cuts

Iranian authorities are enforcing an internet blackout after protests escalated in Tehran. It’s been two weeks since demonstrations flared up in protest at harsh economic conditions. They’ve spread to more than 100 towns and cities and taken on a political tone.

R. Scott Gemmill, the creator and showrunner of “The Pitt,” has always felt comfortable in a hospital.

He initially had ambitions of going into medicine — he studied gerontology, which explores the processes and problems of aging, and did some volunteer work at hospitals. He also took a nurse assistant course.

“I really thought I was going to try and get into a med school,” he said recently while seated in the recognizable lobby of the show’s fictional hospital set on the Warner Bros. lot in Burbank. “I just wanted to have a job and medicine seemed like there was always going to be a need. I’m comfortable in a hospital. I wish I followed through on a certain level because I loved that ability to go in and solve problems. But my writing kicked in and that’s it — I never went back.”

But in TV land’s school of medicine, Gemmill has gone far. He did a rotation at Chicago’s County General Hospital, joining the writing staff of NBC’s popular medical drama “ER” in its sixth season. And now his turn at Pittsburgh Trauma Medical Center, through HBO Max’s “The Pitt,” has been a breakout success, revitalizing the medical drama genre with a fresh spin on the format — each episode tracks one hour in a shift — and energizing its audience with a traditional weekly rollout. The Emmy-winning series returned Thursday for its second season that revolves around a shift on the Fourth of July. But the fireworks arrived well before that, with HBO Max announcing on the eve of the show’s premiere that the drama has been renewed for a third season.

In the hiatus before shooting began on this season’s finale, Gemmill, whose other TV credits include “Jag” and “NCIS: Los Angeles,” talked about the show’s momentum heading into the new season, navigating how personal to get with characters, and introducing a new doctor to the mix.

1

2

1. Noah Wyle as Dr. Robby in Season 2 of “The Pitt.” (Warrick Page / HBO Max) 2. From left: Sepideh Moafi as Dr. Baran Al-Hashimi, Taylor Dearden as Dr. Melissa King, Katherine LaNasa as charge nurse Dana Evans, Gerran Howell as Dr. Dennis Whitaker and Supriya Ganesh as Dr. Samira Mohan in “The Pitt.” (Warrick Page / HBO Max)

You started breaking Season 2 last January, as people were discovering the show week to week. People love to be critical of sophomore seasons of a breakout hit. How did that shape the second season for you and the writers?

It was weird because we wrote [Season 1] without any feedback. Not just wrote it — we shot it and produced it. We had started thinking about Season 2 before people had responded. It was a slow build. I felt like the healthcare professionals found us first, then spread through word of mouth. We were just moving forward with what we thought were the next stages of these characters’ lives. It wasn’t until later on that the accolades came and there was more pressure then. When we first started, we didn’t know if anybody was going to watch or not. We had finished it without any pressure whatsoever because nobody had weighed in on it. It was a very rarefied situation, which was nice. We hope for the best. And it seemed to work out OK. There’s a little bit of concern going into the second season because we were successful, you wonder, can you maintain that? But we try not to focus on that, and just really focus on the characters and the stories and do what we did the first season — tell really authentic, strong stories.

The season picks up 10 months after that initial shift where we met everyone. How did you decide on the time jump, landing on July 4?

It really came from wanting to have Langdon [Patrick Ball] back, so I knew he had to do about 10 months of rehab. Then we were looking at what time of year would that be. We’re also somewhat limited by when we shoot in Pittsburgh. We decided to do the Fourth of July because it comes with a bunch of shenanigans.

Season 2 opens with a helmet-less Robby riding in on a motorcycle.

The motorcycle goes back to some part of Robby’s past. We don’t really talk about it, but it has a link to his father, and his father being a tinkerer of old cars and Robby needing a vacation, a hiatus of sorts. Pennsylvania is a no-helmet law [state]. And some of us who have motorcycles sometimes enjoy riding them without a motor helmet. It’s not a smart thing to do, and it speaks to Robby’s current attitude of a certain amount of carelessness on his part.

Yes, we learn that he’s going to be taking a three-month sabbatical. How soon will we discover what led to that? Is it an amalgamation of different things?

Yeah, he’s long overdue for a vacation. He knows that something’s not working in his life and this is one way he thinks that he can fix things.

How did you land on Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump in Canada as his choice for a getaway?

It was a place I knew about and it just sounded like an interesting place for him to go that has some foreboding associations with it.

A new doctor, Baran Al-Hashimi (Sepideh Moafi), center, is brought in to oversee the ER unit on the eve of Dr. Robby’s (Noah Wyle) three-month sabbatical.

(Warrick Page / HBO Max)

The season introduces a new character, Dr. Baran Al-Hashimi, played by Sepideh Moafi, who’s going to be taking over when Robby is out. She’s an advocate of generative AI and trying to get everyone on board with this idea of saving time with charting. What were your conversations with doctors in the field about that topic and what intrigued you about how healthcare professionals are thinking about this technology?

She’s someone who’s a little different with her approach, a little more contemporary and forward, as opposed to Robby; he bridges contemporary medicine and old-school medicine with his relationship that he had with Dr. Adamson, who showed him a lot of the old-school techniques that he still has in his wheelhouse if he needs them. AI is pretty much here to stay and it’s infiltrating every aspect of our lives — medicine is no exception. I would say it’s still in its infancy in the ER, but there are ways that it’s trying to be implemented. Like any other tool, it has potential to be used wisely and potential for disaster. We’re not really exploring the disastrous side of it yet but just what the realities are. The fear is that it will make the doctors more efficient, especially with things like charting, but then will that time go back to the patients or will they just have to see more patients? And so they’ll have even less time. That’s the challenge at this point.

How do you feel about it in your own industry?

I try not to think about it. I guess I’m probably in denial more than anything. I don’t have any place for it and I don’t really want to really know too much about it at this point.

We see a lightness to Robby this season. He’s involved in a situationship at work. This is a workplace drama. It hasn’t shown us the interior lives of its staff beyond the nuggets they share during their shift. How much do you want the viewers to know about them versus how much do you want your actors to just understand their characters?

It comes with the job. He’s not a monk. He’s in a relationship of convenience more than anything. I don’t think he’s a long-term planner. The fact that he hasn’t had a vacation in forever is proof of that. Robby is very good at putting on a good face until he’s not. I think what we’ll see over the course of the season is that facade start to slide.

It’s a process. The 15-hour nature of the show limits how much of that information you can dole out organically, but it also allows you to be authentic in terms of how much you actually learn about someone in a day. Most of us not just spilling our guts and saying our life story to the people we work with. As we start the season, we’ll think about: What is the journey we’re going to take this character on, and what information needs to be learned in order to achieve that? And then what medical stories will help maybe bring that out. You do it in little layers.

Is there something coming up that you think will be particularly illuminating?

There’s some stuff about Robby. We pulled back a lot on it, but we’ll learn a little bit about him. We’ll learn some things about Whitaker [Gerran Howell]. We know what Langdon is going through, his marriage.

After taking leave to seek treatment for prescription drug addiction, Dr. Frank Langdon (Patrick Ball) returns to work in “The Pitt.”

(Warrick Page / HBO Max)

To stay on Langdon — physicians and people in the healthcare profession are vulnerable to addiction for a variety of reasons. What was important for you in that storyline and what did you want to explore through him?

To show somebody who’s made a mistake and was doing their best to hide it as is sometimes the pattern of behavior. I don’t think most people enjoy their addiction. So, seeing someone who’s doing their best to try and heal themselves. Just because you’re going through the program and doing the steps, it doesn’t mean everyone’s going to welcome you back with open arms. There are still some bad feelings and you have to mend some bridges and fences along the way.

It’s not just Robby and Langdon. Langdon feels he owes a sort of mea culpa to almost everyone he works with, especially Santos [Isa Briones]. And whether or not she’s willing to accept that is debatable. Robby, obviously, has some really strong feelings about it because Langdon was his student, and he made Robby look kind of stupid. Robby is angry at himself for not seeing it.

How are you figuring out who’s going to shuffle in and out?

Some of it’s based on the reality; for instance — I was thinking of this today — next season would be Whitaker’s third year, so he has one more year to stay here, and then he would have to go. It’s really about where they are in their careers and what makes the most sense story-wise.

I want to talk about some of the procedures and cases that we’ll see this season because they’re pretty gnarly. Do you keep a log of cases and try to figure out how they can fit into the story as you go?

We never really start with the medicine. Sometimes we say the medicine is the wallpaper that reflects everything in the room, but what’s going on between the characters is really what’s at stake, and it’s either something going on between them and the patient, between the doctors and nurses, or internally. Ideally, it touches on a little bit of everything.

When we came back, I probably had 150 ideas of just cases. I don’t know how many of them we actually did. We had never done a hot toddler story, [where a child was overheated] but that is something that’s a real problem. That was one where we knew we were going to try and do that story, but whose is it going to be? Who does it reflect most? Then we work backwards into it. We pull from everywhere — things we think of, things we’ve heard, things we imagine. We don’t really do ripped-from-the-headlines, but we do things that seem like that because a lot of times we’re talking to professionals, asking them what was concerning them. What do they worry about? We’re extrapolating their concerns. That’s what happened with [Season 1’s] measles story. There was no measles outbreak when we wrote that story, but we knew, based on what was going on, that there would be eventually, and we just happened that the timing was in our favor.

Is there like a line you won’t cross in terms of squirm factor? Have you had to pull back?

I don’t think so, because we’ve never done anything for the sake of that. We’ve never done anything that’s not done in the ER. As long as it serves a story and a character, then I think it’s fair. We do something big for the finale that Abbot [Shawn Hatosy] and Robby are doing with a bunch of others — it takes all hands on deck. I’m interested to see how that comes out, and I’ve seen elements of it now that are terrific.

Can you share more of what kinds of topics or cases we’ll be seeing this season?

We did a sexual assault, [and] we’re looking at how budget cuts are affecting healthcare. There’s a story about someone who’s been rationing their insulin and the downsides of that.

When the One Big Beautiful Bill Act was signed into law by the president, did you have a lot of calls with professionals?

Oh, yeah, because it’s a huge issue. You figure out with the changes in the Affordable Care Act, if you suddenly have 8 to 10 million people that don’t have insurance, what’s going to happen is they’re going to stop going to their doctors. Anything that was an issue is going to get exacerbated by not being treated. So, where do they end up? Well, they’re going to end up in the ER, but they’re going to be even sicker than they would have been. We’re going to get more people, and their conditions are going to be worse. It only makes what’s already a strained system even more likely to break. Because we were just starting to shoot in the summertime, we could make some adjustments, but I don’t remember going back and changing things. We saw it coming.

I know there had been some discussion about an ICE story? Will we see that this season?

Yes, we have some ICE agents show up, and how that affects people in the hospital. That’s been a tricky one to try and get right without being heavy-handed and being fair to everyone on both sides of that conversation. What else do we do this year? Some fun stuff. The kind of things you would expect over the Fourth of July weekend.

How do you feel about the shipping that’s taking shape with “The Pitt” fan base?

I’m not on social media, I’m not really a part of that. My writers would tell me about things like that. The Langdon-Mel of it — I’m like, he’s married. That’s more of a big brother relationship. And Abbot and Robby — I just sort of shake my head. Our show’s not really like that. It’s not a show where people are sneaking off to have sex in a closet or anything. Those things are very subtle. And we do see a little bit this season between a couple of people, but it’s very much secondary because it’s not something we actually see, per se.

Just as he did last season, Noah Wyle is writing again this season. He’s also directing. Tell me what it’s like when you have the lead of your show involved in different aspects of the show’s creative elements?

It’s really great because he’s up to speed on everything. And because he is the centerpiece of the show, I rely on Noah a lot for guidance and help figuring out how to steer through all the icebergs. He’s a good writer and he’s a good director, and it just adds a whole other level to the writers room, in terms of the connection between us and the set. He’s there right up until, basically, we start shooting. Even when we are shooting, if he has a day off, he’s in the room or we’ll do meetings at lunchtime so he can join in and weigh in. It was Noah’s idea to do the Shema prayer for his breakdown. That was a very coordinated effort because I knew I was asking a lot of him. That’s what’s really nice about having Noah be a writer and a director. He has the vernacular to have these conversations about what he needs from me to get him to where he needs to be. It’s a very symbiotic relationship.

R. Scott Gemmill on the pressure that comes with having a breakout hit: “There’s a little bit of concern going into the second season because we were successful, you wonder, can you maintain that? But we try not to focus on that, and just really focus on the characters and the stories and do what we did the first season — tell really authentic, strong stories.”

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Do you ever worry about him being overextended?

Yes. That’s why I don’t mind when he has a day off. But he’s just gonna fill it with work.

In Hollywood, when something’s a success, there’s an immediate impulse to figure out a way to broaden that success. Has there been talks of spinoffs, ways to build out the universe?

No, not really. We’ve talked about doing a night shift. In time, maybe that’s something we’ll explore. The show still has lots of life in it, so I wouldn’t want to distract from what we’re doing now. But I think there’s a potential to do all the craziness that comes out at night.

Like Dr. Al-Hashimi, you’ve had experience being the newcomer joining a well-oiled machine. Tell me about becoming a writer on “ER” in Season 6.

I hated it when I first went on. They had done so many stories already, and there were multiple stories told per episode, so they had gone through so many stories that it seemed like anything I suggested was already done. They all felt like Ivy League professors and I was a college dropout; I felt like I so didn’t belong there. I remember calling my wife and saying, “I hate this. This is horrible. I should never have left ‘Jag.’” But over time, I found my way and found my voice on the show.

That was the season with one of the episodes I revisit often — when Dr. Carter (Wyle) gets stabbed.

I remember having a big debate over whether Kellie Martin’s eyes should be open or closed. I was adamant that she had to have her eyes open. I’m glad I won, but that was intense. The whole show was very intense.

George Clooney has teased that he would be open to the idea of appearing on “The Pitt.” Could you see a world where that happens?

I take that with a grain of salt but, hey, I’m up for anything. I’ll try anything once.

What I appreciated about the season finale last year, especially in this world of TV where you feel like you need to have this epic cliffhanger, was how true to life it felt. Since you’ll be shooting the finale in January, what can you share about how you’re thinking about it?

There’s something really fun at the end of this season. I hope that we do it as a little Easter egg for the fans in the finale, so I’m looking forward to doing that.

Leading medical groups in the United States have raised alarm after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) under President Donald Trump took the unprecedented step of cutting the number of vaccines it recommends for children.

Monday’s sweeping decision, which advances the agenda of Trump-appointed Secretary of Health Robert F Kennedy Jr, removes the recommendation for rotavirus, influenza, meningococcal disease and hepatitis A vaccines for children.

It comes as US vaccination rates have been slipping, and the rates of diseases that can be protected against with vaccines, such as measles and whooping cough, are rising across the country, according to government data.

“This decision protects children, respects families, and rebuilds trust in public health,” Kennedy said in a statement on Monday.

In response, the American Medical Association (AMA) said it was “deeply concerned by recent changes to the childhood immunisation schedule that affects the health and safety of millions of children”.

“Vaccination policy has long been guided by a rigorous, transparent scientific process grounded in decades of evidence showing that vaccines are safe, effective, and lifesaving,” Sandra Adamson Fryhofer, a doctor and AMA trustee, said in a statement posted on the group’s website.

She pointed out that major policy changes needed “careful review” and transparency, which are lacking in the CDD’s decision.

“When longstanding recommendations are altered without a robust, evidence-based process, it undermines public trust and puts children at unnecessary risk of preventable disease,” she said.

The change was effective immediately and carried out following the approval by another Trump appointee, CDC acting director Jim O’Neill, without the agency’s usual outside expert review.

The changes were made by political appointees, without any evidence that the current recommendations were harming children, Sean O’Leary, chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics, said.

“It’s so important that any decision about the US childhood vaccination schedule should be grounded in evidence, transparency and established scientific processes, not comparisons that overlook critical differences between countries or health systems,” he told journalists.

Protections against those diseases are only recommended for certain groups deemed high risk, or when doctors recommend them in what’s called “shared decision-making”, the new CDC guidance stated.

States, not the federal government, have the authority to require vaccinations for schoolchildren.

But CDC requirements often influence the state regulations, even as some states have begun creating their own alliances to counter the Trump administration’s guidance on vaccines.

Kennedy, the US health secretary, is a longtime vaccine sceptic.

In May, Kennedy announced that the CDC would no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children and pregnant women, a move immediately questioned by public health experts who saw no new data to justify the change.

In June, Kennedy fired an entire 17-member CDC vaccine advisory committee, later installing several of his own replacements, including multiple vaccine sceptics.

In August, he announced that the US is to cut funding for mRNA vaccine development, a move health experts say is “dangerous” and could make the US much more vulnerable to future outbreaks of respiratory viruses like COVID-19.

Kennedy in November also personally directed the CDC to abandon its position that vaccines do not cause autism, without supplying any new evidence to support the change.

Trump, reacting to the latest CDC decision on his Truth Social platform, said the new schedule is “far more reasonable” and “finally aligns the United States with other Developed Nations around the World”.

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Dick Cheney predicted Thursday that the Soviet Union will withdraw all of its troops from Europe by 1995, a forecast that prompted key Senate Democrats to question whether President Bush’s new proposal for cutting U.S. forces should be faster and deeper.

As the Senate Armed Services Committee opened congressional debate on reshaping the nation’s military structure, Cheney and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Colin L. Powell, were repeatedly challenged on the Administration’s troop-reduction plans.

195,000 Force Level

Cheney, disclosing the Pentagon’s rough timetable for cuts in Europe, testified that it may take a year or two to carry out any U.S.-Soviet agreement on the issue.

Bush announced Wednesday night that he was recommending that each side cut its combat forces in Central Europe to 195,000, with the United States allowed to have an additional 30,000 elsewhere in Europe. Currently, the United States has 305,000 troops on the continent.

Sen. Alan J. Dixon (D-Ill.), sharply criticizing the pace of negotiations, declared that he would push the subcommittee he heads to legislate an immediate reduction of 50,000 American troops in Europe and 10,000 in Korea.

Dixon said events are overtaking negotiations, with NATO allies West Germany and Belgium already planning their own deep cuts and Soviet forces certain to be kicked out by new governments in Eastern Europe.

“I’m not saying we should strip until we’re naked,” Dixon said. “There are reasonable, moderate, fair reductions we can make.”

Later, Committee Chairman Sam Nunn (D-Ga.) applauded Bush for going beyond his proposal of last May and advocating the withdrawal of 80,000 U.S. troops, not just the 30,000 he called for then. He called it “much more relevant to the changes in Europe and to the budget realities here at home.”

But Nunn voiced strong concern when Cheney seemed to advocate keeping 225,000 U.S. troops in Europe indefinitely, despite his prediction that the Soviets would pull all of its forces out of Eastern Europe and the two Germanys would be reunited.

Nunn warned that unless the United States had plans to make substantial withdrawals in such a case, it could wind up supplying most of the ground forces for NATO as other allies disbanded their units.

The influential senator got Cheney to concede that the Administration would “take another look” at U.S. troop levels in the event of a sweeping Soviet pullback and German reunification.

Despite Cheney’s expression of flexibility, the defense secretary firmly defended Bush’s new plan. He asserted that any effort by Congress to make unilateral troop cuts before the conclusion of U.S.-Soviet arms control talks would undermine the NATO alliance and encourage greater instability in Europe.

“We are on the verge of winning one of the greatest victories in the history of the world without a shot being fired,” Cheney said. “We should not unilaterally bring them (U.S. troops) home before we get an agreement.”

Republicans Cautious

Several Republicans on the committee strongly backed that position.

“We cannot let the euphoria sweeping this nation drive us to unilateral and hasty reductions in these forces,” Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S. C.) said.

Although members of both parties warmly pledged to work cooperatively with Cheney and Powell in the battles ahead, several Democrats served notice that they would press for deep cuts in the Administration’s proposals for increased spending on strategic weapons programs.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) proposed a “Democratic alternative” that he said would carve a $169-billion “peace dividend” out of the defense budget over the next five years, more than quadrupling the savings proposed by Bush for the same period.

Kennedy singled out the B-2 Stealth bomber, the “Star Wars” anti-missile program and other major programs for deep slashes. He argued that Bush’s budget fails to reflect a dramatically diminished Soviet military threat and a massive upgrading of U.S. strategic weapons in the last decade.

“We have to have a modernization program,” he said, “but does it have to be at the madcap pace of the 1980s?”

Cheney, while acknowledging major changes in the world, said that the Soviets continue to modernize their own strategic arsenal. “The Soviet Union remains the only nation on earth capable of destroying the United States,” he said.

Powell likewise contended that this was no time for the nation to let down its guard.

“I never want to return to that leisurely, comfortable ‘From Here to Eternity’ attitude of the 1930s that helped invite global conflict to an unsuspecting world,” he said.

BUENOS AIRES, Dec. 26 (UPI) — Argentine President Javier Milei’s government is promoting a reform that seeks to redefine the role of the state in public education, curb direct government intervention and give families greater control over their children’s schooling.

A proposed law would legalize homeschooling, expand school choice and grant parents a more active role in school governance, including mechanisms to influence the appointment or removal of principals.

The stated goal is to introduce greater competition among educational institutions to attract students. The initiative has been submitted to Congress, and debate could begin in March.

The reform focuses primarily on basic education, which includes preschool, primary and secondary levels, while also introducing changes to the university financing system.

If approved, it would fully replace the current National Education Law in force since 2006.

“Argentina faces a deep educational crisis, as shown by our students’ results in national and international assessments,” a report by the Ministry of Deregulation and the Secretariat of Education said.

Internationally, PISA tests, which measure skills in math, reading and science, show stagnation or a sustained decline in the performance of Argentine students.

“Compared with other countries in the region, Argentina consistently ranks among the worst performers,” the report said.

Domestically, national assessments show that more than 80% of students in their final year of secondary school fail to reach satisfactory levels in math, while more than 40% have difficulties with reading comprehension.

The official diagnosis also describes the system as overly centralized and bureaucratic, with little room for pedagogical innovation and oversight mechanisms considered weak and lacking transparency.

“The family is the natural and primary agent of education; civil society is the space where it develops through various institutions and projects; and the state has the obligation to guarantee access, continuity and completion of studies at all levels,” the draft law says.

At the secondary level, reform would promote agreements between schools, companies and the productive sector to improve general education and vocational guidance.

Basic education also would be declared an essential service, requiring a minimum level of classes.

The bill recognizes multiple teaching modalities, including in-person, hybrid, community-based, home-based and distance learning, all subject to supervision and evaluation under national and local standards.

Julio Alonso, an academic at the University of Buenos Aires, told UPI the education reform is part of a broader package of changes pushed by the government.

“It is not an isolated measure. It is linked to labor and tax reforms,” he said.

According to Alonso, the central change lies in redefining the role of the state relative to that of families.

“The state takes on a subsidiary role. It guarantees access, but the main decisions fall to parents. The family is formally established as the central actor in the education system,” he said.

Another key point, he said, is the abandonment of a unified national curriculum. Provinces and the country’s capital would assume full responsibility for education, while the federal government would be limited to setting common minimum content.

“The idea of a national education project is left behind. In practice, responsibilities are further delegated to provincial governments,” Alonso said.

He added that the initiative also decentralizes education financing by eliminating the legal spending floor equivalent to 6% of gross domestic product.

“Under this reform, provinces would cover costs with their own resources, while the national government would concentrate spending on direct transfers to families,” he said.

A third pillar of the proposal concerns teachers, with greater family participation in evaluation processes, though not in hiring decisions.

Alonso warned, however, that the reform faces political and social obstacles. The ruling coalition lacks a majority in Congress and depends on support from provincial lawmakers — a weakness recently seen during the budget debate.

On the social front, Alonso anticipates strong resistance, particularly over cuts to the university system, with possible strikes and protests.

Khalid Mishain, from the Youth Citizens Observers Network, says cuts to humanitarian funding are deepening Sudan’s crisis, with famine spreading, aid groups pulling back, and hunger set to worsen without immediate action.

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — To tax tips or not? That is a question that will confront lawmakers in states across the U.S. as they convene for work next year.

The Trump administration is urging states to follow its lead by enacting a slew of new tax breaks for individuals and businesses, including deductions for tips and overtime wages, automobile loans and business equipment.

In some states, the new federal tax breaks will automatically apply to state income taxes unless legislatures opt out. But in many other states, where tax laws are written differently, the new tax breaks won’t appear on state tax forms unless legislatures opt in.

In states that don’t conform to the federal tax changes, workers who receive tips or overtime, for example, will pay no federal tax on those earnings but could still owe state taxes on them.

States that adopt all of Trump’s tax cuts could provide hundreds of millions of dollars in annual savings to certain residents and businesses. But that could financially strain states, which are being hit with higher costs because of new Medicaid and SNAP food aid requirements that also are included in the GOP’s big bill that Trump signed this summer.

Most states begin their annual legislative sessions in January. To retroactively change tax breaks for 2025, lawmakers would need to act quickly so tax forms could be updated before people begin filing. States also could apply the changes to their 2026 taxes, a decision requiring less haste.

So far, only a few states have taken votes on whether to adopt the tax breaks.

“States in general are approaching this skeptically,” said Carl Davis, research director at the nonprofit Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

Treasury presses states to act

The bill Trump signed July 4 contains about $4.5 trillion of federal tax cuts over 10 years.

It creates temporary tax deductions for tips, overtime and loan interest on new vehicles assembled in the U.S. It boosts a tax deduction for older adults. And it temporarily raises the cap on state and local tax deductions from $10,000 to $40,000, among other things. The law also provides numerous tax breaks to businesses, including the ability to immediately write off 100% of the cost of equipment and research.

Forty-one states levy individual income taxes on wages and salaries. Forty-four states charge corporate income taxes.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent this month called on those states “to immediately conform” to the federal tax cuts and accused some Democratic-led states that haven’t done so of engaging in “political obstructionism.” Though Bessent didn’t mention it, many Republican-led states also have not decided whether to implement the tax deductions.

“By denying their residents access to these important tax cuts, these governors and legislators are forcing hardworking Americans to shoulder higher state tax burdens, robbing them of the relief they deserve and exacerbating the financial squeeze on low- and middle-income households,” Bessent said.

Some tax analysts contend that there’s more for states to consider. The tax break on tips, for example, could apply to nearly 70 occupational fields under a proposed rule from the Internal Revenue Service. But that would still exclude numerous low-wage workers, said Jared Walczak, vice president of state projects at the nonprofit Tax Foundation.

“Lawmakers need to consider whether these are worth the cost,” Walczak said.

Tips and overtime tax breaks

Because of the way state tax laws are written, the federal tax breaks for tips and overtime wages would have carried over to just seven states: Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon and South Carolina. But Colorado opted out of the state tax break for overtime shortly before the federal law was enacted.

Michigan this fall became the first — and so far only — state to opt into the tax breaks for tips and overtime wages, effective in 2026. The overtime tax exemption is projected to cost the state nearly $113 million and the tips tax break about $45 million during its current budget year, according to the state treasury department.

Michigan lawmakers offset that by decoupling from five federal corporate tax changes the state’s treasury estimated would have reduced state tax revenues by $540 million this budget year.

Republican state Rep. Ann Bollin, chair of the Michigan House Appropriations Committee, said the state could not afford to embrace all the tax cuts while still investing in better roads, public safety and education.

“The best path forward is to have more money in people’s pockets and have less regulation — and this kind of moved in that direction,” she said.

Arizona could be among the next states to act. Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs has called upon lawmakers to adopt the tax breaks for tips, overtime, seniors and vehicle loans, and follow the federal government by also increasing the state’s standard deduction for individual income taxpayers. Republican state House leaders said they stand ready to pass the tax cuts when their session begins Jan. 12.

Corporate tax breaks

In addition to Michigan, lawmakers in Delaware, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island have passed measures to block some or all of the corporate tax cuts from taking effect in their states.

A new Illinois law decoupling from a portion of the corporate tax changes could save the state nearly $250 million, said Democratic state Sen. Elgie Sims, chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee. He said that could help ensure continued funding for schools, healthcare and other vital services.

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, an outspoken Democratic opponent of Trump, also cited budget concerns for rejecting the corporate tax cut provision. He said states already stand to lose money because of other provisions in Trump’s big bill, such as a requirement to cover more of the costs of running the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP.

“The decoupling is an effort to try to hold back the onslaught from the federal government to make sure that we can support programs like the one we’re announcing today,” Pritzker told reporters at a December event publicizing a grant to address homelessness in central Illinois.

Lieb writes for the Associated Press. AP writer John O’Connor in Springfield, Ill., contributed to this report.