Tax code stops subsidizing employer union-busting campaigns

What it does

This bill amends the tax code to prohibit employers from deducting business expenses incurred to discourage workers from joining unions or engaging in collective bargaining. Currently, employers can write off millions spent on anti-union consultants, captive-audience meetings, and related activities as ordinary business expenses. The bill denies that deduction and requires employers to report such spending to the IRS, with penalties for non-disclosure.

Why we flagged it

The bill is a straightforward tax-policy measure that removes a deduction category (anti-union employer spending) to align the tax code with federal labor policy. It is not deregulation, not a subsidy, and not a carve-out—it is a targeted denial of a tax benefit to a specific category of business expense.

What the text implies

• Employers may shift anti-union spending to non-deductible categories or structure it as capital expenditures, reducing the bill's practical impact if implementation guidance is narrow.
• The bill's effectiveness depends on IRS enforcement and the Secretary's regulatory guidance (due 240 days post-enactment); weak or delayed rules could blunt the intended effect.
• Third-party consultants (union-busting firms) face new reporting obligations under Section 6039K, which may increase transparency but could also create a chilling effect on legitimate labor-relations consulting.
• The penalty structure (minimum $10,000 or $1,000 per FTE, up to $100,000) may be insufficient to deter large employers but could be onerous for small businesses with limited HR capacity.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

The bill removes a tax subsidy that has allowed employers to deduct millions in anti-union spending, reducing the financial advantage employers have in discouraging unionization. Workers benefit by facing less well-funded employer opposition to their right to organize, and the tax code no longer subsidizes interference with a federally protected right.

Named in the bill

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), Department of the Treasury, Economic Policy Institute, Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, National Labor Relations Act, Railway Labor Act, Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Where it stands

137 cosponsors: 137 Democrats.

• Apr 7, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Apr 7, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Ways and Means · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

6 lobbying clients named this bill on 9 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $3,035,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 43 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 82% of bills with at least one filing.

Donald Norcross, the sponsor, reported $841,914 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers — $1,425,000 on 2 filings
• American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees — $690,000 on 1 filing
• American Federation of Teachers — $410,000 on 1 filing
• National Right to Work Committee — $410,000 on 2 filings
• United Mine Workers of America — $80,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 21, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.