S.1310 - No Tax Breaks for Union Busting (NTBUB) Act (119th Congress)
Summary
The No Tax Breaks for Union Busting (NTBUB) Act aims to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, preventing employers from deducting expenses incurred while attempting to influence their employees' decisions regarding labor organizations and collective action. It seeks to eliminate what proponents view as a tax subsidy for anti-union activities.
The bill defines labor organizations and labor organization activities, specifying that attempts to influence employees on these matters will not be tax-deductible. It includes provisions for information reporting, requiring employers to disclose expenditures related to these activities and imposing penalties for non-compliance.
The Act outlines exceptions for communications with employee representatives, shareholders, voluntary recognition of labor organizations, labor-management partnerships, grievance procedures, and legally required communications.
Expected Effects
The primary effect of this bill, if enacted, would be to increase the cost for employers who engage in activities aimed at dissuading employees from joining or forming unions. This could potentially level the playing field during unionization efforts.
It would also increase transparency regarding employer spending on such activities through enhanced reporting requirements. This may lead to changes in employer behavior regarding union-related activities.
Potential Benefits
- Empowerment of Workers: By removing tax advantages for anti-union activities, the bill aims to provide workers with a more neutral environment to decide on unionization.
- Fairer Collective Bargaining: The bill promotes a more equitable balance of power between employers and employees during collective bargaining.
- Increased Transparency: The information reporting requirements would shed light on employer spending related to influencing union activities.
- Discourages Unfair Labor Practices: By removing tax deductions for expenses related to unfair labor practices, the bill may disincentivize such behavior.
- Alignment with NLRA Intent: The bill reinforces the National Labor Relations Act's intention of protecting workers' rights to organize and engage in collective bargaining.
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential for Increased Labor Disputes: Some argue that limiting employer influence could lead to more frequent and intense labor disputes.
- Compliance Costs: The new reporting requirements could impose additional administrative burdens and costs on businesses.
- Possible Litigation: The definitions of 'labor organization activity' and 'attempt to influence' could be subject to legal challenges, leading to uncertainty.
- Reduced Employer Investment: Some businesses may reduce investment in employee relations programs, even those unrelated to union activities, due to increased scrutiny.
- Economic Impact: Opponents may argue that the bill could negatively impact business competitiveness and economic growth by increasing labor costs.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's alignment with the US Constitution is complex. While it doesn't directly infringe on any specific constitutional right, its impact on employer speech and association could raise First Amendment concerns.
However, Congress has broad authority to regulate commerce and taxation under Article I, Section 8. The bill could be argued as a permissible regulation of economic activity related to labor relations.
The bill also indirectly supports the right to association, which is implicitly protected by the First Amendment, by aiming to reduce employer interference in workers' decisions to form or join unions.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).