H.R. 1179 (119th)Bill Overview

Chiquita Canyon Tax Relief Act

Emergency Management|Emergency Management
Cosponsors
Support
Democratic
Introduced
Feb 10, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This bill designates payments made to individuals because of the Chiquita Canyon elevated temperature landfill event as "qualified disaster relief payments" under Internal Revenue Code section 139(b), excluding them from gross income. It defines covered payments (loss, damages, relocation, property value loss, closing costs, inconvenience) when provided by government entities, Waste Connections, Inc., or related parties, applies to payments received on or after March 1, 2024, and defines the event as starting May 1, 2022.

Why people may split

Liberals stress victim relief and corporate accountability concerns

Watch point

Narrow constituent relief bills often pass the House relatively easily, absent controversial offsets.

This bill designates payments made to individuals because of the Chiquita Canyon elevated temperature landfill event as "qualified disaster relief payments" under Internal Revenue Code section 139(b), excluding them from gross income.

It defines covered payments (loss, damages, relocation, property value loss, closing costs, inconvenience) when provided by government entities, Waste Connections, Inc., or related parties, applies to payments received on or after March 1, 2024, and defines the event as starting May 1, 2022.

Passage35/100

Content is narrow and non-ideological, aiding passage, but targeted tax carve-outs face scrutiny and require package inclusion or bipartisan agreement.

CredibilityPartial

How solid the drafting looks.

Contention28/100

Liberals stress victim relief and corporate accountability concerns

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Likely helpedFederal agencies · Taxpayers

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitIncreases net relief for affected individuals by excluding qualifying Chiquita Canyon payments from taxable income.
  • Potential benefitSimplifies tax reporting by treating these payments as qualified disaster relief under section 139.
  • Potential benefitEncourages faster compensation from government, Waste Connections, or insurers by making payments tax-free.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesReduces federal taxable receipts by exempting payments that otherwise could be included in gross income.
  • Potential burdenCreates a geographically and payer-specific tax exemption that could set precedent for targeted relief.
  • TaxpayersAdds verification and administrative burdens for IRS and taxpayers to substantiate qualifying payments.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Liberals stress victim relief and corporate accountability concerns
Progressive90%

Likely supportive because it provides tax-free relief to affected residents and addresses direct economic harm.

May press for safeguards to ensure corporate accountability and transparency around settlements and payments.

Leans supportive
Centrist85%

Generally supportive as a narrow, pragmatic measure to ease victims' burdens while fitting into existing tax law (section 139).

Would seek fiscal clarity, anti-abuse rules, and clearer retroactivity/definition language.

Leans supportive
Conservative65%

Mixed to somewhat skeptical: supports tax-free disaster relief for victims but concerned about creating a targeted tax carve-out and setting precedent.

Would want limits, transparency, and protections against gaming.

Split reaction
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood35/100

Content is narrow and non-ideological, aiding passage, but targeted tax carve-outs face scrutiny and require package inclusion or bipartisan agreement.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Estimate of revenue loss absent from text
  • Level of bipartisan or committee support unknown
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Liberals stress victim relief and corporate accountability concerns

Content is narrow and non-ideological, aiding passage, but targeted tax carve-outs face scrutiny and require package inclusion or bipartisa…

Unlocked analysis

Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for Chiquita Canyon Tax Relief Act.

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis