PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 1, 2001
Earthquake Loss Reduction Act of 2001 - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow a nonrefundable personal credit of 50 percent of so much of the qualified seismic retrofit expenses (principal residence earthquake retrofit expenses) incurred during a taxable year that does not exceed $6,000. Provides a five-year recovery period for the depreciation of qualified seismic retrofit expenses. Authorizes the issuance of qualified seismic retrofitting bonds, 95 percent of the proceeds of which must be used for seismic retrofitting expenditures. Provides an exemption from passive activity loss restrictions for any seismic retrofitting activity engaged in during a taxable year.Amends the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 to authorize the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to establish a grant program to provide financial assistance to certain local governments, public or nonprofit private hospitals, or public institutions of higher education to pay the Federal share of the cost of carrying out earthquake disaster mitigation and recovery planning measures with respect to critical facilities and infrastructures (disaster response facilities, hospital and medical facilities) under the jurisdiction of such recipients. Allows grant funds to be used to retrofit such facilities and infrastructures, implement earthquake disaster mitigation measures, or develop earthquake disaster recovery plans. Establishes the Loss Reduction Trust Fund for grant payments.
People & committees
Rep. Thompson, Mike [D-CA-1] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Research.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Science, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Science, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Science, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and Science, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 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.1669 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.1669 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.1669 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.1669 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.