The full text is here. I've been scrolling through it, and reading portions of it, this morning. (There's a summary here, but it leaves out a lot of interest to folks in higher education; this summary is a bit better. UPDATE: The IHE account is quite useful in terms of the higher ed impact.) A few takeaways:
1. Section 117 of the existing tax code is untouched. Section 117 makes tuition waivers for grad students tax-exempt; it also makes tax exempt tuition benefits for faculty and staff, a huge benefit for a small number of university employees (including this one). So it looks like those tax exemptions remain in place, and PhD students can breathe a sigh of relief.
2. The bill does impose an excise tax on university endowments with a per capita value of $500,000 or more. This is a weird tax that reaches only a very small number of schools, including Yale, Harvard, Princeton, Rice, Notre Dame, MIT, Cal Tech, Amherst, Pomona, Williams and others (see here for 2015 figures--my institution is probably now in the taxable group due to the surging stock markets in 2016 and 2017--I wouldn't be surprised if Chicago increases enrollments, in order to get back under!)
3. Of more consequence for job seekers is that the bill eliminates the deduction for moving expenses provided by an employer.
4. Those in states with high local and state taxes--like New York, California, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Illinois--are likely to see their taxes go up since the deduction for state and local taxes paid is now limiited to $10,000--though it will depend on income level, obviously, and property taxes, notwithstanding the cuts in individual federal income tax rates. The doubling of the standard deduction will help those who have no children, or fewer than three; those with three or more children will probably take a hit, becasue the doubling of the standard deduction is worth less than the personal exemptions that are now eliminated.
5. The elimination of the exemption on SALT will probably put pressure on states with high taxes to lower them, with deleterious effects for public higher education in those states (among other things).
6. Another curiosity, whose import I'm unclear on: the bill allows employers to deduct only 50% of the cost of business-related meals. One possibility is that employers will continue to eat the remaining costs, but another possibility is they will tighten up on expenditures for meals with visiting speakers, job candidates, departmental events and the like.
Readers with more information can add comments or links, below.
