PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Sep 15, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10006 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10006 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10006 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10006 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-07-30 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The bill would expand eligibility for qualified opportunity zones, a designation under the federal tax code, to census tracts containing any part of certain closed military sites. It would also raise states’ designation limits for these nominated tracts. This special treatment concerns sites closed through a base realignment and closure round.
Section 1400Z–1(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended—
(C) such population census tract contains any portion of a former installation, facility, or entity of the Department of Defense closed pursuant to a base realignment and closure round.
(B) the number of population census tracts in a State that may be designated as qualified opportunity zones under this section during any period (determined after application of paragraphs (1) and (2)) shall be increased by the number of population census tracts described in subsection (c)(1)(C) and nominated for designation as qualified opportunity zones during such period.
Section 2(a) would add an eligibility route for a census tract containing any portion of a former Defense Department installation, facility, or entity closed through a base realignment and closure round. The proposed criterion does not cover every military-site closure.
2. Certain areas containing former military installations eligible for designation as qualified opportunity zones
(C) such population census tract contains any portion of a former installation, facility, or entity of the Department of Defense closed pursuant to a base realignment and closure round.
For purposes of the existing designation-limit rules, a tract qualifying under the new military-site criterion would not be counted as a low-income community if it fails both existing eligibility routes in subparagraphs (A) and (B). Those existing requirements are not reproduced in the bundle.
For purposes of applying paragraphs (1) and (2)— (A) a population census tract which is described in subsection (c)(1)(C) and which does not meet the requirements of subparagraph (A) or (B) of subsection (c)(1) shall not be treated as a low-income community
Section 2(b) would increase a state's permitted number of opportunity-zone designations by the number of qualifying military-site tracts nominated during the same period. This increase would be calculated after applying the existing limits. The increase is not expressly restricted to tracts that fail the other eligibility routes.
(B) the number of population census tracts in a State that may be designated as qualified opportunity zones under this section during any period (determined after application of paragraphs (1) and (2)) shall be increased by the number of population census tracts described in subsection (c)(1)(C) and nominated for designation as qualified opportunity zones during such period.
The effective-date clause specifies application to areas designated after enactment. However, it refers to amendments made by “this subsection,” leaving uncertainty about which amendments it covers.
(c) Effective date The amendments made by this subsection shall apply to areas designated under section 1400Z–1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 after the date of the enactment of this Act.
The supplied September 15, 2026 source snapshot records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Ways and Means on July 30, 2026. It does not establish subsequent legislative action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-15T08:06:15Z. 2026-07-30: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. 2026-07-30: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-07-30. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied text contains a narrow geographic eligibility preference and a related exception to designation limits. These are central to the bill's policy; classification does not establish their merits or effects.
Census tracts containing any part of a former Defense Department site closed through a base realignment and closure round would receive a special route to opportunity-zone eligibility. States nominating these tracts would also receive additional designation capacity tied to their number, including for tracts that do not satisfy the existing eligibility routes.
(C) such population census tract contains any portion of a former installation, facility, or entity of the Department of Defense closed pursuant to a base realignment and closure round.
(A) a population census tract which is described in subsection (c)(1)(C) and which does not meet the requirements of subparagraph (A) or (B) of subsection (c)(1) shall not be treated as a low-income community
(B) the number of population census tracts in a State that may be designated as qualified opportunity zones under this section during any period (determined after application of paragraphs (1) and (2)) shall be increased by the number of population census tracts described in subsection (c)(1)(C) and nominated for designation as qualified opportunity zones during such period.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 15, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI