Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
The bill adds a new tax-code penalty for certain tax-exempt colleges and universities that receive a civil judgment finding a Title VI violation. Penalties equal the greater of $100,000 or 5% of aggregate administrative compensation (for institutions subject to 6033(a)) apply per determination; refunds are required if judgments are reversed.
Method of enforcement: tax-code penalties versus DOJ/court remedies
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes a substantive tax-law regime: a new penalty tied to federal-court Title VI judgments, mandatory IRS review of exempt status after repeated determinations, and additional reporting requirements for covered institutions.
The bill adds a new tax-code penalty for certain tax-exempt colleges and universities that receive a civil judgment finding a Title VI violation.
Penalties equal the greater of $100,000 or 5% of aggregate administrative compensation (for institutions subject to 6033(a)) apply per determination; refunds are required if judgments are reversed.
After more than two determinations (post-enactment) the IRS must review whether the institution still qualifies for tax exemption; affected institutions must report judgments on annual returns.
Moderate regulatory reach and political salience lower chances; procedural and partisan hurdles likely in both chambers.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes a substantive tax-law regime: a new penalty tied to federal-court Title VI judgments, mandatory IRS review of exempt status after repeated determinations, and additional reporting requirements for covered institutions. It provides concrete statutory definitions and cross-references to the Internal Revenue Code, and it includes several safeguards (refunds if judgments are reversed; consolidation of related judgments).
Method of enforcement: tax-code penalties versus DOJ/court remedies
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Method of enforcement: tax-code penalties versus DOJ/court remedies
Generally supportive because the bill creates financial accountability and reporting for Title VI civil-rights judgments against colleges.
Views it as a tool to strengthen enforcement and transparency where institutions violate civil rights.
May want stronger survivor remedies and clearer protections for complainants.
Cautiously supportive of accountability but concerned about process and unintended consequences.
Appreciates refund if judgments reversed but wants clearer definitions, administrative guidance, and fiscal impact estimates.
Would seek technical fixes to avoid overreach and protect due process.
Likely opposed because it uses the tax code to punish institutions for civil-rights judgments, expands federal leverage over universities, and risks politicizing enforcement.
Prefers enforcement through DOJ or courts, and worries about burdens on state institutions and free-speech consequences.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Moderate regulatory reach and political salience lower chances; procedural and partisan hurdles likely in both chambers.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Method of enforcement: tax-code penalties versus DOJ/court remedies
Moderate regulatory reach and political salience lower chances; procedural and partisan hurdles likely in both chambers.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes a substantive tax-law regime: a new penalty tied to federal-court Title VI judgments, mandatory IRS review of exempt status after repeated determi…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.