Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to extend the excise-tax exemption for alternative motorboat fuels sold as supplies for vessels or aircraft to also cover vessels that meet section 4042(c)(1) and are engaged in trade between Atlantic or Pacific U.S. ports (including territories). The change applies to fuel sales after December 31, 2023.
Liberals worry about revenue loss and corporate giveaway; conservatives emphasize tax relief.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive change to the Internal Revenue Code that is clear in purpose and reasonably specific in mechanism (amending 4041(g) and referencing 4042(c)(1)) with a stated effective date, but it lacks fiscal acknowledgment, definitional clarity for potential boundary issues, and measurement or oversight provisions.
The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to extend the excise-tax exemption for alternative motorboat fuels sold as supplies for vessels or aircraft to also cover vessels that meet section 4042(c)(1) and are engaged in trade between Atlantic or Pacific U.S. ports (including territories).
The change applies to fuel sales after December 31, 2023.
Technically narrow and administrable, but creates revenue loss and lacks compromise features; likeliest as part of a larger tax package.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive change to the Internal Revenue Code that is clear in purpose and reasonably specific in mechanism (amending 4041(g) and referencing 4042(c)(1)) with a stated effective date, but it lacks fiscal acknowledgment, definitional clarity for potential boundary issues, and measurement or oversight provisions.
Liberals worry about revenue loss and corporate giveaway; conservatives emphasize tax relief.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals worry about revenue loss and corporate giveaway; conservatives emphasize tax relief.
Likely cautiously supportive if this meaningfully promotes lower-carbon maritime fuels, but skeptical about an untargeted tax break for shipping firms.
Concerns will focus on revenue loss, fairness, and whether environmental standards are enforced.
Support is conditional and uncertain.
Likely cautiously favorable as a narrow technical correction improving tax parity for coastal trade.
Will seek scorekeeping: revenue cost estimates and limited scope.
Pragmatists will want an explanation of fiscal impact and non-retroactivity concerns.
Generally supportive as a pro-business, pro-maritime tax relief and regulatory-parity measure.
Favored for reducing tax burdens and supporting coastal commerce.
Some conservatives might press for broader tax simplification instead.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically narrow and administrable, but creates revenue loss and lacks compromise features; likeliest as part of a larger tax package.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals worry about revenue loss and corporate giveaway; conservatives emphasize tax relief.
Technically narrow and administrable, but creates revenue loss and lacks compromise features; likeliest as part of a larger tax package.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive change to the Internal Revenue Code that is clear in purpose and reasonably specific in mechanism (amending 4041(g) and referencing…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.