On June 8, 2025, approximately 70 executives from major international corporations, including Shell, Toyota, and LVMH, convened in Washington, D.C., to lobby against Section 899 of President Donald Trump’s proposed finance bill. This provision, part of the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” aims to impose increased taxes on foreign investments in U.S. assets, raising concerns about potential impacts on American job security and international investment flows.
The Global Business Alliance (GBA), representing these companies, argues that the measure could deter foreign investment and harm the U.S. economy. Jonathan Samford, president of the GBA, emphasized that many multinationals might reconsider their U.S. operations, potentially jeopardizing 8.4 million American jobs. He stated, “Those companies will not be paying U.S. tax whatsoever because they will not be able to operate in that punitive, high-tax environment.”
Section 899 proposes a progressive tax burden of up to 20% on foreign investors’ U.S. income, targeting countries that impose taxes the U.S. deems unfair, such as digital service taxes. Critics have dubbed it the “revenge tax,” fearing it could escalate global trade tensions and deter foreign investment in U.S. markets.
The lobbying efforts coincide with ongoing U.S.-China trade discussions in London, highlighting the broader implications of the proposed tax changes on international trade relations. Industry groups, including the Institute of International Bankers, representing major global banks like HSBC and BNP Paribas, are also voicing concerns. They argue that the tax could disrupt financial markets and burden American businesses.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo and other Republicans are reportedly in close coordination with President Trump on the tax bill. While the White House has declined to comment, some lawmakers suggest that the provision may ultimately be counterproductive to U.S. economic goals. Senator Steve Daines noted the need to ensure that U.S. tax policies do not diminish the country’s status as the global gold standard.
As the Senate prepares to review the bill, investors and multinational companies are closely monitoring developments. The potential for increased borrowing costs and reduced foreign investment underscores the high stakes involved. Analysts warn that the provision could lead to a decline in foreign demand for U.S. direct and portfolio investment, potentially weakening the dollar and impacting the broader economy.
The outcome of the Senate’s deliberations on Section 899 will have significant implications for the U.S. economy and its position in the global financial system. As debates continue, stakeholders across industries and borders await clarity on the future of foreign investment in the United States.
