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. Norman, Ralph [R-SC-5] · R–SC
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: Oct 14, 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.10690 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.10690 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.10690 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.10690 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 · 2026-10-01 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 proposed Capital Loss Inflation Fairness Act would change the deduction limit for taxpayers other than corporations whose capital losses exceed their capital gains. These are losses and gains from selling or exchanging assets covered by the tax code’s capital-asset rules. It would allow up to $14,250 of excess losses, or $7,125 for married individuals filing separately, limited to their actual excess losses. The dollar limits would be adjusted for inflation after 2026.
This Act may be cited as the Capital Loss Inflation Fairness Act.
In the case of a taxpayer other than a corporation, losses from sales or exchanges of capital assets shall be allowed only to the extent of the gains from such sales or exchanges, plus (if such losses exceed such gains) the lower of— (A) $14,250 ($7,125 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return), or (B) the excess of such losses over such gains.
In the case of any taxable year beginning in a calendar year after 2026, the dollar amounts in paragraph (1)(A) shall be increased
Section 2 would replace section 1211(b) of the Internal Revenue Code. For taxpayers other than corporations, allowable capital losses would equal no more than capital gains plus the smaller of actual excess losses or $14,250. The dollar limit would be $7,125 for a married individual filing a separate return.
Section 1211(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows: (b) Other taxpayers (1) In general In the case of a taxpayer other than a corporation, losses from sales or exchanges of capital assets shall be allowed only to the extent of the gains from such sales or exchanges, plus (if such losses exceed such gains) the lower of— (A) $14,250 ($7,125 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return), or (B) the excess of such losses over such gains.
For tax years beginning after 2026, both dollar limits would increase using the cost-of-living formula in section 1(f)(3), with 2025 substituted for its 2016 reference year. Each increase would be rounded to the nearest $25.
In the case of any taxable year beginning in a calendar year after 2026, the dollar amounts in paragraph (1)(A) shall be increased by an amount equal to— (A) such dollar amount, multiplied by (B) the cost-of-living adjustment under section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which the taxable year begins, determined by substituting calendar year 2025 for calendar year 2016 in subparagraph (A)(ii) thereof. If any increase determined under the preceding sentence is not a multiple of $25, such increase shall be rounded to the nearest multiple of $25.
The proposed change would apply to losses in tax years beginning after December 31, 2025.
The amendment made by this section shall apply to losses in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025.
The supplied October 14, 2026 source snapshot records that the bill was introduced in the House and referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means on October 1, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-14T19:41:07Z. 2026-10-01: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. 2026-10-01: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-10-01. 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 and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
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 is limited to that version; earmark disclosures and committee or conference materials were not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential exception was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 14, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI