Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
This bill (Chemical Tax Repeal Act) would remove subchapters B and C of Chapter 38 of the Internal Revenue Code, repealing federal excise taxes on ‘taxable chemicals’ and ‘taxable substances.’ The repeal would take effect January 1, 2024.
Liberals emphasize revenue loss and environmental/public-health risks.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory repeal: it precisely identifies the provisions to be removed from the Internal Revenue Code and sets an effective date, but it omits explanatory, fiscal, transitional, and oversight details that would ordinarily accompany a substantive tax-law change.
This bill (Chemical Tax Repeal Act) would remove subchapters B and C of Chapter 38 of the Internal Revenue Code, repealing federal excise taxes on ‘taxable chemicals’ and ‘taxable substances.’ The repeal would take effect January 1, 2024.
Narrow and administratively simple but removes revenue and lacks offsets or compromise, limiting cross‑chamber appeal.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory repeal: it precisely identifies the provisions to be removed from the Internal Revenue Code and sets an effective date, but it omits explanatory, fiscal, transitional, and oversight details that would ordinarily accompany a substantive tax-law change.
Liberals emphasize revenue loss and environmental/public-health risks.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize revenue loss and environmental/public-health risks.
Likely opposed.
Removes a dedicated revenue source and reduces tax on chemical producers without accompanying environmental or public-health safeguards in the text.
Concerned about potential loss of funds and weaker incentives to limit harmful chemical uses.
Mixed view.
Recognizes small-business and industrial cost relief, but worries about revenue loss and absent offsets.
Would seek fiscal analysis and possible compromises to limit unintended effects.
Likely supportive.
Views repeal as pro-growth, lowering regulatory tax burdens on industry and consumers.
Sees simplification of tax law and fewer constraints on chemical commerce as positives.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow and administratively simple but removes revenue and lacks offsets or compromise, limiting cross‑chamber appeal.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize revenue loss and environmental/public-health risks.
Narrow and administratively simple but removes revenue and lacks offsets or compromise, limiting cross‑chamber appeal.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory repeal: it precisely identifies the provisions to be removed from the Internal Revenue Code and sets an effective date, but it omits explanator…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.