Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Amends Internal Revenue Code section 2032A to change the limit on the aggregate reduction in fair market value of qualified real property for special-use (farm/closely held real property) estate tax valuation. For property used in the primary qualified farming use (subsection (b)(2)(A)) the aggregate reduction limit is set at $15,000,000; for the other qualified use (subsection (b)(2)(B)) it is set at $750,000.
Progressives emphasize equity and lost revenue; conservatives emphasize property rights.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused statutory amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that clearly specifies new dollar limits and an effective date but includes minimal contextual, fiscal, or oversight detail.
Amends Internal Revenue Code section 2032A to change the limit on the aggregate reduction in fair market value of qualified real property for special-use (farm/closely held real property) estate tax valuation.
For property used in the primary qualified farming use (subsection (b)(2)(A)) the aggregate reduction limit is set at $15,000,000; for the other qualified use (subsection (b)(2)(B)) it is set at $750,000.
Conforming text changes are made, and the amendment applies to estates of decedents dying after enactment.
Technically simple and constituency-targeted but creates revenue loss and lacks offsets or compromise features, lowering enactment odds.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused statutory amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that clearly specifies new dollar limits and an effective date but includes minimal contextual, fiscal, or oversight detail.
Progressives emphasize equity and lost revenue; conservatives emphasize property rights.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize equity and lost revenue; conservatives emphasize property rights.
Likely critical.
Views the change as a large tax preference that mainly benefits wealthier landowners and reduces estate tax progressivity.
Will emphasize equity and lost federal revenue concerns while acknowledging family-farm preservation goals.
Cautiously receptive but demanding on details.
Sees merit in preventing breakup of viable farms, wants independent cost estimates and anti-abuse provisions.
Will weigh rural stability against fiscal and distributional effects.
Broadly supportive.
Frames the bill as protecting private property rights, keeping family farms intact, and reducing punitive taxation at death.
Prefers permanent relief and limited additional rules.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically simple and constituency-targeted but creates revenue loss and lacks offsets or compromise features, lowering enactment odds.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize equity and lost revenue; conservatives emphasize property rights.
Technically simple and constituency-targeted but creates revenue loss and lacks offsets or compromise features, lowering enactment odds.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused statutory amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that clearly specifies new dollar limits and an effective date but includes minimal contextual,…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.