Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
This bill amends Internal Revenue Code section 165 to create a special casualty-loss rule for uncut timber damaged or destroyed by fire, storm, theft, insects, invasive species, or severe drought. The deductible loss basis is at least the appraised pre-loss value minus salvage value, with appraisals meeting USPAP, done by Federal/State-certified appraisers within one year.
Liberals emphasize environmental gain and reforestation requirement.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear, narrowly focused substantive amendment to the Internal Revenue Code establishing a special rule for casualty losses of uncut timber.
This bill amends Internal Revenue Code section 165 to create a special casualty-loss rule for uncut timber damaged or destroyed by fire, storm, theft, insects, invasive species, or severe drought.
The deductible loss basis is at least the appraised pre-loss value minus salvage value, with appraisals meeting USPAP, done by Federal/State-certified appraisers within one year.
The rule applies only to timber held for cutting and sale in an active trade or business, includes pre-merchantable timber, and conditions the deduction on reforestation within five years with recapture rules.
Technically narrow and non-controversial policy but creates unoffset revenue loss; more likely as part of a broader package than as standalone law.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear, narrowly focused substantive amendment to the Internal Revenue Code establishing a special rule for casualty losses of uncut timber. It provides concrete valuation mechanics and conditionality (reforestation) while delegating important implementation, recapture, and definitional details to Treasury/IRS rulemaking.
Liberals emphasize environmental gain and reforestation requirement.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize environmental gain and reforestation requirement.
Generally favorable because the bill ties casualty tax relief to mandatory reforestation and recognizes nonmerchantable timber and climate-driven threats.
Concerned that benefits may flow to large private timber owners without support for small landowners or conservation priorities.
Would look for stronger safeguards, assistance for small owners, and clear recapture enforcement.
Supportive of clarifying casualty-loss treatment and promoting prompt reforestation, while cautious about budget impacts and administrative complexity.
Sees value in appraisal standards but wants safeguards against overvaluation and a clear implementation plan from Treasury.
Would favor offsets or cost estimates.
Generally supportive because it provides tax relief to timber businesses after disasters and clarifies valuation.
Concerned about added regulatory requirements, appraisal mandates, and a forced reforestation condition seen as federal intrusion on private land decisions.
Prefers minimizing compliance costs and preserving property-owner flexibility.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically narrow and non-controversial policy but creates unoffset revenue loss; more likely as part of a broader package than as standalone law.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize environmental gain and reforestation requirement.
Technically narrow and non-controversial policy but creates unoffset revenue loss; more likely as part of a broader package than as standal…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear, narrowly focused substantive amendment to the Internal Revenue Code establishing a special rule for casualty losses of uncut timber. It provides concrete…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.