Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
This bill adds a safe-harbor to the Internal Revenue Code so individual taxpayers who timely pay 125% of their prior year income tax will not be subject to the failure-to-pay penalty for the current year. It excludes taxpayers who failed to file prior-year returns, whose prior year was under 12 months, or who fail to file the current year return on time.
Progressives emphasize taxpayer relief and simplification benefits.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear, narrowly targeted substantive amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that defines a new safe-harbor-like rule for avoiding the failure-to-pay penalty by timely paying 125% of prior-year tax.
This bill adds a safe-harbor to the Internal Revenue Code so individual taxpayers who timely pay 125% of their prior year income tax will not be subject to the failure-to-pay penalty for the current year.
It excludes taxpayers who failed to file prior-year returns, whose prior year was under 12 months, or who fail to file the current year return on time.
Special rules address joint returns and the provision stops applying after the filing due date or filing date unless additional payments accompany a timely-filed return.
Content is narrow and non-ideological which helps, but modest revenue effects and competing priorities reduce standalone prospects.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear, narrowly targeted substantive amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that defines a new safe-harbor-like rule for avoiding the failure-to-pay penalty by timely paying 125% of prior-year tax. The statutory language is specific in core elements and includes several common exceptions, but it leaves administrative detail and fiscal considerations to implementing authorities or separate analyses.
Progressives emphasize taxpayer relief and simplification benefits.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize taxpayer relief and simplification benefits.
Likely supportive of simplifying compliance and reducing penalties that can disproportionately harm people with cash-flow problems.
Would welcome clearer, predictable rules that reduce surprise penalties, while worrying about any revenue loss or loopholes that primarily help high-income taxpayers.
May push for safeguards for lower-income taxpayers and clarity on administration.
Generally favorable to simplifying tax compliance and reducing minor penalties, provided the change is administrable and revenue impacts are modest.
Would look for cost estimates, clear IRS guidance, and limits preventing avoidance by those with volatile income.
Likely to support with technical fixes.
Skeptical: values simplicity, but concerned this softens enforcement and encourages underpayment.
Worries about fairness and long-term revenue effects.
Might accept if accompanied by strict limits and clear anti-abuse rules.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is narrow and non-ideological which helps, but modest revenue effects and competing priorities reduce standalone prospects.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize taxpayer relief and simplification benefits.
Content is narrow and non-ideological which helps, but modest revenue effects and competing priorities reduce standalone prospects.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear, narrowly targeted substantive amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that defines a new safe-harbor-like rule for avoiding the failure-to-pay penalty by t…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.