This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Denies federal tax deductions for employer spending intended to influence employees about union organizing, collective bargaining, or other labor-organization activities. It expands the Internal Revenue Code to define such disallowed expenditures, creates exceptions (for things like communications with a certified employee representative, certain shareholder disclosures, and amounts paid by unions), requires Treasury/IRS guidance within 240 days, and imposes new employer and third‑party information‑reporting requirements with monetary penalties for failures to report. The rule applies to amounts paid or incurred in taxable years beginning after 240 days following enactment.
The bill reduces tax subsidies and increases transparency for employer anti-union spending—making union organizing more feasible and improving accountability—while imposing new reporting burdens, potential penalties, and compliance costs that fall especially hard on small employers and may chill legitimate employer-employee communications.
Union organizers and workers may find it easier to organize because employers would lose tax deductions for spending to influence employee views on unions, reducing employer-funded anti-union persuasion.
The law increases transparency and reporting of employer spending on labor-influence activities, giving the public, regulators, and unions clearer information about who is funding anti-union campaigns.
Reducing tax deductions for employer anti-union spending eliminates a tax subsidy, modestly improving tax fairness by reducing federal tax expenditures that indirectly favor employers over workers and unions.
Employers — especially small businesses and firms using consultants — will face higher compliance costs, new reporting obligations (including §6039K filings), and risk substantial penalties (e.g., starting at $10,000 and scaling by FTEs).
Smaller employers are likely to bear a disproportionate share of the administrative and financial burden of compliance relative to larger firms, increasing strain on small businesses.
The change could chill legitimate employer communications about workplace proposals and policies if employers fear losing deductions or triggering reporting/penalties, leaving employees less informed about workplace matters.
Introduced April 4, 2025 by Ben Ray Luján · Last progress April 4, 2025