Bill Overview
Title: Broadband Grant Tax Treatment Act
Description: This bill excludes from gross income, for income tax purposes, certain broadband grants made for broadband deployment.
Sponsors: Rep. Panetta, Jimmy [D-CA-20]
Target Audience
Population: Recipients of broadband deployment grants
Estimated Size: 3000000
- The bill pertains to the taxation of certain broadband grants, specifically excluding them from gross income for tax calculations.
- Entities or individuals who receive broadband deployment grants will be directly impacted as these grants will not count as taxable income.
- The broadband industry, including companies and possibly non-profits involved in broadband deployment, will be affected due to potential tax relief.
- Indirectly, end consumers of broadband services might benefit if the tax savings lead to more widespread or cheaper broadband access.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily affects entities and individuals who receive broadband deployment grants, particularly in the broadband industry. This includes companies, non-profits, and possibly state and local governments involved in deploying broadband infrastructure. It is important to consider that not all broadband deployment grants are large enough to, on their own, create significant tax burdens, but cumulative smaller grants could still lead to substantial tax savings.
- The likelihood that a person from the general public benefits directly is low unless they are personally involved in broadband projects that receive these grants. However, there is a potential indirect benefit if these entities translate tax savings into reducing broadband costs or expanding service areas.
- Given the budget constraints of $630,000 in year 1 and $6,300,000 over 10 years, the policy will likely target significant projects or lead broadband deployment efforts where these grants have measurable impacts on tax bills.
- Due to the specificity of the policy, the simulation should include a diverse range of individuals, some of whom may directly benefit from receiving broadband grants, and others who experience indirect effects through improved broadband services or local economic growth.
Simulated Interviews
CTO of a Mid-sized Broadband Company (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The tax exclusion is a relief; it means more budget flexibility for expanding our infrastructure in rural areas.
- Although it won't immediately affect customer prices, it gives us room to innovate and improve service quality.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
City Municipal Officer (Austin, TX)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The reduced tax burden from grant income allows us to reinvest in more community projects.
- This could eventually lead to lowered costs for residents.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Entrepreneur/Local Internet Service Provider (Rural Iowa)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The tax exclusion is nice but not as impactful as I hoped.
- Grants need to be bigger to really help small providers like me scale up effectively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Non-Profit Director (Minneapolis, MN)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Excluding grants from income tax lets us allocate more directly to projects.
- It's a positive development, although for non-profits the tax angle isn't as significant.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Software Engineer (Denver, CO)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see immediate personal impact.
- If it makes broadband cheaper or better, it could be good for my work-from-home setup.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Investor in Tech Startups (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy could make such investments more attractive if companies can leverage savings for growth.
- Long-term impact might make startups more competitive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Policy Analyst (Buffalo, NY)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy simplifies the tax situation for recipients, potentially encouraging more entities to apply for these grants.
- It may lead to more efficient use of public funds in broadband sectors.
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 |
Broadband Infrastructure Engineer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Tax exclusion might redirect more of our budget towards actual deployment efforts.
- Could improve project timelines and scopes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Freelance Journalist (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 26 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy has more to do with corporate finances than direct public impact.
- Interesting to see how it affects the competitive landscape of providers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Small Business Owner (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If providers expand and lower costs, I might get better service, which helps business.
- The policy seems to lean more towards business benefits than direct consumer ones.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $630000 (Low: $450000, High: $800000)
Year 2: $630000 (Low: $450000, High: $800000)
Year 3: $630000 (Low: $450000, High: $800000)
Year 5: $630000 (Low: $450000, High: $800000)
Year 10: $630000 (Low: $450000, High: $800000)
Year 100: $630000 (Low: $450000, High: $800000)
Key Considerations
- The reduction in tax revenue might place immediate fiscal constraints unless offset by gains elsewhere.
- Long-term impacts depend significantly on how saved tax dollars influence companies' operational and investment decisions.
- Economic impacts tied closely to the health and digital infrastructure expansion within targeted regions.