Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
This bill repeals the federal excise tax on indoor tanning services by removing chapter 49 of Subtitle D of the Internal Revenue Code. The repeal applies to services performed after the date of enactment.
Public-health deterrent vs. tax relief for businesses
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is narrowly crafted and precise in its primary action (repeal by striking the relevant chapter and table entry with a clear effective date), but it omits several customary supporting elements for a tax repeal such as fiscal impact acknowledgement, transitional rules, treatment of pre-enactment liabilities or collections, and any oversight or reporting provisions.
This bill repeals the federal excise tax on indoor tanning services by removing chapter 49 of Subtitle D of the Internal Revenue Code.
The repeal applies to services performed after the date of enactment.
No offsetting revenue measures or other changes are included in the bill text.
Content is narrow and administrable, aiding passage; however, fiscal impacts without offsets and lack of broad constituency reduce standalone chances.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is narrowly crafted and precise in its primary action (repeal by striking the relevant chapter and table entry with a clear effective date), but it omits several customary supporting elements for a tax repeal such as fiscal impact acknowledgement, transitional rules, treatment of pre-enactment liabilities or collections, and any oversight or reporting provisions.
Public-health deterrent vs. tax relief for businesses
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Public-health deterrent vs. tax relief for businesses
Likely opposed.
They will note this removes a revenue source and eliminates a public-health disincentive for a risky consumer behavior.
They may acknowledge small-business relief but see it as a tax cut for a nonessential, health-harmful service.
Mixed/unsure.
They will weigh small-business relief and simplicity against the fiscal cost and public-health implications.
They will seek CBO scoring, revenue offsets, and data on the policy's net effects before committing.
Likely supportive.
They will emphasize reducing taxation, limiting government intervention, and helping small businesses.
They will argue the tax was an arbitrary burden and its repeal advances economic freedom.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is narrow and administrable, aiding passage; however, fiscal impacts without offsets and lack of broad constituency reduce standalone chances.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Public-health deterrent vs. tax relief for businesses
Content is narrow and administrable, aiding passage; however, fiscal impacts without offsets and lack of broad constituency reduce standalo…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is narrowly crafted and precise in its primary action (repeal by striking the relevant chapter and table entry with a clear effective date), but it omits several cust…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.