They say that the only two certainties in life are death and taxes. The recently passed “Big Beautiful Bill,” however, claims to eliminate one of those — at least for overtime hours.
The budget bill, passed in July, followed up on a key Trump campaign promise to eliminate taxes on overtime pay. Even better: the law is retroactive to the beginning of 2025, giving those who work overtime an additional six months of tax-free wages ahead of all the money the bill will save them going forward.
But the reality may be far less generous than it sounds.
Before you start planning how to spend all that extra cash, be aware that the new law contains several big, not-so-beautiful catches.
Not all overtime pay is tax exempt
In touting the elimination of taxes on overtime pay in the budget bill, the White House claimed that the law “makes good on … President Trump’s cornerstone campaign promises and benefits hardworking Americans where they need it the most — their paychecks.”
And in some ways, it does. The reality, however, is that the “Big Beautiful Bill” only eliminates some tax on overtime pay.
To start, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) noted that the tax break only pertains to a portion of overtime pay, or the “‘half’ of ‘time and a half pay’, required under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.”
For example, if a worker makes $40 an hour, then their time and a half overtime would amount to $60 an hour. Of that $60, only $20 (the “half” part of “time and a half”) remains tax-free.
Additionally, “no tax on overtime” is a federal income-tax change only. State and local income taxes still apply (unless your state separately conforms), and Social Security and Medicare taxes are still withheld on all wages, including overtime.
As well, there’s a cap to how much overtime pay remains tax-exempt: $12,500 per person annually, or $25,000 for people filing together. Earners who make more than $150,000 (or $300,000 combined between two people filing together) are not eligible for tax-free overtime pay.
Another issue, raised by Forbes, is horizontal equity: two people with the same annual pay can end up taxed differently. An hourly worker who logs FLSA overtime can deduct part of that overtime, while a salaried worker putting in the same extra hours gets no break.
Then there are those workers whose overtime pay is dictated by different agreements or laws. The WSJ pointed to airline and railroad workers as examples of those “who often get overtime pay under union contracts and are exempt from FLSA because they are covered by the Railway Labor Act.” These workers generally will not qualify for the deduction on their contract overtime.
They added that “One result is different treatment for similar jobs. An airline jet mechanic wouldn’t get the deduction but an airplane mechanic at a separate maintenance company could.”
The long-term fallout
Beyond the immediate monetary effect, a more broad catch to the new law could make itself known in the long run.
The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) raised concerns that the law will incentivize many to work as much overtime as possible to gain the extra income, including evenings and weekends — habits “associated with a range of negative impacts on physical and mental health, well-being, and productivity.”
In addition, those unable to work overtime for personal or health reasons will lose out on the benefits. The EPI called the law “another gimmick that does more harm than good” and suggested that offering workers raises so they don’t have to work the extra hours would prove a better option.
Forbes, meanwhile, labeled the law “a stealth anti-job creation measure” because it lessens the need for employers to hire more workers.
“A 50-hour week for one employee can be replaced by tacking on an additional 10 hours across five separate workers. The overtime deduction thus may boost take-home pay for some, but it does so by encouraging a labor distribution that concentrates hours in the hands of fewer people.”
That said, according to Tax Policy Center estimates, only 9% of American households will actually save money by paying fewer taxes on overtime pay, resulting in an average added windfall of roughly $1400 annually. Most workers will see the benefit at tax time.
And, of course, there’s one final caveat to the “no tax on overtime pay” law: it expires in 2028.
Tag Archives: Fair Labor Standards Act
Alternet: Donald Trump just debunked his own lie — and it should get him sued | Opinion
Walmart, Apple , and Amazon, the most successful companies in the U.S., base their corporate strategies on data: consumer behavior data, market research, financial, product, and competitive analysis data.
Any CEO who deliberately relied on falsified data, or who demanded cooked books, would be fired immediately — and likely sued by the Board of Directors.
Any CEO of any company who tried to manipulate the appearance of short-term success for his own personal gain, at the expense of long-term viability for the company, would also be fired and likely sued for malfeasance, and worse.
A successful CEO knows that falsifying economic or financial data can lead to charges of securities fraud, wire fraud, and other financial crimes, because false data can ruin investors, corporations, and markets overnight.
Enter Donald Trump, whose self-proclaimed governing philosophy is “running the country like it’s a business.” Debunking the lie of his own manufactured image as a “successful businessman,” last Friday Trump angrily fired the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Commissioner because he didn’t like her data — even as he wears 34 felony convictions for falsifying records.
Dr. Erika McEntarfer, a widely respected statistician, enjoyed bipartisan support, including confirmation votes from Marco Rubio and JD Vance. Appointed commissioner under the Biden administration, she holds a Ph.D. in economics from Virginia Tech, and served at the Census Bureau for two decades under both parties prior to her BLS appointment.
By federal law, McEntarfer’s appointment ends in 2028. Trump fired her anyway because he was embarrassed by jobs data that didn’t match his own hype.
In May, the White House said that April’s jobs report “proved” that Trump was “revitalizing” the economy. In June, Trump posted, “GREAT JOBS NUMBERS.” After the Labor Department released revised jobs figures for those months — a common practice because jobs reports are sample projections that get adjusted when actual employer data come in — Trump fired the messenger.
Trump’s penchant for hiding and falsifying data has put American corporations and the economy in more danger. Just as he scrubbed government websites of climate data to bolster his fossil fuel donors, just as he ordered the Smithsonian to remove an exhibit accurately reflecting his own impeachments, Trump thinks reality is whatever he says it is.
As he fantasizes about returning America to the Gilded Age, where robber barons extracted the earth’s resources for unimaginable profit while laborers worked for starvation wages, he’s forgetting that his oligarch donors need accurate economic data too. At least oligarchs creating real products and delivering real services—as opposed to merely speculating in Trump’s image—need real, reliable, and uncooked data.
McEntarfer should sue
When Trump fired McEntarfer in a social media post, he declared that her numbers were “phony.” He wrote on Friday, “In my opinion, today’s Jobs Numbers were RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad,” adding: “But, the good news is, our Country is doing GREAT!”
He said the numbers had been manipulated for political purposes, and announced he fired McEntarfer as a result.
Trump also baselessly accused McEntarfer of manipulating jobs numbers before the November election to advantage Kamala Harris. Trump said to reporters, “I believe the numbers were phony, just like they were before the election, and there were other times. So you know what I did? I fired her, and you know what? I did the right thing.”
When asked what his source was, he said, “my opinion,” confirming that there was no evidence to back up his reckless claims, claims that permanently tanked the reputation of a celebrated career professional.
Presidents not immune from civil prosecution
No doubt Trump slurred McEntarfer based on his own “opinion” to avoid defamation liability, but an opinion that implies a false fact is still defamatory, it is still actionable, and presidents are not immune from civil lawsuits for defamation.
The four legal elements of defamation are easily found here: false statement; publication; negligence in repeating the falsehood; and reputational harm.
More, a president has immunity from civil lawsuits only for actions taken in furtherance of his core constitutional powers. One of the main “core constitutional powers” of a president is ensuring the faithful execution of laws, such that acting to impede the execution of federal law would fall outside core official responsibilities. (As an aside, even under the disastrous Trump v. US criminal immunity ruling, Trump’s J6 conduct would likely have fallen outside his core function, had it proceeded to trial.)
Trump knowingly and intentionally lied about the BLS commissioner in a manner that directly conflicts with the Department of Labor’s statutory mission; as such, it was not a “core Constitutional function.” Announcing that previous labor reports were “falsified” causes immediate reputational harm to the Commissioner, the Department of Labor, and the US economy overall. It directly impedes the accurate compilation of labor data, a charge mandated by the Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933 as well as the Fair Labor Standards Act.
By implicitly directing that all future US data should be falsified to suit his own political narrative, Trump’s statements not only harm America’s economy, but they hinder rather than aid the faithful execution of laws.
As McEntarfer’s predecessor puts it, McEntarfer’s “totally groundless firing” sets a dangerous precedent and “undermines the statistical mission of the bureau.”
“We need accurate Jobs Numbers,” Trump told reporters, suggesting McEntarfer’s jobs numbers weren’t.
“She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified,” he added, suggesting McEntarfer was neither.
Missing the risible irony as he seeks manipulated jobs data for his own political purposes, Trump added, “Important numbers like this must be fair and accurate, they can’t be manipulated for political purposes.”
https://www.alternet.org/alternet-exclusives/trump-lie-debunked