commandant for Programs and Resources, said of the initiative during a panel at the Modern Day Marine expo in April, explaining that the Corps partly "got ourselves into the position we're in now" by neglecting maintenance.

But the military is facing maintenance woes on other fronts too— one of the Army's biggest bases was forced to dissolve its teams that oversaw preventative housing maintenance last month, amid federal government cuts, according to Military.com. And the Pentagon sought to shift $1 billion intended for Army barracks to finance deployments to the southern border earlier this year.

In a statement provided to Business Insider, Jacobs said that funds approved for barracks issues and childcare centers — which have faced staffing shortages and meager pay — are already a comparatively modest sum, considering the level of disrepair with which some facilities must contend.

"There's not enough money as it is to upgrade and maintain quality of life infrastructure like barracks and child development centers, and address urgent issues like mold and broken heating and A/C units," Jacobs wrote. "None of this money should be diverted for any reason — let alone to terrorize immigrant communities and stifle dissent."

"The fact that a billion dollars in the first six months of this administration was diverted from barracks and quality of life and operations and maintenance to the border is sending the message that we really don't care about your health and wellness," Tokuda said during the hearing, adding that money transfers were equivalent to "essentially guaranteeing that we will ultimately never fix these barracks."

A budget-writing panel in the House of Representatives passed a $24.8 billion NASA budget bill Tuesday, joining a similar subcommittee in the Senate in maintaining the space agency's funding after the White House proposed a nearly 25 percent cut.

The budget bills making their way through the House and Senate don't specify funding levels for individual programs, but the topline numbers—$24.8 billion in the House version and $24.9 billion the Senate bill—represent welcome news for scientists, industry, and space enthusiasts bracing for severe cuts requested by the Trump administration.

The spending plan passed Tuesday by the House Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies covers NASA and numerous other federal agencies. The $24.8 billion budget the House seeks for NASA is $6 billion more than the Trump administration's budget proposal, and keeps NASA's funding next year the same as this year.

Read full article

Comments

Trump's new proposal includes tax cuts, student loan reforms, and stricter rules for Medicaid and SNAP. Here's what the four biggest changes could mean for you.

• President Donald Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" passed the House and is now headed to his desk.
• The tax and spending bill passed in a 218-214 vote on Thursday.
• Trump had urged GOP lawmakers to get the bill passed by July 4.

President Donald Trump's Big Beautiful Bill is one step closer to becoming law — and reshaping policy from Medicaid to taxes.

The House passed the massive spending bill on Thursday afternoon in a 218-214 vote.

Every Democrat voted against the bill, along with two Republicans: Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.

The final passage came after House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries spoke for roughly eight hours and 45 minutes in opposition to the bill, breaking the record for the longest House floor speech in American history.

The bill now heads to Trump's desk for signing, which could happen as soon as Friday, July 4.

The bill underwent a number of changes since the House passed an initial version in May. That included the eventual removal of a provision aimed at preventing states from regulating AI for 10 years. The bill passed the upper chamber on Tuesday, with Vice President JD Vance casting the tie-breaking vote after three GOP senators opposed it.

The bill will have a sweeping impact on Americans' wallets and the country's fiscal health. In addition to extending the 2017 tax cuts, making cuts to Medicaid, and repealing student loan forgiveness, the bill is also expected to add trillions to the deficit over the next ten years.

In May, Moody's Analytics downgraded the US's credit rating, citing rising federal debt. This could lead to higher interest rates on mortgages, auto loans, and more down the road.

Republicans passed the bill despite vehement opposition from Elon Musk, the former face of DOGE.

Musk had criticized the bill's impact on the deficit and its phase-out of green energy tax credits, some of which benefit Tesla. That led to his epic feud with Trump, which remains ongoing to this day.

On Monday, Musk vowed to support primary challengers against any Republicans who supported the bill and said that if it passed, he would form a new political party, called the America Party.

Republicans have largely brushed all of that off.

"Similar threats have been made before, and I'm unsure if anything's come of those threats," Rep. Brian Jack of Georgia told BI on Wednesday.

• The Senate is debating Trump's spending bill and could vote on it as early as Monday.
• The huge piece of legislation could affect all aspects of American life and has divided lawmakers.
• Elon Musk, until recently a Trump ally, called the bill "utterly insane" and "political suicide."

The bromance between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk is most definitely over.

The Tesla CEO, who until recently was the face of the White House DOGE Office and Trump's efforts to cut government spending, had some more choice words for the president's signature spending bill on Saturday.

"The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country! Utterly insane and destructive," Musk said on X. "It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future."

Senate Republicans managed to push the bill past a key procedural hurdle over the weekend, allowing debate to begin. A final vote could come as early as Monday.

Republicans have hoped to get a version of the bill to Trump's desk by the president's requested July 4 deadline. Some lawmakers, however, remain opposed to the bill.

Democrats, meanwhile, have remained united in their opposition, and have found a surprise ally in Musk.

In his criticisms on Sunday, Musk focused on provisions in the bill that would terminate Biden-era tax credits for renewable energy, such as solar, wind, and battery manufacturing.

Tesla, Musk's automotive company, has an energy generation and storage business that earned $2.7 billion in revenue during Q1 2025. The company also uses batteries and solar cells in many of its products.

In response to an X post from Michael Thomas — the founder of Cleanview, a company that tracks clean energy development — who said the bill would likely decrease energy capacity in the country, Musk said the bill would be "incredibly destructive" for the United States.

In another post, Musk shared a poll about the bill and said it would be "political suicide" for the Republican Party. He also reposted several posts criticizing the bill, including one by Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican.

"'BBB' = our credit rating if this bill becomes law," Massie wrote on X.

Trump's mega bill will impact nearly every aspect of American life, including healthcare, student loans, taxes, Social Security, Medicaid, clean energy, defense, immigration, tipping, AI regulation, and more.

Musk's X posts echo remarks he made earlier this month when his feud with Trump took a public turn. Musk called the bill a "disgusting abomination" on X before laying into Trump's personal life.

At the time, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Business Insider said the situation was "an unfortunate episode from Elon, who is unhappy with the One Big Beautiful Bill because it does not include the policies he wanted. The President is focused on passing this historic piece of legislation and making our country great again."

The tech billionaire later apologized to Trump on X, saying he regretted "some" of his posts and that they "went too far."

Representatives for the White House and Musk did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

• Bernie Sanders says AI should be used to give people a shorter workweek.
• "Let's use technology to benefit workers," Sanders said on Joe Rogan's podcast.
• The Vermont senator introduced a bill to require a 32-hour workweek last year.

Could AI help enable workers to work fewer hours each week? Sen. Bernie Sanders thinks so.

In an episode of the Joe Rogan Experience released on Tuesday, the Vermont senator said that if it were up to him, increases in productivity and efficiency brought by artificial intelligence and automation would be used to give time back to workers.

"You're a worker, your productivity is increasing because we give you AI, right?" Sanders said. "Instead of throwing you out on the street, I'm going to reduce your workweek to 32 hours."

"Let's use technology to benefit workers," he continued. "That means, give you more time with your family, with your friends, for education, whatever the hell you want to do. You don't have to work 40 hours a week anymore."

Sanders introduced the "Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act" last year. The act would require employers to provide overtime pay for any time worked beyond 32 hours, which is equivalent to eight hours per day for four days. The change would be phased in over four years.

The idea of a 32-hour workweek has gained momentum in recent years, and some companies, including those that use AI, have already begun to experiment with it.

Top CEOs have also predicted that AI will spur shorter workweeks.

Rogan also pressed Sanders during the episode about what happens if virtually all work becomes automated and whether people can find purpose in life without jobs.

"Work has been so essential to human existence forever, right? And you're suddenly taking that away," Sanders said. "What do people do? How do they relate to each other? All I would say at this moment is the answer is not to fall in love with your AI creature out there."

"Who knows, but I think human beings are capable of finding, replacing work with other emotionally satisfying things," Sanders said. "I think we can do it."

• Elon Musk reshared two posts from Trump on Sunday amid protests in LA.
• It comes days after the feud between the two men reached a peak.
• Musk also shared an image of a masked protester waving a Mexican flag, writing: "This is not ok."

Elon Musk is back to cheering President Donald Trump on — for now.

On Sunday night, amid protests in the Los Angeles area, Musk posted a screenshot of a Truth Social post from Trump denouncing California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass.

The president and his allies have cast the ongoing demonstrations, which began in response to immigration raids, as an "insurrection." His administration ordered the deployment of 2,000 National Guard members to the LA area over Newsom's objections.

Earlier on Sunday night, Musk reposted a Truth Social post screenshot from Vice President JD Vance about the administration's response, adding two American flag emojis.

He also shared an image of a masked protester waving a Mexican flag on top of a damaged vehicle, writing: "This is not ok."

The posts come just days after the feud between Musk and Trump reached a fever pitch last week. At one point, Musk approvingly shared a post suggesting that Trump be impeached, while Trump floated revoking Musk's companies' government contracts.

The public fighting between the two men largely subsided over the weekend, and Musk deleted some of his posts, including one declaring that Trump was in the "Epstein files."

Trump has said that he has no plans to repair his relationship with Musk.

The feud began after Musk departed his role as the informal leader of the White House DOGE Office, with the tech titan criticizing Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" for adding trillions to the deficit over the next 10 years.

• Two House Republicans voted against the "Big Beautiful Bill" on Thursday.
• Now, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt says Trump wants them to face primary challenges.
• "I don't think he likes to see grandstanders in Congress," she said.

Four months into his second term, President Donald Trump wants members of his own party thrown out of office over their perceived lack of loyalty to his "Big Beautiful Bill"

That was the message delivered by White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt after two Republicans — Reps. Warren Davidson of Ohio and Thomas Massie of Kentucky — voted against Trump's bill as it passed the House on Thursday.

Asked by a reporter at a briefing later on Thursday whether Trump think the duo should be primaried, Leavitt responded: "I believe he does."

"I don't think he likes to see grandstanders in Congress," Leavitt said. "'What's the alternative?' I would ask those members of Congress. Did they want to see a tax hike? Did they want to see our country go bankrupt?"

Both Massie and Davidson are deficit hawks who voted against the bill because, in their view, it did not cut spending enough.

Other Republicans have raised concerns about the bill's effect on the deficit but voted for it anyway. Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland, the chairman of the hardline House Freedom Caucus, voted "present."

In response to Leavitt's comments, Massie asked for donations on X.

"For voting on principle, I now have the President AND his press Secretary campaigning against me from the White House podium," Massie wrote. "Can you help me by donating?"

A spokesperson for Davidson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

While the Ohio congressman doesn't typically cross Trump, the president has long been critical of Massie — and vice versa. The Kentucky Republican backed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis during the 2024 GOP primary, and Trump previously called for Massie to face a primary challenge in 2020.

Earlier this week, Trump bashed Massie in front of reporters.

"I don't think Thomas Massie understands government. I think he's a grandstander," Trump said on Tuesday. "I think he should be voted out of office."

• The GOP renamed "MAGA accounts" to "Trump accounts."
• If approved, $1,000 will go to any baby born between 2024 and 2028.
• Sen. Ted Cruz — the person who came up with the idea — says he doesn't mind the Trumpified name.

First, they were called "MAGA accounts." Now, they're "Trump accounts."

As part of their "One Big Beautiful Bill," Republicans on Capitol Hill want to establish new investment accounts for American children. Under the plan, babies born after January 31, 2024 and before January 1, 2029 — essentially, the last three years of President Donald Trump's term — will receive $1,000 for the account from the federal government.

The original name was an acronym for "Money Account for Growth and Advancement" — the same initials as Trump's political movement. In a last-minute change before the House passed their version of the "Big Beautiful Bill" on Thursday, "MAGA" was replaced with "Trump."

While the president stands to get the credit, it was Sen. Ted Cruz's idea to create "Invest America" accounts. The Texas Republican says he doesn't mind.

"What I care is that they remain in there," Cruz told BI, referring to the provision's inclusion in the larger bill. "I think it doesn't matter what they're called. What it matters is what they do."

In terms of political branding, it's further than other recent presidents have gone. President Joe Biden, for instance, chose not to sign COVID-19 stimulus checks like Trump did — though he later said it was "stupid" not to do so.

Other government-backed programs have taken on the name of their creators. The Affordable Care Act, championed by President Barack Obama, is commonly known as "Obamacare," though that was initially a Republican epithet. And Sens. William Roth and Claiborne Pell have also found their names written into the tax code.

"That is not unusual," Cruz said. "You have things like Roth IRAs that were named after Senator Roth. You have things like Pell Grants that were named after Senator Pell. You have things like Obamacare that were named after President Obama."

It's unclear exactly why the accounts were named after Trump, and the White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Cruz had pitched the idea as a way to give kids a stake in the free market from an early age, allowing them to potentially reap financial benefits down the line while making them less likely to support socialism.

"It enables every newborn child in America to experience the enormous benefits of compounded growth, and to accumulate significant resources with the passage of time," Cruz said. "It creates a generation of new capitalists."

According to the bill, individuals with "Trump accounts" will be able to use the savings for things like higher education and first-time home purchases starting at age 18.

Money taken out of the account for those purposes will be taxed as long-term capital gains, while money withdrawn for other purposes is taxed as regular income.

• Republicans are trying to pass Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill" in the coming weeks.
• It includes new tax cuts, changes to Medicaid, saving accounts for kids, and other provisions.
• Here's what you should know about the centerpiece of Trump's legislative agenda.

For months, President Donald Trump has pursued his sweeping agenda through executive actions. Now comes the hard part.

Republicans on Capitol Hill are finally putting pen to paper on what Trump has called the "One Big Beautiful Bill," a sweeping fiscal package that will serve as the centerpiece of the president's legislative agenda.

The bill includes GOP priorities like no taxes on tips or overtime, cuts to Medicaid, "MAGA accounts" for children and several other provisions.

It will take weeks for lawmakers in the House and Senate to work out the final details, and it's likely that some changes will be made along the way. Republicans hope to send the bill to Trump's desk by July 4.

Here's what you should know about what's in the "One Big Beautiful Bill."

The bill includes cuts to Medicaid, and millions could lose health coverage

As part of the plan approved by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, states would implement work requirements in 2029 for childless adults on Medicaid who do not have a disability, mandating they work for 80 hours a month.

A component of the plan would increase the price of doctors' visits, mandating beneficiaries making above the federal poverty limit to pay co-payments of up to $35. States would also be required to stop taxing hospitals and nursing homes in order to secure more federal funding.

Medicaid recipients in some states would have more paperwork to regularly confirm their residency status and income. And the plan would lower federal funding for some recipients in states that fund medical coverage for undocumented immigrants.

The Congress Budget Office estimated the legislation would save about $912 billion over the next decade in federal spending, about $715 billion of which would derive from Medicaid and Affordable Care Act cuts. The CBO said about 8.6 million people could lose their insurance coverage.

The plan came short of expectations among some ultraconservatives who wanted more Medicaid cuts at the federal level. Some GOP leaders wanted per-capita caps for those in Medicaid expansion states and a lower across-the-board rate at which the federal government supplements each state's funding for Medicaid programs.

Democrats have strongly opposed the bill, emphasizing that millions of Americans will potentially have their lives uprooted by Medicaid cuts.

No tax on tips or overtime, making Trump's 2017 tax cuts permanent, and more

Some of Trump's flashiest campaign promises were to remove taxes on tips, overtime, and Social Security. This bill largely gets those done, but only for the next four years — lawmakers will have to decide whether to renew the cuts in 2029.

The bill would allow workers in an "occupation that traditionally and customarily receives tips" to claim a tax deduction for the sum of all tips that they received in the previous year. It would also do the same for overtime wages. Neither deduction is available to anyone who is a "highly compensated employee."

To help accomplish Trump's "no taxes on Social Security" pledge, Republicans created a new $4,000 tax deduction for seniors making less than $75,000 per year. There's also a provision in the bill to fulfill Trump's promise of no taxes on car loan interest.

There's also an extension of the child tax credit, which is currently $2,000 but was set to decrease to $1,000 after this year. The bill would increase the credit to $2,500 through 2028, then it would drop to $2,000 permanently after that.

If you're thinking of buying an electric vehicle, you might want to do so before the end of the year. The bill would eliminate existing tax credits for new and used EVs, and it would impose an annual registration fee of $250 for EV owners.

The bill also makes permanent a slew of tax cuts that Trump and Republicans enacted in 2017. The average American won't feel much of a difference, since they've probably gotten used to the existing tax rates and brackets that have existed since 2018. But it's the most consequential part of the bill from a budgetary perspective, adding trillions to the deficit over the next several years.

MAGA savings accounts

The bill establishes "Money account for growth and advancement" accounts, or MAGA accounts, for children. The idea was originally proposed by Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.

The federal government would pay $1,000 to babies born from 2024 through 2028. After the cutoff, parents will still be able to put $5,000 per year into each account.

Cruz's proposal is similar to previous Democratic-led efforts for "baby bonds," but the biggest difference is that there is no income cutoff. Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, a Democrat, envisioned a program primarily targeted at low-income families.

A repeal of Biden's student loan forgiveness plans

If enacted, the reconciliation bill would mean major changes for student-loan borrowers. The legislation proposes terminating all existing income-driven student-loan repayment plans, including Biden's SAVE income-driven repayment plan, which would have shortened the timeline for debt relief and provided cheaper monthly payments. While SAVE is currently paused due to litigation, Trump and Republican lawmakers have said they would not carry out the plan if it survives in court.

Under the bill, borrowers would have two repayment plan options: one, called the Repayment Assistance Plan, would allow for loan forgiveness after 360 qualifying payments, and the other option would be a standard repayment plan with a fixed monthly payment over a fixed time period set by the servicer.

Payments made under the Repayment Assistance Plan would be calculated based on the borrower's income and would count toward Public Service Loan Forgiveness.

A 10-year ban on state-level AI laws

House lawmakers handed a major win to Big Techby including a 10-year federal preemption on all state artificial intelligence laws in the larger bill. Congress has talked about a federal AI policy, but no serious legislative proposals have emerged.

In the meantime, states have tried to fill to void. Major tech companies have long fought state-level AI regulations. Last year, California lawmakers passed the nation's most sweeping AI legislation only for Gov. Gavin Newsom to veto it.

Meta, OpenAI, and Anthropic lobbied against California's bill. Meta recently wrote to the White House that state laws "could impede innovation and investment."

The issue isn't going away. In the 2024 legislative session, lawmakers in at least 45 states introduced AI-related bills, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Unlike most of the other provisions on this list, the AI regulation ban faces major hurdles to making it into law. Republicans must adhere to strict parliamentary rules to pass Trump's bill without facing a Democratic filibuster in the Senate. One rule is that all provisions must be primarily fiscal in nature, and many expect that the AI provision will fail that test.

A debt ceiling hike, the end of IRS Direct file, money for a border wall, and more

Avoiding default: Republicans would raise the debt limit by $4 trillion, staving off a potential default that could come later this summer. One way or another, Congress will have to address the debt issue soon. The federal government is expected to exhaust its borrowing ability sometime in August.

Billions for missile defense: Trump wants the US to have a futuristic missile defense system inspired by Israel's vaunted "Iron Dome" air defenses, but the US shield would include space-based components and focus on longer-range missile threats rather than the smaller weapons Israel faces. House Republicans have allocated roughly $25 billion for overall missile defense, most of which will go to the "Golden Dome" project.

700 more miles of Trump's border wall: Republicans proposed spending roughly $47 billion on border barriers, which will cover 701 miles of "primary wall," 900 miles of river barriers, and 629 miles of secondary barriers. Trump repeatedly fought in his first term to build a massive border wall between the US and Mexico but struggled to get funding through Congress.

A big tax increase on large university endowments: Republicans would significantly increase Trump's 2017 groundbreaking tax on colleges and universities with large endowments. Under the bill, the tax rate would be tied to the size of their endowment, adjusted by student enrollment.At the low end, the rate would remain at 1.4%. At the highest level, universities would pay 21% tax if they have an endowment of $2 million or more per student.

IRS direct file: The big beautiful bill would officially kill off the IRS's Direct File program, a Biden-era initiative that has long been a subject of Republican ire. In April, a Treasury Department official told BI that it was a failed and disappointing program. The new legislation would instead allocate funding towards studying a public-private partnership to provide free filing for a majority of taxpayers.

• Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene was called out by a fellow Republican for recent stock trades.
• He said those trades were "just another reason why" lawmakers should be banned from trading stocks.
• Greene has attracted scrutiny for well-timed trades made around Trump's tariff moves.

First, it was Democrats who made a big deal out of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's stock trading habits. Now, a fellow Republican is joining in.

"Just another reason why stock trading by members of Congress or their spouses should be banned," Rep. Mike Lawler of New York wrote on X in response to a post showing that one of the Georgia congresswoman's recent stock purchases had paid off.

Lawler, who does not own any individual stocks, is a co-sponsor of the TRUST in Congress Act, a bill to require lawmakers and their spouses to divest from stocks or place them in a blind trust.

Greene has attracted scrutiny in recent weeks for a series of well-timed trades she made around President Donald Trump's tariff moves in early April.

When stock prices began to fall after the April 2 "Liberation Day" announcement, Greene began investing tens of thousands of dollars into a variety of stocks, continuing to do so right up until stock prices shot back up after Trump announced that most of those tariffs would be paused for 90 days.

The congresswoman has said that her stock portfolio is managed by an outside financial advisor.

"All of my investments are reported with full transparency. I refuse to hide my stock trades in a blind trust like many others do," the congressman said in a statement previously shared with BI. "Since my portfolio manager makes my trades for me, I usually find out about them when the media asks."

She's not the only lawmaker who bought the dip: Democratic Rep. Jared Moskowitz of Florida did as well.

But Democrats have suggested that Greene, a close Trump ally, may have been aware of Trump's tariff moves ahead of time. The congresswoman has denied that.

Lawler's post came on the heels of a feud between the two lawmakers that began on Wednesday, when Greene denounced the New York congressman for opposing Republicans' "Big Beautiful Bill" over a tax provision.