S. 1175 (119th)Bill Overview

Small County PILT Parity Act

Public Lands and Natural Resources|Property taxPublic Lands and Natural Resources
Cosponsors
Support
Bipartisan
Introduced
Mar 27, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief

The bill (Small County PILT Parity Act) amends 31 U.S.C. 6903(c) to add finer population tiers and a detailed per-capita limitation table for Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) for units of general local government.

It replaces existing population breakpoints with 1,000-person increments from 1,000 up to 50,000 and specifies a per-capita dollar multiplier for each population value in that range.

Passage60/100

Small, technical payment adjustment with localized beneficiaries tends to attract bipartisan support, but fiscal impact and Senate procedure create uncertainty.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped, numerically detailed statutory amendment that directly modifies the formula in 31 U.S.C. 6903(c).

Contention30/100

Liberals emphasize rural aid and service protection benefits

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Who this appears to help vs burden50% / 50%
Local governmentsFederal agencies
Likely helped
  • Local governmentsIncreases per-capita federal PILT payments to many small counties, boosting local revenue.
  • Local governmentsImproves fiscal capacity for local services and infrastructure in low-population jurisdictions.
  • Targeted stakeholdersProvides more granular, population-based payment parity among small jurisdictions.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesIncreases federal expenditures relative to current law, raising budgetary cost.
  • Targeted stakeholdersAllocates higher per-capita payments to smaller populations, raising distributional equity concerns.
  • Federal agenciesMay reduce funds available for other federal programs without appropriations offsets.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Liberals emphasize rural aid and service protection benefits
Progressive80%

Likely supportive overall as a targeted aid increase for small, often rural, local governments that receive federal land impacts.

Views this as helping local services, infrastructure, and potentially protecting communities near federal lands.

Wants clarity on fiscal offsets and equity in distribution but sees the bill as addressing a real funding gap.

Leans supportive
Centrist70%

Pragmatic, generally favorable but wants more information on costs and implementation.

Sees value in clearer, granular formula for small governments but expects CBO scoring, transparency on budgetary impact, and possible sunset or review provisions.

Leans supportive
Conservative65%

Mixed but cautiously supportive if it aids rural counties in the sponsor's states; fiscally wary about expanding federal payments.

Preferences include limiting new mandatory spending or requiring offsets, and ensuring the change doesn't create open-ended federal obligations.

Split reaction
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood60/100

Small, technical payment adjustment with localized beneficiaries tends to attract bipartisan support, but fiscal impact and Senate procedure create uncertainty.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Magnitude of net federal cost from new limits
  • Whether appropriators demand offsets
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Liberals emphasize rural aid and service protection benefits

Small, technical payment adjustment with localized beneficiaries tends to attract bipartisan support, but fiscal impact and Senate procedur…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped, numerically detailed statutory amendment that directly modifies the formula in 31 U.S.C. 6903(c).

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis