Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
This bill repeals the rule that requires Social Security benefits to be included in federal gross income, so Social Security benefits would no longer be subject to federal income tax after enactment. It authorizes appropriations from the Treasury to each Social Security and Railroad Retirement trust fund each fiscal year equal to the reduction in transfers caused by that repeal.
Liberals emphasize regressivity and fiscal cost; conservatives emphasize tax relief for seniors.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly accomplishes a single substantive change—terminating the application of §86 so Social Security benefits are not included in gross income—and it pairs that change with a broadly worded appropriation to make affected trust funds whole.
This bill repeals the rule that requires Social Security benefits to be included in federal gross income, so Social Security benefits would no longer be subject to federal income tax after enactment.
It authorizes appropriations from the Treasury to each Social Security and Railroad Retirement trust fund each fiscal year equal to the reduction in transfers caused by that repeal.
The bill includes a non‑binding statement that tax increases should not be used to provide the appropriation revenue.
Though politically attractive to many voters, the high, ongoing fiscal cost without offsets or sunset reduces legislative feasibility.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly accomplishes a single substantive change—terminating the application of §86 so Social Security benefits are not included in gross income—and it pairs that change with a broadly worded appropriation to make affected trust funds whole. The statutory amendment itself is concise and direct; the hold-harmless appropriation acknowledges fiscal impact.
Liberals emphasize regressivity and fiscal cost; conservatives emphasize tax relief for seniors.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize regressivity and fiscal cost; conservatives emphasize tax relief for seniors.
Likely mixed to skeptical.
The measure provides seniors with tax relief and filing simplicity, but is an unfunded tax cut that disproportionately benefits higher‑income retirees and increases pressures on federal budgets.
Cautiously neutral.
Appreciates targeted relief and simplicity, but worries about fiscal cost, long‑term precedent of using general revenues for trust funds, and lack of specified offsets.
Generally supportive.
Views repeal as welcomed tax relief for seniors and simplification of the tax code; supports the hold‑harmless appropriation and opposes raising taxes to pay for it.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Though politically attractive to many voters, the high, ongoing fiscal cost without offsets or sunset reduces legislative feasibility.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize regressivity and fiscal cost; conservatives emphasize tax relief for seniors.
Though politically attractive to many voters, the high, ongoing fiscal cost without offsets or sunset reduces legislative feasibility.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly accomplishes a single substantive change—terminating the application of §86 so Social Security benefits are not included in gross income—and it pairs that cha…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.