PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 18, 2025
Cameron's Law
This bill increases the orphan drug tax credit to 50% (from 25%) of qualified clinical testing expenses paid or incurred in the development of drugs to treat certain rare diseases or conditions.
As background, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act reduced the orphan drug tax credit (for tax years after 2017) to 25% of qualified clinical testing expenses (e.g., wages, supplies, and certain contract expenses) paid or incurred in the development of drugs to treat certain rare diseases or conditions. For 2017 and prior tax years, the orphan tax credit was 50% of such expenses paid or incurred.
People & committees
Rep. Gottheimer, Josh [D-NJ-5] · D–NJ
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 19, 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.1414 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.1414 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.1414 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.1414 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 · 2025-02-18 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 increase the orphan drug tax credit percentage from 25% to 50% for taxpayers eligible for that credit. The change would apply to tax years beginning after enactment.
Restoration of amount of orphan drug tax credit (a) In general Section 45C(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 25 percent and inserting 50 percent.
The amendment made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.
The bill names the proposal Cameron’s Law and would replace “25 percent” with “50 percent” in section 45C(a) of the federal tax code.
This Act may be cited as Cameron’s Law.
Section 45C(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 25 percent and inserting 50 percent.
The higher percentage would first apply to tax years starting after the enactment date, rather than tax years already underway on that date.
The amendment made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.
The supplied September 19, 2026 source snapshot records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Ways and Means on February 18, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-19T23:34:03Z. 2025-02-18: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. 2025-02-18: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-18. 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 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 earmark was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; member 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: Sep 19, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI