New Bill Gives President Post-Enactment Veto Power, Fast-Tracking Cuts to Spending and Tax Breaks Until 2031

The Legislative Line Item Veto Act of 2025 is setting up a major shake-up in how federal spending and tax laws are finalized. Essentially, this bill creates a new power for the President to target specific parts of a bill—like a single spending line or a targeted tax break—after the bill has already been signed into law. Think of it as a post-game instant replay review for the budget.

The President’s New Power: The Post-Game Veto

Under Section 2, once a bill covering discretionary spending, direct spending, or targeted tax benefits becomes law, the President gets 30 calendar days to propose canceling specific provisions or dollar amounts. They can send up to 10 of these “special messages” per regular bill, or 20 for a massive omnibus bill. The President has to explain exactly what they’re cutting, where the money goes, and why they think the cut is a good idea, including the estimated financial impact. This isn't just theoretical; it means a tax credit benefiting a specific industry or a funding line for a particular government agency could be singled out for elimination, even after Congress passed it and the President signed it.

The Congressional Speed Run

Here’s where it gets interesting—and fast. The President’s proposed cancellation doesn't happen automatically. Congress has to pass a special “approval bill” to make the cut official. However, this approval process is designed to be a total sprint, not a marathon. In the House, debate is limited to five hours total, and crucially, no amendments are allowed. The Senate is even faster, limiting debate to just two hours. This fast-track procedure, detailed in Section 2, means Congress must vote up or down on the President’s proposed cuts quickly and without the ability to tweak or modify them. If Congress misses the deadline, the original spending or tax provision stands, but the severely limited debate time raises serious questions about proper oversight.

What This Means for Your Tax Breaks and Programs

This new authority targets two main areas: spending lines and “targeted tax benefits.” The bill defines a “targeted tax benefit” as a revenue-losing tax break that benefits only a single entity. For example, if a tax law included a specific deduction that only applied to one major corporation’s business model, that benefit could be flagged by the Ways and Means and Finance Committee chairs and targeted for cancellation by the President. If you’re a small business owner relying on a broad tax incentive, you’re likely safe, but if your industry managed to secure a very specific, narrow benefit, it’s now on the chopping block.

Adding to the pressure, the President can also temporarily delay the availability of targeted spending or tax benefits for up to 30 days while Congress considers the cancellation, with the option to extend that delay for another 30 days (Section 2). This means the Executive Branch could functionally pause a program's funding for up to two months before Congress even makes a final decision. For agencies, contractors, or local governments relying on that funding, that temporary freeze could cause significant operational instability.

A New Balance of Power (and a Warning)

Section 3 clarifies that any money saved from these cancellations must be used only for deficit reduction, which is the intended fiscal benefit of the bill. However, the core impact is the shift in power. This bill grants the President a significant, post-enactment check on Congress’s power of the purse, forcing lawmakers to vote on specific cuts they may have previously approved within larger legislation. The authority is temporary, set to expire on October 1, 2031.

It’s worth noting Section 4, a “Sense of Congress,” which basically tells the Executive Branch not to use the threat of these cancellations as a political bargaining chip against individual members of Congress—a clear recognition that this new power could easily be weaponized. While the intent is fiscal discipline, the reality is that giving the President the power to unilaterally select cuts, followed by a highly restricted Congressional approval process, concentrates immense power in the Executive Branch and severely limits Congress’s ability to conduct thorough oversight.