🆚 Side-by-Side Comparison
This page outlines the major differences between the TEA Act and Trump’s 2025 “One Big Beautiful Bill,” including how each is funded, who benefits, and how the money flows.
| Category | TEA Act | Trump’s Budget |
|---|---|---|
| Cash Support | $1,000/month stability payment + $500/month locked savings account from birth | Expanded child tax credit and MAGA savings accounts for select families |
| Healthcare & Safety Net | Local reinvestment of reclaimed Medicaid/WIC funds into mental health, maternal care, housing | Major cuts to Medicaid and SNAP; state block-granting with limited coverage |
| Education & Childcare | Pre-K microgrants, school-based stipends, and learning access credits via local hubs | Consolidates and cuts $4.5B from public education programs |
| Tax Policy | Shifts tax brackets to reduce burden on earners < $30K; surtax on income > $500K; removes exemptions for political churches | Extends 2017 tax cuts; eliminates income tax on tips; increases deficit by $5T+ |
| UCI (Universal Community Investment) | 6.2% worker contribution (similar to Social Security) funds direct aid and youth savings accounts — not a new tax, a reallocation | No equivalent; federal safety net programs defunded or privatized |
| Federal Assets | Includes revenue share from National Parks, land leases, and eco-tourism in a public Community Fund | No dedicated public asset reinvestment mechanism |
| State Role | States must co-fund 20% of TEA distributions; transparent dashboards track usage and impact | States absorb fiscal pressure from cuts to healthcare and education |
| Transparency | Public ledger of all cash flows, community organizations, and participant outcomes | Traditional IRS reporting with no additional transparency mechanisms |
🔍 Fiscal Model Summary: TEA Act
The TEA Act is funded through a multi-stream system: a worker-paid UCI contribution (~6.2%), progressive income taxes on wealth above $500,000, federal public asset royalties (e.g. National Parks), and elimination of tax-exempt status for revenue-generating religious political entities. These are matched by reclaimed federal safety net cuts and managed through local nonprofit and state collaboration. No middle-class tax increases are required.
This policy anchors dignity into the tax code and turns abandoned dollars into visible outcomes — family security, generational savings, and public oversight.