Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
The bill raises the excise tax on net investment income of private colleges and universities, lowers the taxable-income threshold, and creates an extra tax treatment for institutions whose net price rises faster than inflation. Specifically, it replaces the current 1.4% tax rate with a 10% rate, reduces the net investment income exemption threshold from $500,000 to $250,000, and designates a “net-price-increase institution” (based on net price growth exceeding CPI over a three-year period) for additional tax treatment.
Left favors accountability and revenue from endowments; right warns of burdens and reduced giving.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory amendment that alters tax rates and eligibility thresholds and defines a new category of ‘‘net-price-increase institution.’
The bill raises the excise tax on net investment income of private colleges and universities, lowers the taxable-income threshold, and creates an extra tax treatment for institutions whose net price rises faster than inflation.
Specifically, it replaces the current 1.4% tax rate with a 10% rate, reduces the net investment income exemption threshold from $500,000 to $250,000, and designates a “net-price-increase institution” (based on net price growth exceeding CPI over a three-year period) for additional tax treatment.
Changes apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2024.
Substantial tax increase on a well‑organized sector with limited compromise features makes standalone enactment unlikely.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory amendment that alters tax rates and eligibility thresholds and defines a new category of ‘‘net-price-increase institution.’
Left favors accountability and revenue from endowments; right warns of burdens and reduced giving.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Left favors accountability and revenue from endowments; right warns of burdens and reduced giving.
Likely supportive: treats wealthy private institutions as accountable for rising net prices and captures more endowment income.
Sees this as a way to push institutions toward lower tuition and stronger student aid.
Cautiously interested but concerned about magnitude and implementation.
Wants evidence that revenue gains won't reduce aid or destabilize institutions; prefers phased or targeted application.
Likely opposed: views this as heavy-handed taxation of nonprofits, risky interference with private higher education finances, and a potential drag on charitable giving and investment returns.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Substantial tax increase on a well‑organized sector with limited compromise features makes standalone enactment unlikely.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Left favors accountability and revenue from endowments; right warns of burdens and reduced giving.
Substantial tax increase on a well‑organized sector with limited compromise features makes standalone enactment unlikely.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory amendment that alters tax rates and eligibility thresholds and defines a new category of ‘‘net-price-increase institution.’
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.