The House's plans to approve the $2.2 trillion bipartisan Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act by voice vote a few hours after convening this morning are in question due to the possibility that a member may object. How events will unfold is unclear and a potential lawmaker objection doesn't threaten ultimate passage of the bill, but it may require that the House bring a majority of members back to Washington and delay passage until they are able to.

Concerns among House leadership escalated last night, as both House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) revised previous guidance to their respective members to say that, in light of the possibility the measure will not pass by voice vote, members who are able and willing to be in Washington D.C. by 10:00 a.m. on March 27 are encouraged to do so. They had previously said a voice vote was planned due to safety concerns and the difficulty of members traveling.

Even President Trump acknowledged the situation, saying during a news conference yesterday, "There could be one vote, one vote, one grandstander maybe, you might have one grandstander. And for that, we'll have to come back and take a little more time, but it'll pass, it'll just take a little longer."

Any one member could object to the voice vote process, but the current focus is on Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), who in a radio interview this week said he was "having a really hard time" with the prospect that House members may not come back given that the Senate was able to conduct a vote, which resulted in approving the bill 96-0 late March 25. Massie cited a House rule that requires a quorum of members to conduct business.

The CARES Act, the third congressional bill to address the crisis, provides for loans and other benefits to businesses small and large, expanded unemployment insurance, direct payments to those with wages middle-income and below, new appropriations funding for health care and other priorities, and tax changes like deferrals of employer payroll tax liabilities coupled with an employee retention tax credit and rollbacks of TCJA limitations on net operating losses (NOLs) and the IRC Section 163(j) business interest limitation.

Meanwhile, attention is turning to the next congressional relief package. In a news conference yesterday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said going forward "we really should be operating four corners, the four — House and Senate, Democrats and Republicans — as we go along to find as much common ground as we can" given the challenges in passing the previous two bills. For logistical reasons, i.e., one chamber being in session and not the other, House Democrats took the lead on bill #2 and Senate Republicans on bill #3.

There is currently no clear idea of the timing of the next measure nor what exactly would be included, but ideas are already being discussed. Speaker Pelosi mentioned ideas including stronger OSHA protections and food assistance provisions and said there was a proposal on pensions — likely referring to multiemployer pension relief — that Democrats wanted on bill #3 but Senate leadership said should wait for the next round of legislation. "So we're ready for that," she said.

The second EY webcast in the series discussing Tax in the time of COVID-19 is March 27 from 1:00-2:00 p.m. Register here.

———————————————