HB2692, titled the No Tax Breaks for Union Busting (NTBUB) Act, would amend the Internal Revenue Code to deny tax deductions for employer spending intended to influence employees’ views or actions regarding labor organizations and collective activity. The bill treats these expenses similarly to certain political expenditures that are already nondeductible, and it defines covered activities broadly to include employer campaigns around union elections, collective bargaining, labor disputes, and related organizing efforts.
The bill also creates new reporting requirements for employers and third-party consultants who conduct these activities on an employer’s behalf. Employers would have to disclose details about the timing, type, and cost of covered activities on their tax returns, and third parties would have to file information returns identifying the client and the services provided. The Treasury Department would be directed to issue implementing guidance, and the changes would apply to taxable years beginning after a 240-day period following enactment.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would amend sections 162 and 6720 of the Internal Revenue Code and add new reporting provisions under chapter 61 and penalty provisions under chapter 68. It would make employer expenditures aimed at persuading workers about unionization or other labor organization activity nondeductible, while carving out exceptions for direct bargaining, voluntary recognition, legally required communications, grievance procedures, labor-management partnerships, and expenditures by labor organizations themselves. It would also impose new tax-return disclosure obligations and penalties for noncompliance, affecting employers, labor consultants, and other third parties involved in union-related communications.
Sentiment
The bill’s stated purpose and sponsor framing are strongly pro-worker and pro-union, emphasizing employee free choice and arguing that taxpayers should not subsidize employer anti-union campaigns. The bill text and title suggest support from lawmakers concerned about union-busting tactics and labor-law violations. No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no recorded opposition or bipartisan debate in the supplied materials beyond the structure of the bill itself.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the scope of what counts as an attempt to influence employees, since the bill reaches not only unlawful conduct but also lawful employer communications, meetings, and consultant-driven campaigns. Employers and business groups would likely object to the loss of deductibility and the added reporting burden, while labor advocates would support the measure as a way to reduce employer coercion and level the playing field in organizing drives. Another likely issue is administrative complexity, including Treasury’s authority to define additional covered activities and the new disclosure requirements for both employers and third-party firms.
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States providing that there is no immunity from criminal prosecution for an act on the grounds that such act was within the constitutional authority or official duties of an individual, and providing that the President may not grant a pardon to himself or herself.
Recognizing the 15th Anniversary of the January 8, 2011, Tucson, Arizona, shooting and honoring the survivors, victims, and former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, a gun violence survivor, and one of the Nation's most influential voices of courage in the fight to end gun violence.