Message on Senate action sent to the House.
This resolution proposes a constitutional amendment to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment, which now lets Congress tax incomes. If two-thirds of both the House and Senate approve it and three-fourths of state legislatures ratify it within seven years, the repeal would become part of the Constitution. The proposed amendment would prohibit Congress from levying income taxes except during a formally declared war and would take effect two years after ratification. It also directs the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress within 180 days after ratification with recommended implementing legislation.
A constitutional amendment must be passed by two-thirds of both chambers and ratified by three-fourths of the states; it is not sent to the President. This joint resolution sets a seven-year ratification deadline and a two-year delayed effective date after ratification.
This joint resolution proposes a constitutional amendment repealing the Sixteenth Amendment, prohibiting Congress from laying and collecting income taxes except during a declared war.
The repeal would take effect two years after ratification, and the Treasury must report recommended implementing legislation within 180 days.
Ratification must occur within seven years.
Sweeping repeal of income-tax power with large fiscal effects requires supermajorities plus ratification by three-fourths of states — historically rare and politically fraught.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill succinctly and precisely proposes a constitutional amendment and includes limited implementation timing and a reporting requirement. It does not provide comprehensive transition, fiscal, or operational detail to accompany the substantial substantive legal change it would effect.
Progressives emphasize harm to social programs and progressivity loss
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize harm to social programs and progressivity loss
Strong opposition.
The amendment would eliminate the federal income tax authority, threatening funding for major federal programs and progressive revenue mechanisms.
They would view the proposal as shifting tax burdens away from high earners and risking cuts to social services.
Mixed and cautious.
Recognizes constitutional constraint appeal and potential tax simplification, but worries about large fiscal gaps, economic disruption, and unclear implementation.
Would demand concrete transition steps and offsets before supporting.
Generally favorable.
Sees repeal as restoring a constitutional limit on federal taxation, reducing tax burdens, and encouraging economic growth.
Supports reduced federal reach, but wants a credible transition to maintain core functions.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Sweeping repeal of income-tax power with large fiscal effects requires supermajorities plus ratification by three-fourths of states — historically rare and politically fraught.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize harm to social programs and progressivity loss
Sweeping repeal of income-tax power with large fiscal effects requires supermajorities plus ratification by three-fourths of states — histo…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill succinctly and precisely proposes a constitutional amendment and includes limited implementation timing and a reporting requirement. It does not provide comprehensive…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.