Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
The bill raises the individual State and local tax (SALT) deduction limit in Internal Revenue Code section 164(b)(6)(B) from $10,000 to $15,000 for individual filers and to twice that amount for joint returns, effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2024. The text replaces the existing $10,000 ($5,000 married filing separately) cap language with $15,000 (twice such amount for joint returns).
Distributional effects: whether benefits mainly help middle class or wealthy
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that is precise about the statutory text change and effective date, but it omits fiscal acknowledgment and broader implementation or oversight provisions.
The bill raises the individual State and local tax (SALT) deduction limit in Internal Revenue Code section 164(b)(6)(B) from $10,000 to $15,000 for individual filers and to twice that amount for joint returns, effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2024.
The text replaces the existing $10,000 ($5,000 married filing separately) cap language with $15,000 (twice such amount for joint returns).
No offsets, phase‑outs, or income limits are included in the bill text.
Narrow, administrable tax change with clear beneficiaries increases prospects, but fiscal impact and Senate barriers lower overall odds absent offsets or package inclusion.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that is precise about the statutory text change and effective date, but it omits fiscal acknowledgment and broader implementation or oversight provisions.
Distributional effects: whether benefits mainly help middle class or wealthy
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Distributional effects: whether benefits mainly help middle class or wealthy
Likely skeptical.
Recognizes relief for taxpayers in high‑tax states, but worries the change disproportionately helps higher earners and reduces federal revenue without offsets.
Would prefer targeted, means‑tested relief or revenue offsets to protect programs.
Cautiously favorable.
Views this as a moderate, targeted tax relief that helps working families in high‑SALT areas, but wants scoreable offsets and fiscal analysis.
Sees political and regional benefits if paired with accountability measures.
Likely opposed.
Sees this as enlarging deductions, eroding the tax base, and indirectly subsidizing high‑tax states.
Prefers lower federal spending and opposes measures that reduce revenue without cuts or offsets.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, administrable tax change with clear beneficiaries increases prospects, but fiscal impact and Senate barriers lower overall odds absent offsets or package inclusion.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Distributional effects: whether benefits mainly help middle class or wealthy
Narrow, administrable tax change with clear beneficiaries increases prospects, but fiscal impact and Senate barriers lower overall odds abs…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that is precise about the statutory text change and effective date, but it omits fiscal ackno…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.