The proposal, which contains the hotly anticipated corporate tax cut from 35% to 20%, aims to simplify the tax code. The framework allows for a 100% exemption for dividends paid from foreign subsidiaries that are at least 10% owned by a US parent, and plans to move from a worldwide tax system to a territorial one.

“The framework transforms our existing ‘offshoring’ model to an American model. It ends the perverse incentive to keep foreign profits offshore by exempting them when they are repatriated to the United States. It will replace the existing, outdated worldwide tax system with a 100% exemption for dividends from foreign subsidiaries,” the proposal document said.

However, some remain sceptical about the plans. “The current proposals by President [Donald] Trump for tax reform are suffering one major overhang, which is the revenue neutrality,” said Nicolas Roth, head of alternative assets at asset management firm REYL & Cíe. “Simply speaking, dollars lost in tax revenues cannot be borrowed to compensate but taxes cannot add to the debt and deficit of the country.”

While tax breaks for middle-class families and small businesses, as well as the removal of estate tax, which is seen as a giveaway to the super-rich, are likely to dominate the news agenda and debate surrounding tax reform, the changes for international businesses mean that they are by far the biggest winners.

Firstly, the corporate tax rate cut will bring the US below the international average of 22.5% - although Trump did originally want the rate to fall to 15%. The aforementioned dividend exemption will provide a raft of new planning opportunities, and the US’s corporate minimum tax is set to be repealed.

“Starting September 27 2017, business investments in depreciable assets other than structures can be expensed immediately, for at least five years,” said a Baker Botts news update. “Interest expense, however, will be partially limited. No further information is given, although a limitation of 30% of EBITDA was thought to be under consideration.”

Despite Trump promising on September 26 that the next day’s release would be a “very comprehensive report”, it is desperately thin on detail. Similarly to the plan released in April, it’s more of an outline than a plan.

Officials defended the lack of specifics in the framework by saying that it sets “guideposts” for the way forward on tax reform. ‘Reform’, however, is slightly generous, as the proposal really only sets out a series of tax cuts, and does not touch on state or local tax deductions.

Tax journalist and Global Tax 50 entrant Stephanie Johnston said on Twitter: “The Big Six framework is just over 1,500 words, or just a tad over three pages in Word in 10pt Helvetica font. Some of my daily stories are longer; but then they don’t aim to fix the US tax system.”

As ever, political wrangling will determine the fate of the bill. While President Trump has been defeated on healthcare proposals this year, he is likely to receive more bipartisan support for what is a very business-friendly tax reform.

“The President outlined a framework with Congress that will create a simpler and fairer tax code that fuels job creation, higher wages, and economic growth, and will lead to the lowest marginal income tax rate for small and mid-size businesses in more than 80 years,” said US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.

“Democrats and Republicans have a historic opportunity to work together to pass meaningful legislation that, as the President stated, will begin the ‘middle class miracle’. With the President’s leadership, we will create a level playing field so that American businesses and workers will be in a position to succeed in our global economy,” he added.

Not all politicians are as delighted by the tax reform proposal, though. The repeal of the estate tax, which is paid on inheritances of more than $5.5 million, has proved particularly controversial. Trump’s family would save up to $4 billion if it is repealed.

While the Republicans want to frame the debate as saving small family businesses and farms from being broken up upon the death of a patriarch or matriarch, the (nonpartisan) Tax Policy Center found that, in 2013, only 20 small businesses and farms paid national estate tax. Of the 2.7 million annual deaths in the US, only around 5,000 estates pay the tax.

“It is particularly obscene for Trump to repeal the estate tax which would provide a $269 billion tax break to the top 0.2%,” said Senator Bernie Sanders, who narrowly missed out on facing Donald Trump in last year’s election to Hillary Clinton. He said that “99.8% of Americans would not get a nickel in tax breaks by the repeal of the estate tax… When we talk about a rigged economy, this is what we are talking about”.

The other, perhaps more troublesome, political roadblock is that the tax plans would likely leave the US with a huge budget deficit. The proposal is very short on details of tax brackets and which tax deductions would be phased out.

While most Republicans, and indeed many Democrats, will not shy away from giving tax breaks to the rich, politicians on both sides of the aisle will be far more reluctant to risk the US’s financial security.

Particularly given the recent House of Representatives approval of an extra $68 billion for the Defense Department – taking the US’s annual defence budget to an eye-watering $658.1 billion – fiscal prudence is required to keep the country’s finances running. The Tax Policy Center estimated that the proposals being discussed would cost the US of $3.1 trillion in revenue per year.

“The debate on revenue neutrality versus deficit neutrality might appear fiddling, but it is nothing less than one of the fundamental issues with this reform,” said Roth. “Under a revenue neutral framework, all tax cuts must be matched, dollar for dollar with tax increase so the total revenue stays the same. However, a number of tax reforms failed because of this concept.”

“[The] release is progress towards tax reform, but the hardest part lies ahead.” said John Gimigliano, principal-in-charge of federal tax legislative and regulatory services at KPMG. “Congress still needs to figure out how to make the math work, both politically and procedurally, and then needs to convert that to legislation. And if Congress is serious about using ‘regular order’ to move a bill, it could take months, not weeks for legislation to get to the President’s desk.”

Due to the lack of detail in the proposal, Congress will have a large influence over the bill. Ultimately, this is not the tax reform which businesses were hoping for, but if the corporate tax rate comes down and other sweeteners are preserved, they will see it as a win nonetheless.

Should the reform proposal generate too much negative headwind, many of its provisions will be changed or removed altogether. There is also the possibility that it will fail to be passed at all, leaving businesses operating in the US stuck working with the country’s awkward, archaic and ineffectual system.