Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
This bill amends Internal Revenue Code section 164 to address the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction marriage penalty. It sets the base dollar limitation and modified adjusted gross income thresholds for single filers, makes joint returns equal to 200% of that base, and married filing separately equal to 50%.
Progressives stress distributional impacts; conservatives stress deficit and subsidy concerns.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill specifies a clear, narrowly scoped substantive change to the tax code and provides precise statutory text and an effective date, enabling direct legal implementation.
This bill amends Internal Revenue Code section 164 to address the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction marriage penalty.
It sets the base dollar limitation and modified adjusted gross income thresholds for single filers, makes joint returns equal to 200% of that base, and married filing separately equal to 50%.
The changes take effect for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2026, and include conforming edits to related provisions.
Technically straightforward but creates a revenue loss benefiting higher‑SALT taxpayers; plausible in a broader package but unlikely as standalone without offsets.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill specifies a clear, narrowly scoped substantive change to the tax code and provides precise statutory text and an effective date, enabling direct legal implementation. It includes multiple conforming edits to integrate with existing Code structure.
Progressives stress distributional impacts; conservatives stress deficit and subsidy concerns.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives stress distributional impacts; conservatives stress deficit and subsidy concerns.
Likely cautiously supportive because the bill rectifies a marriage-based filing inequity.
However, progressives will worry it primarily benefits higher-income taxpayers and reduces federal revenue for social programs.
Likely supportive as a technical, fairness-oriented correction that reduces a clear filing inequity.
Will seek clear CBO cost estimates and pragmatic offsets or a limited sunset if costs are material.
Likely opposed because it expands a federal tax preference, increases potential federal revenue loss, and effectively subsidizes high state taxes.
May be acceptable only with strict offsets or targeting.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically straightforward but creates a revenue loss benefiting higher‑SALT taxpayers; plausible in a broader package but unlikely as standalone without offsets.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives stress distributional impacts; conservatives stress deficit and subsidy concerns.
Technically straightforward but creates a revenue loss benefiting higher‑SALT taxpayers; plausible in a broader package but unlikely as sta…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill specifies a clear, narrowly scoped substantive change to the tax code and provides precise statutory text and an effective date, enabling direct legal implementation.…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.