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: Sen. Warner, Mark R. [D-VA]
Target Audience
Population: People who rely on broadband services expanded by government grants
Estimated Size: 70000000
- The bill impacts entities that receive broadband grants by changing their tax liabilities, affecting their financial position.
- Any organization involved in broadband deployment is directly impacted because the grants they receive for such projects will not be taxed as income.
- The outcome of this bill affects broadband service providers, particularly those who rely on government grants to expand their services.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily affects internet service providers (ISPs) who receive broadband deployment grants. These entities may pass on improvements in service quality or expansion to end users, thus indirectly benefiting consumers.
- End users in rural or underserved areas are most likely to see improvements in their broadband access and quality of service due to expanded infrastructure.
- Those who work in or with the broadband industry may experience indirect job growth or increased job security if their companies benefit from reduced tax liabilities.
- Households benefiting from the improved service may report a change in well-being due to better access to online services, education, and telecommuting.
- The policy won't affect all customers equally, as improvements will heavily depend on the location and business strategies of ISPs.
Simulated Interviews
Farmer (Rural Indiana)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the policy leads to better internet around here, it's been very slow and unreliable.
- If the internet improves, I could improve my business operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Software Developer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I doubt this bill would affect me since my internet is already fast.
- It might help others in less connected areas which is great.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Healthcare Administrator (Albuquerque, NM)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Better broadband could improve our telehealth capabilities, reducing system downtimes.
- I support anything that helps improve service delivery in telehealth.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Broadband Technician (Detroit, MI)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could mean more business for us and potential job security.
- I'm hopeful it makes a real difference in the speed and reach of our network projects.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
University Student (Austin, TX)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If it helps me to have more reliable internet during my classes, that'd be fantastic.
- There's lots of frustration when internet speed goes down during online exams or submissions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Freelance Writer (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not sure the policy will affect me directly since my service is already pretty good.
- If broadband improves for others, that's always a good thing.
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 |
Retired (Rural Mississippi)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this means I can have consistent consultations without dropouts, it'd be such a relief.
- I'm hopeful that improved broadband can reach places like mine more reliably.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Small Business Owner - Online Retail (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Faster and more reliable internet would certainly help with smoother operations.
- Keeping my online store running efficiently is crucial to my business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
High School Teacher (Seattle, WA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If it means less disruption in online classes, I'm all for it.
- The difference could be massive for remote or hybrid learning experiences.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Local ISP Operator (Rural Kansas)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Not getting taxed on our grant could be a game changer for expansion.
- We'll be able to offer better services and reach new areas.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $16000000 (Low: $11000000, High: $21000000)
Year 3: $16500000 (Low: $11500000, High: $21500000)
Year 5: $17000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $22000000)
Year 10: $18000000 (Low: $13000000, High: $23000000)
Year 100: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Key Considerations
- The variability in the amount of broadband grants issued annually can lead to fluctuation in the impact on tax revenue.
- Revenue losses due to this policy might be offset by economic benefits including increased digital access and productivity.
- The impacts on state and local taxes may differ from federal tax impacts due to varying infrastructure needs and grant allocations.