US Vice President JD Vance hit the road on August 21 to promote President Donald Trump’s legislative accomplishment, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act tax and spending bill.
The law permanently extended tax cuts from a 2017 law Trump signed, which would have expired at the end of 2025 had Congress not reauthorised them. The law also included some new tax cuts, including for tips, overtime and Americans 65 and older.
Speaking in Peachtree City near Atlanta, Vance said, “We had the biggest tax cut for families that this country has ever seen.”
The tax cuts were significant, but they weren’t the biggest in US history, which was a phrase Trump has often used to inaccurately describe his 2017 tax cut law. The 2025 tax cuts rank either third-biggest since 1980 or tied for seventh, depending on the yardstick.
At the same time, many Americans could see relatively modest changes to the taxes they owe starting in 2026, because the 2025 law mostly extended existing tax cuts.
The White House did not provide a response before publication.
Comparing historical tax cut laws
We examined the tax revenue decreases from major laws passed since 1980. (On balance, most tax laws prior to 1980 either raised taxes or cut them modestly.)
Tax bill dollar amounts tend to rise over time because of inflation, so we looked at tax cuts as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), which evens out the differences over time. And because some early laws have tax cut data available only for the first five or six years of the law’s life, we compared laws by looking at the cumulative tax savings during a law’s first five years in effect.
We found that the law with the biggest tax savings was 1981 legislation passed by the Democratic Congress and signed by President Ronald Reagan, who won office promising large tax cuts. That law cut taxes by 3.5 percent of the nation’s cumulative five-year GDP.
A 2012 bill passed by the Republican Congress and signed by President Barack Obama ranked second. That bill, which cut taxes by 1.7 percent of GDP, extended the tax cuts passed in 2003 under President George W Bush.
Based on current projections, Trump’s 2025 law ranks third, at 1.4 percent of GDP when factoring in Trump’s 2017 cuts.
Trump’s 2017 law ranks fourth at 1 percent, tied with a 2010 law Obama signed that extended Bush’s 2001 tax cuts. Bush’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts ranked sixth and seventh, with 0.7 percent and 0.5 percent, respectively.
If considering only new tax cuts and not the re-upped 2017 tax cuts, then Trump’s 2025 law would tie for seventh at 0.5 percent of GDP.
Joseph Rosenberg, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center, said that it’s legitimate to measure the scale of the cuts in the 2025 tax law either way.
What will Americans see in their taxes starting in 2026?
There could be a disconnect between the historical scale of Trump’s 2025 bill and the impact that Americans will notice when filing 2026 taxes.
Because Americans are already paying the lower rates that began in 2017 and that the 2025 law extended, they won’t necessarily notice a sizeable reduction in taxes owed.
“For most families, they are going to see a child tax credit that increases by a maximum of $200 per child, from $2,000 to $2,200,” said Margot Crandall-Hollick, principal research associate at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. “Some are going to pay a little less because of the tips and overtime provisions and a slightly higher standard deduction.”
The law preserves a more generous standard deduction that had been set to expire and increases it slightly to $15,750 for single filers and $31,500 for joint filers in 2025, to be indexed to inflation annually.
The Texas Senate has given final approval to a new Republican-leaning congressional voting map, sending it to Governor Greg Abbott for his signature.
The state senate voted along party lines to pass the map 18-11 shortly after midnight on Saturday, following more than eight hours of heated debate.
President Donald Trump has pushed for the map to help the GOP maintain its slim majority in Congress in the 2026 midterm elections. It has five new districts that would favour Republicans.
Abbott, a Republican, is expected to quickly sign it into law, though Democrats have promised to challenge it in court.
The effort by Trump and Texas’s Republican-majority legislature prompted state Democrats to hold a two-week walkout and kicked off a wave of redistricting efforts across the country.
The weeks-long showdown has roiled the Texas Legislature. Much of the drama unfolded in the House, where the map ultimately passed on Wednesday.
The showdown has also inflamed a broader, state-by-state redistricting battle, with governors from both parties pledging to redraw congressional maps.
California Democrats approved legislation on Thursday calling for a special election in November for residents to vote on a redrawn congressional map designed to help Democrats win five more House seats next year. Governor Gavin Newsom quickly signed it.
California’s map needs voter approval because, unlike in Texas, a nonpartisan commission normally draws the map to avoid the sort of political battle that is playing out.
On Friday, Abbott called California’s redistricting “a joke” and asserted that Texas’s new map is constitutional but California’s would be overturned.
Trump wants more states to revise maps
On a national level, the partisan makeup of existing districts puts Democrats within three seats of a majority. The incumbent president’s party usually loses seats in the midterms.
The Texas redraw is already reshaping the 2026 race, with Democratic Representative Lloyd Doggett, the dean of the state’s congressional delegation, announcing on Thursday that he will not seek re-election to his Austin-based seat if the new map takes effect.
Under the proposed map, Doggett’s district would overlap with that of another Democratic incumbent, Republican Greg Casar.
Trump has pushed other Republican-controlled states, including Indiana and Missouri, to also revise their maps to add more winnable GOP seats.
Additionally, it was already planned for Ohio Republicans to update their maps to reflect their political views.
Redistricting occurs typically right after a census and every once every ten. There are no national restrictions on a state trying to redraw districts in the middle of the decade, even though some have their own limitations.
Journalist and author Jeremy Scahill argues that Israel is feigning ignorance if it thinks Hamas will surrender.
If Israel rejects the latest offer to pause its War on Gaza, it’s a sign that Israel “doesn’t want any deal”, argues US journalist and author Jeremy Scahill.
Scahill, the co-founder of Drop Site News, tells host Steve Clemons that Hamas has offered major concessions on sticking points such as the number of Palestinian prisoners to be released, Israeli withdrawal from the border with Egypt, and the so-called GHF.
A United States judicial commission has denied parole to Joseph Lyle Menendez, a day after his brother Erik was also ordered to stay in prison for the murder of their parents in a Beverly Hills mansion more than three decades ago.
A California panel ordered on Friday the 57-year-old, who goes by his middle name, to remain behind bars along with his younger sibling, defying a campaign for their freedom waged by family, friends and celebrities, including Kim Kardashian.
“Joseph (Lyle) Menendez was denied parole for three years at his initial suitability hearing today,” read a brief statement from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR).
The outcome of Lyle Menendez’s hearing is the latest blow to a movement that has swelled in recent years, amplified by Netflix’s smash hit dramatic series Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story.
The show and myriad documentaries have fixated on the gory details of the 1989 shotgun murders, and the televised jury trial that captivated audiences with accounts of their abusive upbringings and posh lifestyles.
Eleven-hour hearing
Friday’s hearing came just over 36 years after the deaths of parents Jose and Kitty Menendez, in what prosecutors said was a cynical attempt by their sons to obtain a large family fortune.
After setting up alibis and trying to cover their tracks, Erik and Lyle shot Jose Menendez five times with shotguns, including in the kneecaps.
Kitty Menendez died from a shotgun blast as she tried desperately to crawl away from her killers.
The brothers initially blamed the deaths on a mafia hit, but changed their story several times in the ensuing months.
Erik, then 18, confessed to the murders in a session with his therapist.
The pair ultimately claimed they had acted in self-defence after years of emotional and sexual abuse at the hands of a tyrannical father.
During their decades in prison, changing social mores and greater awareness of sexual abuse helped elevate the men to something approaching cultural icons.
Friday’s hearing, which was closed to the public, lasted 11 hours. It was held separately from Thursday’s hearing for his brother Erik, 54.
Both brothers appeared by videolink from the San Diego prison where they are being held.
The panel members, whose identities were not released by CDCR, questioned them on their behaviour and attitude towards the murders.
The British government has extended the deadline to October to decide on whether to approve China’s plans to build the largest embassy in Europe in London, after Beijing refused to explain why the plans contained blacked-out areas.
China’s plans to build a new embassy on the site of a two-century-old building near the Tower of London have stalled for the past three years because of opposition from numerous groups in Britain.
Pro-democracy campaigners from Hong Kong fear Beijing could use the embassy to harass political opponents and even detain them, while nearby residents fear it could pose a security risk to them and attract large protests.
Politicians in Britain and the United States have warned the government against allowing China to build the embassy on the site over concerns that it could be used as a base for spying.
DP9, the planning consultancy working for the Chinese government, said on Friday its client felt it would be inappropriate to provide full internal layout plans, saying additional drawings provided an acceptable level of detail, after the government asked why several areas were blacked out in drawings.
“The Applicant considers the level of detail shown on the unredacted plans is sufficient to identify the main uses”, DP9 said in a letter to the government. “In these circumstances, we consider it is neither necessary nor appropriate to provide additional more detailed internal layout plans or details”.
Several rooms on the plans submitted to the local council, including the basement area, were marked “redacted for security reasons”.
The proposed complex would include offices, a large basement area, housing for 200 staff, and a new tunnel to connect the Embassy House to a separate building on the embassy grounds.
The United Kingdom government’s decision to extend the deadline came after the embassy earlier this month said that claims the building, located near London’s financial district, could have “secret facilities” used to harm Britain’s national security were “despicable slandering”.
The British government’s department of housing said in reply on Friday that it would now rule on whether the project can go ahead by October 21 rather than by the previous deadline of September 9 because it needed more time to consider the responses.
Luke de Pulford, executive director of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, a group with ties to an international network of politicians critical of China, which revealed the letter, said: “These explanations are far from satisfactory”.
De Pulford, a longstanding critic of plans for the embassy, said the “assurances amount to ‘ trust me bro'”.
The Chinese embassy in London expressed “serious concern” over the government’s response.
The embassy said host countries have an “international obligation” to support the construction of diplomatic buildings.
“The Chinese side urges the UK side to fulfil its obligation and approve the planning application without delay”, the embassy said in a statement.
The Chinese government purchased Royal Mint Court in 2018, but its requests for planning permission to build the new embassy there were rejected by the local council in 2022 over safety and security concerns.
As President Donald Trump intensifies his controversial efforts to remove immigrants from the nation, Uganda is the latest of several nations to reach a deportation agreement with the US.
In a statement on Thursday, Uganda’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that Kampala had agreed for Washington to send over third-country nationals who face deportation from the US, but are unwilling to return to their home countries. According to the ministry, the agreement was reached under a number of conditions.
Trump’s contentious plans to deport millions of undocumented immigrants have been condemned by rights organizations and law experts. Those already deported include convicted criminals and “uniquely barbaric monsters”, according to the White House.
Similar agreements have been made between African nations, such as Eswatini, which was formerly known as Swaziland, reportedly in exchange for lower tariffs. According to Melusi Simelane of the Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC), the US’s actions constitute exploitative behavior and amount to “dumping ground” for the continent, adding that Washington was particularly focused on developing nations with weak human rights protection.
Here’s what you need to know about the Uganda deal and what countries might be getting in return for hosting US deportees:
What ratified in Uganda?
The permanent secretary of Uganda’s foreign ministry, Bagiire Vincent Waiswa, claimed in a statement posted on X on Thursday that the nation had a “temporary arrangement” with the US. He did not state the timelines for when the deportations would begin or end.
According to the statement, there are caveats about the people who would be transferred, such as the statement that Uganda “prefers” that Africans be transferred as part of the deal.
The statement continued, “The two parties are putting together the detailed modalities for the implementation of the agreement.”
A US State Department statement confirmed that Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had held discussions over the phone regarding “migration, reciprocal trade, and commercial ties”.
After weeks of speculation in the local Ugandan media regarding whether the country would accept US deportees, the deal was announced.
Henry Okello Oryem, the foreign affairs minister in Uganda, refuted the media reports on Wednesday, claiming the country lacks the facilities to house deportees.
Speaking to The Associated Press news agency, Oryem said Uganda was discussing issues of “visas, tariffs, sanctions and related issues” with the US, but not of migration.
“We’re talking about cartels,” said one analyst. How can we incorporate them into Uganda’s local communities? he told the AP.
Uganda’s narrative had changed the day afterward.
During his two-day state visit to Nairobi on May 16, 2024, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni gestures to the media during a joint briefing with Kenyan President William Ruto (unseen).
What might Uganda gain from this?
What might Uganda be receiving in return was not disclosed in the Foreign Ministry’s statement on Thursday.
Other nations, including Eswatini, reportedly offer deportees lower tariffs.
Uganda has been hit with 15 percent tariffs on goods entering the US, as part of Trump’s reciprocal tariff wars. Early in August, senior government officials in Uganda announced that Kampala would start negotiations for a better deal and that the tariffs would impede exports, particularly in the agricultural sector.
One of Uganda’s most important exports to the US is coffee, vanilla, cocoa, and petroleum products. Kampala is particularly keen on boosting coffee exports to the US and competing with bigger suppliers like Colombia. On the other hand, the US pays an 18% tariff on imported goods to Uganda, which exports machinery, such as aircraft parts.
The US and Uganda have historically forged friendly relations, with US aid arriving in Kampala on a regular basis. However, after Uganda passed an anti-homosexuality bill into law in 2023, relations turned sour, and the US accused Uganda of “human rights violations”. For same-sex relationships, punishment under the law, including life sentences, is imposed.
After that, Washington halted HIV-related aid and imposed visa restrictions on Ugandan government officials who “were complicit in undermining the democratic process.” The US also banned Uganda from the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), a trade programme that helped African countries trade tariff-free with the US, but that Trump’s tariffs have effectively killed.
Uganda was also prohibited from receiving two-year loans by the World Bank, but this restriction was lifted in June.
Rights activists claim that the deportees’ accord could lead to a more favorable US administration position toward Uganda, but at the expense of those who have been deported.
“The proposed deal runs afoul of international law”, human rights lawyer Nicholas Opiyo told the AP. According to him, such a system leaves deportees without clear definition of their legal status as refugees or prisoners.
Because of the desire for Uganda to appear in the good books of the United States, Opiyo said, “We are sacrificing human beings for political expediency in this case.” “That I can keep your prisoners if you pay me, how is that different from human trafficking”?
Are refugees already a thing in Uganda?
Yes, Uganda hosts the most refugees in Africa. It already hosts some 1.7 million refugees, largely from neighbouring South Sudan, Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which are all dealing with armed conflict and unrest.
In the past, the country has been praised for having a “progressive refugee policy” and “maintaining an open-door approach to asylum.”
Opposition activists are, however, raising concerns about the government’s poor human rights record. Uganda has been ruled by Museveni since 1986, with his party winning contested elections in landslides. Of course, opposition figures and journalists are frequently the targets of arrests. Some people report being tortured while they are being held.
Speaking to the AP, opposition lawmaker Muwada Nkunyingi said the US deal could give Museveni’s government further Western legitimacy ahead of general elections scheduled for January 2026.
According to Nkunyingi, the agreement “clears their image now that we are about to hold elections in 2026.” He urged the US to take into account what he termed Uganda’s human rights problems.
Jasmin Ramirez holds a photo of her son, Angelo Escalona, at a government-organised rally protesting against the deportation of alleged members of the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang, who were transferred to an El Salvador prison, in Caracas, Venezuela, on Tuesday, March 18, 2025]Ariana Cubillos/AP]
What other nations has the US sent people there?
Similar agreements have been reached with the US by Eswatini, Rwanda, and South Sudan.
Eswatini, in July, accepted five unnamed men from Vietnam, Jamaica, Laos, Cuba and Yemen.
They were described as “individuals so uniquely barbaric that their home countries refused to take them back,” according to Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary of the Department for Homeland Security. She added that they were sentenced to up to 25 years in prison for crimes ranging from child rape to murder. The men are presently held in detention facilities and will be sent back to their countries, according to officials who did not state a timeline.
The Eswatini government is accused of participating in the deal in exchange for US tariff cuts. The tiny nation, which pays US exports of clothing, fruits, nuts, and raw sugar, received a 10% tariff.
“No country should have to be engaged in the violation of international human rights laws, including breaching its domestic laws, to please the Global North in the name of trade”, Simulane of SALC, who is leading an ongoing court case challenging the Eswatini government’s decision, told Al Jazeera. According to him, the action was in contravention of the nation’s constitution, which requires that parliament approves international agreements.
The agreement should be made public for the public to see if it is in line with our national interest, Simulane said, “at the core.” “We further want the agreement declared unconstitutional because it lacked parliamentary approval”.
South Africa, which borders Eswatini on three sides, summoned the smaller nation’s diplomats earlier in August to raise security concerns.
In July, the US sent eight “barbaric” criminals to South Sudan. The DHS listed them as being from Cuba, Myanmar, Vietnam, Laos, Mexico and South Sudan. According to the DHS, they were found guilty of first-degree murder, robbery, drug trafficking, and sexual assault.
In the US, the men were initially directed to Djibouti for months while a legal challenge was pending. However, in late June, the US Supreme Court approved the move to South Sudan.
Rwanda has also stated that it will deport 250 Americans at an unnamed time. The deportees will enjoy “workforce training, health care, and accommodations,” says government spokesman Yolande Makolo. The country previously struck a controversial migrant deal for a fee with the United Kingdom. However, that agreement was broken when the UK’s new Labour government was elected in 2024.
El Salvador has accepted 300 migrants, primarily from Venezuela, for a $6 million fee.
Costa Rica accepted 200 asylum seekers from Afghanistan, China, Ghana, India and Vietnam. By June, 28 people had already been detained, compared to the majority of those who had been repatriated. What did the US offer in return remain a mystery.
