Bill Overview
Title: No Tax Breaks for Radical Corporate Activism Act
Description: This bill disallows a business expense tax deduction for any reimbursement paid by an employer to an employee for travel expenses to obtain an abortion, or for the costs of any gender transition procedure for the employee's minor child.
Sponsors: Rep. Mast, Brian J. [R-FL-18]
Target Audience
Population: Employees seeking reimbursements for abortion or gender transition procedures for minor children
Estimated Size: 500000
- This legislation targets businesses that provide specific health-related reimbursements to employees.
- A significant number of companies offer health benefits that may cover travel expenses for medical services, including those mentioned in the bill.
- Employees who rely on these reimbursements for abortion-related travel or gender transition procedures for their minor children are directly affected.
- This population includes individuals seeking abortions and those involved in gender transition processes for minor children.
- Globally, legal and societal contexts surrounding abortion and gender transitions vary, influencing the number of affected individuals.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily affects employees who work for companies that have explicitly offered reimbursements for abortion-related travel or gender transition procedures for minor children. These companies are likely to be larger corporations with comprehensive health plans.
- The population directly affected comprises employees within these companies who are planning to utilize these benefits. Not everyone in this pool will use these options, meaning the policy’s impact is limited to a subset of individuals.
- The policy may lead to emotional and financial stress for those employees who depended on such reimbursements, but it will not affect those who were not planning or needing these procedures.
- Due to the budget constraints, the scope of the policy’s enforcement and its checks on corporate expenditures might be limited.
- Overall, the policy could potentially motivate companies to reevaluate the structure of their health benefits. However, many employees will remain unaffected as they do not fall into the target categories or their companies might compensate in other ways.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (Texas)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's disheartening to see measures that could limit access to vital health services.
- I worry about what this means for future health-related support from my employer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 9 |
Marketing Coordinator (California)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy feels like a step backwards in terms of progress and rights.
- Without this support, managing my child's transition could become significantly more challenging for our family.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 10 |
Financial Analyst (New York)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This doesn't directly affect me or my benefits.
- I have concerns about how it may impact the rights of others my company employs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Art Student and Part-time Retail Worker (Illinois)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think this policy impacts me directly as I don't get such benefits.
- However, I worry about the broader implications for workers' rights and accessibility.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
HR Manager (Oregon)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could pressure companies to reevaluate their existing health benefits packages.
- Overall, this may affect morale and retention if employees feel that family support is lacking.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
School Teacher (Florida)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not personally affected by this.
- It seems like businesses should not involve themselves in matters some find morally objectionable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Nurse Practitioner (Ohio)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could introduce unnecessary barriers for those seeking integral health care interventions.
- I worry about how this could affect young patients and their families.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 9 |
Graphic Designer (Washington)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This feels like a setback for transgender rights.
- Losing reimbursement options makes managing necessary procedures more difficult.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 10 |
Construction Worker (Kansas)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This doesn't affect me directly, but I worry it could have wider implications for workplace benefits.
- It seems a bit excessive for companies to cover these kinds of costs in the first place.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Legal Associate (New Jersey)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about how this affects corporate decision-making on employee benefits.
- This policy might discourage businesses from offering extensive health benefits in fear of future restrictions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 10 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $105000000 (Low: $55000000, High: $210000000)
Year 3: $110000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $220000000)
Year 5: $120000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $240000000)
Year 10: $145000000 (Low: $85000000, High: $290000000)
Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $1000000000)
Key Considerations
- The scale of corporate behavioral change in response to losing these tax deductions.
- Potential legal challenges to the bill, affecting its implementation and associated savings.
- Unintended consequences on employee health benefits offered by companies.