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. LaHood, Darin [R-IL-16] · R–IL
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 10, 2025. 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.1075 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.1075 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.1075 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.1075 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 · 2025-02-06 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.
This proposal would count required tax documents and payments sent electronically as delivered or paid on the day they are sent, even if received or reviewed later. It would let qualifying small business corporations choose S corporation tax status by their tax-return filing deadline, including extensions, subject to eligibility and shareholder-consent conditions. It would also move two estimated-income-tax payment dates for individual people one month later.
the date on which such return, claim, statement, or other document, or payment, is sent electronically by such person shall be deemed to be the date of delivery or the date of payment, as the case may be, regardless of the date on which the applicable agency, officer, or office receives or reviews such return, claim, statement, document, or payment.
An election under subsection (a) may be made by a small business corporation for any taxable year not later than the due date for filing the return of the S corporation for such taxable year (including extensions).
(i) on 1 or more days in such taxable year and before the day on which the election was made the corporation did not meet the requirements of subsection (b) of section 1361, or (ii) 1 or more of the persons who held stock in the corporation during such taxable year and before the election was made did not consent to the election, then such election shall be treated as made for the following taxable year.
Quarterly installments for estimated income tax payments by individual (a) In general The table contained in section 6654(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— (1) by striking June 15 and inserting July 15, and (2) by striking September 15 and inserting October 15.
The bill names the proposal the Tax Administration Simplification Act.
This Act may be cited as the Tax Administration Simplification Act.
For tax documents and payments subject to a legal deadline, the proposal would use the electronic sending date as the delivery or payment date. The sender must send the document or payment to the agency, officer, or office where it is required to go; later receipt or review would not change that date.
If any return, claim, statement, or other document required to be filed, or any payment required to be made, within a prescribed period or on or before a prescribed date under authority of any provision of the internal revenue laws is sent electronically by any person to the agency, officer, or office with which such return, claim, statement, or other document is required to be filed, or to which such payment is required to be made, the date on which such return, claim, statement, or other document, or payment, is sent electronically by such person shall be deemed to be the date of delivery or the date of payment, as the case may be, regardless of the date on which the applicable agency, officer, or office receives or reviews such return, claim, statement, document, or payment.
The electronic-sending rule would apply to documents and payments sent after December 31, 2025. The proposal would require the Secretary to issue regulations or other guidance deemed necessary by December 31, 2025.
Not later than December 31, 2025, the Secretary shall issue such regulations or other guidance as the Secretary determines necessary to carry out the purposes of this paragraph.
The amendments made by this section shall apply to any document or payment sent after December 31, 2025.
A small business corporation could make an election—a formal choice of S corporation tax status—for a tax year by that year's S corporation return deadline, including extensions. Unless the Secretary provided otherwise, it could make the election on a timely filed return.
An election under subsection (a) may be made by a small business corporation for any taxable year not later than the due date for filing the return of the S corporation for such taxable year (including extensions).
Except as otherwise provided by the Secretary, an election under subsection (a) for any taxable year may be made on a timely filed return of the S corporation for such taxable year.
An otherwise timely S corporation election would instead count for the following tax year if, before the election during the requested year, the corporation failed the referenced eligibility requirements on any day or any person who held its stock during that period did not consent.
If— (A) an election under subsection (a) is made for any taxable year within the period described in paragraph (1), but (B) either— (i) on 1 or more days in such taxable year and before the day on which the election was made the corporation did not meet the requirements of subsection (b) of section 1361, or (ii) 1 or more of the persons who held stock in the corporation during such taxable year and before the election was made did not consent to the election, then such election shall be treated as made for the following taxable year.
If an S corporation election was late or was not made, the Secretary could treat it as timely after finding reasonable cause for the failure. This relief would be discretionary. The Secretary could also issue regulations, rules, or guidance to implement the election provisions.
If— (A) an election under subsection (a) is made for any taxable year after the date prescribed by this subsection for making such election for such taxable year or no such election is made for any taxable year, and (B) the Secretary determines that there was reasonable cause for the failure to timely make such election, the Secretary may treat such an election as timely made for such taxable year.
The Secretary may prescribe such regulations, rules, or other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate for purposes of applying this subsection.
For elections concerning qualified subchapter S subsidiaries, the proposal would add a requirement to apply rules similar to the revised S corporation election rules. The underlying subsidiary-election provision is not reproduced.
Qualified subchapter S subsidiaries Section 1361(b)(3)(B) of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following flush sentence: Rules similar to the rules of section 1362(b) shall apply with respect to any election under clause (ii).
For qualified subchapter S trusts, the proposal would delete section 1361(d)(2)(D) of the tax code. Because the deleted provision is not supplied, this bundle does not establish the full practical effect of that deletion.
Qualified subchapter S trusts Section 1361(d)(2) of such Code is amended by striking subparagraph (D).
The Secretary could also excuse a missed deadline for revoking an S corporation election—ending that tax-status choice—if there was reasonable cause, including when no revocation had been made. This discretionary relief would apply to revocations made after enactment.
If— (i) a revocation under subparagraph (A) is made for any taxable year after the date prescribed by this paragraph for making such revocation for such taxable year or no such revocation is made for any taxable year, and (ii) the Secretary determines that there was reasonable cause for the failure to timely make such revocation, the Secretary may treat such a revocation as timely made for such taxable year.
The amendments made by subsection (c) shall apply to revocations made after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Apart from the separate effective date for revocations, section 3's changes would apply to elections for tax years beginning after December 31, 2025.
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the amendments made by this section shall apply to elections for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025.
The amendments made by subsection (c) shall apply to revocations made after the date of the enactment of this Act.
For individual people's estimated income tax installments—tax payments made during the year—the proposal would replace June 15 with July 15 and September 15 with October 15 in the statutory payment table. These changes would apply to installments due in tax years beginning after December 31, 2025.
Quarterly installments for estimated income tax payments by individual (a) In general The table contained in section 6654(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— (1) by striking June 15 and inserting July 15, and (2) by striking September 15 and inserting October 15.
The amendments made by this section shall apply to installments due in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 10, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Ways and Means on February 6, 2025. It does not establish subsequent legislative action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2025-09-10T08:06:18Z. 2025-02-06: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. 2025-02-06: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-06. 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 provision unrelated to the bill's tax-administration subject, or policy change attached to appropriations, was identified in the supplied complete 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 supplied complete introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
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 treatment warranting a finding was identified in the supplied complete introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 10, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI