Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
The bill creates a new tax credit (section 36C) for individuals equal to 50 percent of amounts paid or incurred for a "qualified mobility device." Qualified devices include wheelchairs, scooters, walkers, gait trainers, crutches, canes, artificial limbs, and various braces, plus features or enhancements. The credit is limited to three qualified mobility devices per taxpayer per taxable year and reduces any other deduction or credit for the same expense.
Refundability: liberals assume refundable; conservatives worry about fiscal cost.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a straightforward substantive tax-policy change with clear purpose and basic parameters but is under-specified in implementation, fiscal, and anti-abuse detail.
The bill creates a new tax credit (section 36C) for individuals equal to 50 percent of amounts paid or incurred for a "qualified mobility device." Qualified devices include wheelchairs, scooters, walkers, gait trainers, crutches, canes, artificial limbs, and various braces, plus features or enhancements.
The credit is limited to three qualified mobility devices per taxpayer per taxable year and reduces any other deduction or credit for the same expense.
Amendments and conforming changes to the Internal Revenue Code are specified, and the rule applies to amounts paid or incurred after enactment.
Substantive but narrow benefit with broad sympathy; main barrier is fiscal cost and need for agreement on offsets or inclusion in larger legislation.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a straightforward substantive tax-policy change with clear purpose and basic parameters but is under-specified in implementation, fiscal, and anti-abuse detail.
Refundability: liberals assume refundable; conservatives worry about fiscal cost.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Refundability: liberals assume refundable; conservatives worry about fiscal cost.
Likely strongly supportive because the measure reduces out-of-pocket costs for people with disabilities and expands access to mobility equipment.
Views the credit as advancing equity and independence, especially if refundable as the bill title indicates.
May press for clarity on refundability and coverage breadth.
Generally favorable to targeted relief for medical needs but cautious about fiscal cost and implementation details.
Sees practical benefit for patients, while wanting clarity on refundability, interactions with existing tax deductions, and anti-fraud measures.
Skeptical of creating or expanding refundable tax benefits and concerned about added federal spending.
Prefers existing state programs, HSAs, or targeted means-tested aid over broad federal tax credits.
Would seek stricter limits and clearer offsets.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Substantive but narrow benefit with broad sympathy; main barrier is fiscal cost and need for agreement on offsets or inclusion in larger legislation.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Refundability: liberals assume refundable; conservatives worry about fiscal cost.
Substantive but narrow benefit with broad sympathy; main barrier is fiscal cost and need for agreement on offsets or inclusion in larger le…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a straightforward substantive tax-policy change with clear purpose and basic parameters but is under-specified in implementation, fiscal, and anti-abuse d…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.