Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to eliminate the inclusion of Social Security benefits in adjusted gross income, effectively ending federal income taxation of those benefits for taxable years after enactment. It adds a termination for section 86 and appropriates amounts from the Treasury to each Social Security and related trust fund equal to any reduction in transfers to that fund caused by the change.
Liberals emphasize regressivity and demand targeted benefits or offsets.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly and directly achieves its primary substantive objective by repealing the application of section 86 to Social Security benefits and by providing a statutory appropriation to hold trust funds harmless, but it provides limited administrative, fiscal-detail, and oversight scaffolding.
This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to eliminate the inclusion of Social Security benefits in adjusted gross income, effectively ending federal income taxation of those benefits for taxable years after enactment.
It adds a termination for section 86 and appropriates amounts from the Treasury to each Social Security and related trust fund equal to any reduction in transfers to that fund caused by the change.
The appropriation covers funds under the Social Security Act, the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, and the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974.
Simple and popular in concept but high long-term budgetary cost and recurring appropriations reduce institutional appetite for enactment.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly and directly achieves its primary substantive objective by repealing the application of section 86 to Social Security benefits and by providing a statutory appropriation to hold trust funds harmless, but it provides limited administrative, fiscal-detail, and oversight scaffolding.
Liberals emphasize regressivity and demand targeted benefits or offsets.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize regressivity and demand targeted benefits or offsets.
Supports reducing tax burdens on retirees but worries this blanket tax cut is regressive and lacks explicit offsets.
Appreciates the trust-fund hold-harmless language but will want details on who benefits and how costs are covered.
May prefer a targeted approach or revenue offsets from wealthy taxpayers or corporations.
Generally favorable to relieving taxes on retirees and appreciates the explicit hold-harmless provision for trust funds.
Concerned about the bill’s fiscal cost and wants official scoring, offsets, or a sunset to manage tradeoffs.
Would weigh benefits to moderate-income retirees against deficit implications.
Strongly supportive of repealing tax on Social Security as a pro-tax-cut, limited-government reform.
Views the trust-fund appropriations as necessary to avoid program disruption, though some conservatives may prefer no new ongoing outlays.
Overall sees the bill as pro-senior and pro-individual liberty.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Simple and popular in concept but high long-term budgetary cost and recurring appropriations reduce institutional appetite for enactment.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize regressivity and demand targeted benefits or offsets.
Simple and popular in concept but high long-term budgetary cost and recurring appropriations reduce institutional appetite for enactment.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly and directly achieves its primary substantive objective by repealing the application of section 86 to Social Security benefits and by providing a statutory ap…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.