On July 1, 2025, Roger Marshall cast one of the 50 votes that passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, whose tax and spending changes the Congressional Budget Office estimates leave the lowest-income tenth of households worse off while the top tenth gains, and which adds trillions of dollars to the national debt. In the votes before passage, Marshall voted against requiring the bill not to add to the deficit and against restoring the expanded Child Tax Credit.
As the House member for Kansas's 1st District, Marshall voted in 2017 for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, whose tax cuts the 2025 law extended. On the day the 2025 bill passed, Marshall said it would "help shrink the debt."
Roger Marshall's Votes and Statements on Taxes and the Deficit
- Marshall Cast One of the 50 Votes for a Law That Gives the Top Tenth $13,600 a Year and Costs the Lowest Tenth $1,200. On July 1, 2025, Roger Marshall voted yes on Senate passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which passed 50 to 50 with the Vice President breaking the tie, so the bill would have failed without his vote. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the law will cost the lowest-income tenth of households an average of $1,200 a year, mainly through its Medicaid and SNAP cuts, while the top tenth gain $13,600 a year.
- Marshall Voted to Score the Tax-Cut Extension as Costing Nothing in June 2025. On June 30, 2025, Marshall voted yes to sustain the chair's ruling that the chair must rely on determinations made by the Budget Committee, which let the committee chairman use a "current policy" baseline under which extending the 2017 tax cuts was scored as costing nothing. The ruling was sustained 53 to 47. Brookings calls the maneuver a fundamental break with 50 years of budget rules, and reports the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the law's deficit increase, with interest, as a total of $4.1 trillion.
- Marshall Voted Against Requiring the Bill Not to Add to the Deficit in June 2025. On June 30, 2025, Marshall voted no on Senator Alex Padilla's motion to make the bill "not increase the deficit" over 2025-2034 against current law. It failed 47 to 53. The Congressional Budget Office's February 2026 update estimates the law will add $4.2 trillion to the national debt through 2034 and $4.7 trillion through 2035, counting interest and economic effects.
- Marshall Voted Against Restoring the Expanded Child Tax Credit in July 2025. On July 1, 2025, Marshall voted no on Senator Michael Bennet's motion to raise the Child Tax Credit to "match levels of the expanded Child Tax Credit," paid for by corporations and the wealthy. It failed 47 to 53. The law instead raised the credit to $2,200 and denied it to families unless a parent and the child have Social Security numbers; Brookings found 17 million children were in low-income families that received less than the full credit or no credit at all and thus would not benefit from the increase.
- Marshall Voted Against Barring Tax Cuts for the Wealthy Paid for by Medicaid and Food Aid Cuts in February 2025. On February 20, 2025, Marshall voted no on waiving the budget rules for Senator Chuck Schumer's amendment "to prevent tax cuts for the wealthy if a single dollar of Medicaid funding is cut," which failed 49 to 51, and no on Senator Amy Klobuchar's amendment to stop tax cuts for the ultra-rich while families struggle to afford food, which failed 48 to 52. The same night he voted against Schumer's amendment "to prevent unwarranted tax cuts for the ultra-rich," which failed 47 to 52. ITEP estimates the law gives the richest 1 percent $1 trillion in tax cuts over a decade while cutting Medicaid by almost as much, and that more than 70 percent of the net tax cuts will go to the richest fifth in 2026.
- Marshall Voted Against Middle-Class Tax Relief and a Limit on Record Debt in April 2025. On April 5, 2025, Marshall voted no on Senator Jacky Rosen's amendment to provide tax relief for the middle class, which failed 47 to 52. On April 4 he voted no on Senator Jeff Merkley's point of order against legislation creating more debt over 30 years than the country accumulated in its first 249 years, which failed 46 to 53. The Congressional Budget Office projects federal interest costs will rise from $970 billion in 2025 to $2.1 trillion by 2036, a path that reflects the law along with tariffs and other changes.
- Marshall Voted for the Budget Resolution That Allowed $1.5 Trillion in Deficit-Financed Tax Cuts in April 2025. On April 5, 2025, Marshall voted yes on H.Con.Res. 14, which allowed the Senate Finance Committee to add up to $1.5 trillion to deficits and raised the debt limit by up to $5 trillion. It passed 51 to 48. That budget resolution is the one the One Big Beautiful Bill Act was passed under.
- Marshall Voted Against Returning Unspent Immigration-Enforcement Money to Cut the Deficit in June 2026. On June 5, 2026, Marshall voted no on Senator Gary Peters's amendment to rescind unspent immigration-enforcement balances from the law and transfer them to the Treasury "to reduce the deficit." It failed 46 to 53. The money stayed with the enforcement agencies while the law's deficit cost grew in the Congressional Budget Office's February 2026 update.
- As a House Member, Marshall Voted for the 2017 Tax Law That Gave the Top 1 Percent an Average $61,090 Cut. On November 16, 2017 and again on December 20, 2017, as the House member for Kansas's 1st District, Marshall voted for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, first on House passage and then for the final version that became law. The Tax Policy Center found that households in the top 1 percent would receive an average tax cut of $61,090 by 2025, while the bottom 60% of American households would receive an average tax cut of less than $500. The 2025 law Marshall voted for permanently extends the temporary individual income and estate tax provisions of the 2017 law.
- Marshall Said the Bill Would Help Shrink the Debt; Congress's Budget Estimate Said It Adds at Least $3.3 Trillion. On July 1, 2025, after voting for the bill, Marshall told the Kansas Reflector it would spark such growth that it would "help shrink the debt." The same story noted that a congressional budget estimate found the bill would add at least $3.3 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, and Brookings reports the Congressional Budget Office's estimate that the law adds $3.4 trillion to deficits through 2034 before interest.
What Roger Marshall's Tax Votes Mean for Kansas
- State budget. Gov. Laura Kelly says the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is expected to cost Kansas at least $150 million as provisions cutting health care programs take effect.
- What Kansas gives up. Over ten years, the law cuts federal Medicaid funding for Kansas by about $3.35 billion, by KFF's allocation of the Congressional Budget Office estimate, and makes Kansas pay part of SNAP benefits for the first time.
Frequently Asked Questions About Roger Marshall on Taxes and the deficit
What is Roger Marshall's record on taxes and the deficit under Trump?
Roger Marshall voted for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on July 1, 2025 and, before passage, voted against requiring it not to add to the deficit, against restoring the expanded Child Tax Credit, and to let the Budget Committee score the extended 2017 tax cuts as costing nothing. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the law adds trillions to the debt, and Marshall said it would help shrink the debt.
Did Roger Marshall vote for tax cuts for the rich?
Roger Marshall voted for the 2025 law that ITEP estimates gives the richest 1 percent $117 billion in net tax cuts in 2026, more than the bottom 60 percent combined, and before that voted against three amendments in February 2025 to block tax cuts for the wealthy while Medicaid and food aid were cut. In 2017, as a House member, he voted for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
How much does the tax law Roger Marshall voted for add to the national debt?
The law Roger Marshall voted for adds $4.2 trillion to the debt through 2034 in the Congressional Budget Office's February 2026 estimate, counting interest and economic effects. Brookings and the Tax Policy Center write that the money spent in the law would have been sufficient to resolve Social Security's long-term financing problem.
Last updated: 2026-10-25