One Big Beautiful Bill, Many Big Errors?
Washington just passed OBBB, a sprawling tax-and-spend package Trump wanted by July 4th. But classical liberals should think twice before calling it a win.
Hello Friends,
I hope you’re well. I’m on a family vacation in beautiful Colorado.
I want to share my thoughts on the OBBB. Please subscribe to my newsletter and share your thoughts, pro or con at the buttons below. Thanks!
The One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) was just signed into law, and let’s be honest—it’s not the conservative win many want it to be. Yes, it makes parts of the 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent, and yes, there are a few decent deregulatory or pro-work provisions, like making full expensing permanent and tightening some Medicaid eligibility loopholes. But that doesn’t make this bill beautiful—or big in the right way.
What we got instead is a Frankenstein of populist giveaways, temporary tax breaks, and fiscal smoke and mirrors. It expands government in both directions—more military and border spending for the Right, more tax credits and spending carveouts for the Left. And it still overspends by nearly $2 trillion per year, according to EPIC’s most recent budget scorecard (https://epicforamerica.org/federal-budget). That’s not a win. That’s a red flag.
Let’s start with what went right. Republicans made the full expensing provision from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) permanent—this is arguably the most pro-growth part of the bill and a real win for capital formation and productivity. They also held the line (barely) against full corporate rate hikes and locked in some of the lower marginal rates that were set to expire. If TCJA was flawed for being temporary, OBBB at least recognizes that permanence matters.
But that’s about where the good ends.
Instead of extending TCJA’s broader reform vision, OBBB piles on temporary and targeted tax breaks that narrow the base and expand complexity—raising the SALT cap to $40,000, carving out deductions for tips, overtime, senior expenses, and car loans, and expanding the Child Tax Credit, which is little more than another income redistribution tool without serious work requirements.
And while the individual tax rate cuts weren’t allowed to expire, OBBB fails to cut those rates further or flatten the tax code into something more honest and growth-focused.
On spending?
Don’t buy the headlines. Yes, the bill includes what DC calls “cuts”—$1.5 trillion less spending than some baseline, mostly through tighter eligibility rules for Medicaid and SNAP. But even dynamic models show the bill adds at least $500 billion in overspending in the first few years alone, mostly because lawmakers delayed the real spending cuts and front-loaded new spending on military, border security, and tax credits.
This is not sustainable budgeting. It’s just new packaging for old habits.
Even the so-called “school choice” provisions are problematic. A new federal tax credit for education expenses sounds appealing but invites the federal government deeper into an area where states and families—not Washington—should lead. School choice should be universal and state-driven, not warped by carveouts that risk federal micromanagement later.
This is not the art of the deal—it’s more like political duct tape.
Republicans were so eager to hit the July 4 deadline that they passed a $7 trillion-per-year federal budget framework without making the tough calls. The spending side got “reformed” only in DC terms. And the tax side? Bloated with goodies, weak on growth.
The fact that this was the best we could get under GOP control should worry everyone who wants limited government. Republicans must remember what made TCJA work—broad rate cuts, full expensing, and a focus on growth—and push for true fiscal conservatism, not progressive-lite populism.
America doesn’t need a tax code that picks winners and losers, or a federal budget built on temporary sugar highs. We need less spending, spending limit, broader tax base based more on consumption, and more trust in markets and families—not bureaucrats.
OBBB may be law now, but it can’t be the last word.
Economist Stephen Moore has much different take on this matter. Perhaps it all centers on Say's law. Grow the economy and more revenue comes in. Also, the 1BBB (as I prefer to call it) is not the only part of the economic plan. With tariffs and more free trade, the Treasury will take in more than goes out. This happened in the latest data. Also, the impact of DOGE will result in a gentle cascade of change in the Federal government which will reduces costs, but these will take time to appreciate. As to the school choice option, I have heard the debate before, but if the GI BIll worked, why not give this a try? The US education is dominated by unions and the quality of education in the US is a basket case.