“Big and beautiful” or not?

Analysis
Insights

With the centerpiece of U.S. President Donald Trump’s economic agenda winding its way through Congress, we examine what’s of key interest to markets and investors, before noting why the ultimate outcome of the bill is likely to look different.

Share

June 5, 2025

Kelly Bogdanova
Vice President, Portfolio Analyst
Portfolio Advisory Group – U.S.

Right on cue, political jabs about the tax and budget bill recently passed in the U.S. House of Representatives – formally called the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” – are heating up, and the legislation is increasingly catching investors’ attention.

The political theater might be amusing to us if the country’s federal legislators were held in higher standing – the collective rating of the House and Senate is currently at only 26 percent, according to Gallup – and if their track record on managing spending and the country’s debt load was better.

Tax relief usually brings relief to the stock market

We think the stock market generally favours the tax and stimulus provisions in the budget bill – political rhetoric aside.

  • The House version of the bill extends the low tax rates for individuals that became effective in 2018 during President Donald Trump’s first term;
  • includes new tax exemptions on gratuities and overtime pay;
  • provides an extra $4,000 tax deduction for filers age 65 and older;
  • includes a new $1,000 cash payment for newborns in an investment account and additional investment incentives in such accounts, and higher tax credits for families with children;
  • and incorporates generous business incentives, including accelerated depreciation of capital investments.

In fact, we can’t remember a time when the stock market hasn’t embraced low tax rates, tax exemptions and direct cash payments, and business incentives – regardless of fiscal implications.

The stock market’s general logic is that the more money in individuals’ pockets and businesses’ accounts, the more spending on goods and services – which can benefit some S&P 500 companies and others listed on stock exchanges by boosting profit growth, at least somewhat.

A leery bond market

However, the bond market seems to see this differently. It’s starting to act more like a responsible adult or grandparent, in our view.

Treasury market investors – especially large institutional investors in the U.S. and abroad – are taking a more circumspect look at the deficit and debt projections associated with the legislation.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) – the official scorekeeper of the costs associated with such legislation – projects the bill will increase annual federal deficits over the next 10 years by $2.4 trillion cumulatively. In other words, tack on that amount to the country’s current $37 trillion in federal debt.

The White House and many Republicans argue it won’t end up nearly this bad and future deficits could decline, whereas Democrats say deficits will be far worse. Regardless, it’s anyone’s guess as far as we’re concerned.

We think fuzzy math has dominated Washington for decades. Previous budget bills passed under the leadership of each party and scored by the CBO, along with loads of additional spending on emergencies and for other purposes, have pushed federal government finances deep into the red.

Importantly, we think the bond market is starting to show signs of being less tolerant of ultra-high deficits.

Stumbling blocks in the Senate

We anticipate difficult negotiations between Senate and House Republicans before the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” can arrive on the president’s desk for his signature.

There are a few key provisions currently in dispute, including one affecting foreign investors.

Overall spending levels and the need for deficit reduction: Some Republican senators, especially those with libertarian leanings (Senators Rand Paul, Mike Lee, and Ron Johnson), strongly disagree with the high spending levels and fiscal deficits associated with the House bill.

SALT deduction: The House bill raises the cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction to $40,000, which benefits taxpayers in high-tax states. Many Republican senators in low-tax states strongly oppose this.

Medicaid spending: The House bill includes a work requirement for some Medicaid recipients. Some Republican senators oppose what they view as cuts to Medicaid benefits and are concerned about lower-income individuals potentially falling off the health care insurance rolls; Democrats agree with them.

Section 899: This controversial section of the House bill contains “retaliatory tax provisions” on select foreign governments, overseas companies, and foreign investors in certain U.S. securities. As written, the language is complex yet vague in some areas, and there are disagreements between tax specialists on which securities and which foreign investors would be impacted.

In practice, according to the Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based nonpartisan tax policy firm, Section 899 targets countries that have instituted a global minimum tax or have digital services or diverted profits taxes. It assesses that certain entities and individuals in Canada, the UK, many EU countries, and Australia could be affected if these taxes remain in place or these foreign governments are unable to negotiate a compromise with the U.S. government.

The Tax Foundation views Section 899 as being harmful to the U.S. economy due to its potential implications on foreign direct investment into the U.S. We also view it negatively for this reason. Furthermore, the legislative language currently includes a lot of gray areas and cedes wide discretion to the Treasury secretary to specify retaliatory taxes and other issues.

We would be surprised if the House’s Section 899 language stays intact after going through the Senate.

Financial industry lobbyists and foreign lobbyists are already trying to get the Section 899 House language either:

  • modified to minimise the impact on foreign investors and companies;
  • clarified to spell out the retaliatory taxes much more clearly and provide the Treasury secretary with less discretion;
  • or stripped from the bill altogether.

Also, it’s possible there will be at least one procedural challenge in the Senate to remove Section 899.

It’s normal for the Senate to modify controversial provisions of House bills, especially when it’s being lobbied hard. We never underestimate industry lobbyists’ power and influence, and the financial lobby has been successful in the past in achieving at least some of its objectives.

Moving toward the finish line

Regardless of the merits and demerits of the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” we think House and Senate Republicans will be forced to ultimately craft compromise legislation out of political necessity – although the process could get very messy.

This is because if they fail to do so, a major tax increase would occur in 2026 on individuals, ahead of the midterm elections in November of next year. Therefore, we think Trump has every incentive to spend a lot of political capital to muscle through a final compromise version of the bill in both chambers.

This doesn’t, however, make us any less concerned about the very high federal annual deficit and cumulative debt.

Our forthcoming Global Insight 2025 Midyear Outlook, available in mid-June, will discuss how investors in U.S. stock and bond markets should perceive the risks associated with the runaway federal debt and high annual deficits. Stay tuned.

Let’s connect


We want to talk about your financial future.


This publication has been issued by RBC’s Wealth Management international division in the United Kingdom and the Channel Islands which is comprised of an international network of RBC® companies located in these jurisdictions and includes RBC Europe Limited and Royal Bank of Canada (Channel Islands) Limited. You should carefully read any risk warnings or regulatory disclosures in this publication or in any other literature accompanying this publication or transmitted to you by RBC’s Wealth Management international division.

This publication has been compiled from sources believed to be reliable, but no representation or warranty, express or implied is made to its accuracy, completeness or correctness. All opinions and estimates contained in this report are judgements as of the date of this report, are subject to change without notice and are provided in good faith but without legal responsibility. This report is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any securities. Past performance is not a guide to future performance, the value of investments and income arising can go down, future returns are not guaranteed, and an investor may not get back the amount originally invested. Countries throughout the world have their own laws regulating the types of securities and other investment products and services which may be offered to their residents, as well as the process for doing so. As a result, any securities or services discussed in this report may not be eligible for sale in some jurisdictions. This report is not, and under no circumstances should be construed as, a solicitation to act as a securities broker or dealer in any jurisdiction by any person or company that is not legally permitted to carry on the business of a securities broker or dealer in that jurisdiction. Nothing in this report constitutes legal, accounting or tax advice or individually tailored investment advice.

This material is prepared for general circulation and does not have regard to the particular circumstances or needs of any specific person who may read it. The investments or services contained in this report may not be suitable for you and it is recommended that you consult an independent investment advisor if you are in doubt about the suitability of such investments or services. To the full extent permitted by law none of the entities which comprise the international division of RBC Wealth Management nor any of their affiliates, nor any other person, accepts any liability whatsoever for any direct or consequential loss arising from any use of this report or the information contained herein. No matter contained in this document may be reproduced or copied by any means without the prior consent of RBC Wealth Management.

Clients of RBC Europe Limited may be entitled to compensation from the UK Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) if it cannot meet its obligations. This depends on the type of business and the circumstances of the claim. Most types of investment business are covered for up to a total of £85,000. For further information about the compensation provided by the FSCS scheme (including the amounts covered and eligibility to claim) please refer to the FSCS website FSCS.org.uk. Please note only compensation related queries should be directed to the FSCS. Royal Bank of Canada (Channel Islands) Limited is not covered by the UK Financial Services Compensation Scheme.

RBC Europe Limited is registered in England and Wales with company number 995939. Its registered office is 100 Bishopsgate, London EC2N 4AA. RBC Europe Limited is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority.

Royal Bank of Canada (Channel Islands) Limited (“the Bank”) is regulated by the Jersey Financial Services Commission in the conduct of deposit taking, fund services and investment business in Jersey. The Bank’s general terms and conditions are updated from time to time and can be found at https://www.rbcwealthmanagement.com/en-eu/terms-and-conditions. Registered office: Gaspé House, 66-72 Esplanade, St. Helier, Jersey JE2 3QT, Channel Islands. Deposits made with Royal Bank of Canada (Channel Islands) Limited in Jersey are not covered by the UK Financial Services Compensation Scheme. Royal Bank of Canada (Channel Islands) Limited is a participant in the Jersey Bank Depositors Compensation Scheme. The Scheme offers protection for ‘eligible deposits’ up to £50,000 per individual claimant, subject to certain limitations. The maximum total amount of compensation is capped at £100,000,000 in any 5 year period. Full details of the Scheme and banking groups covered are available on the Government of Jersey’s website http://www.gov.je/dcs or on request.

Investment services offered by the Bank are not covered by an investor compensation scheme as there is currently no such scheme operating in Jersey, however ‘eligible deposits’ held pursuant to investment services may be protected under the Bank Depositors Compensation Scheme described above – for more information see the Bank’s general terms and conditions. Some of the products that the Bank might recommend to you could be registered overseas and may be covered by a local compensation scheme. Your investment counsellor will provide you with the details of any overseas compensation schemes (where applicable) at the time of making an investment recommendation.

Copies of the latest audited accounts are available upon request from the registered office.
® / ™ Trademark(s) of Royal Bank of Canada. Used under licence.


Kelly Bogdanova

Vice President, Portfolio Analyst
Portfolio Advisory Group – U.S.

Related articles

Equity market roller coaster: How is your stomach?

Analysis 6 minute read
- Equity market roller coaster: How is your stomach?

Tariff pause: Reasons to exhale and get back to basics

Analysis 6 minute read
- Tariff pause: Reasons to exhale and get back to basics

Shock and tariff: Four key perspectives on the sell-off

Analysis 13 minute read
- Shock and tariff: Four key perspectives on the sell-off