PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.ASSUMING FIRST SPONSORSHIP - Mr. Murphy asked unanimous consent that he may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 1849, a bill originally introduced by Representative LaMalfa, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII. Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 5, 2025
Disaster Mitigation and Tax Parity Act of 2025
This bill excludes from gross income, for federal income tax purposes, payments received from a state catastrophe loss mitigation program by an individual for the purpose of making improvements to the individual’s property that mitigate the impact of certain disasters.
Under current law, individuals may exclude from gross income, for federal income tax purposes, payments received under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act or the National Flood Insurance Act (as in effect on April 15, 2005) for hazard mitigation. (Some exceptions apply.) Further, under current law, such payments do not increase the basis of the property for which the payments are made.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill allows a similar exclusion from gross income for certain payments received by an individual from a program established by
a state (or any political subdivision or instrumentality of the state),
a joint powers authority, or
an entity that was established by the state to provide essential or basic property insurance and is regulated by the state.
Under the bill, such payments must be for making improvements to the individual’s property for the sole purpose of reducing damage that would be done to the property by a windstorm, earthquake, flood, or wildfire.
Finally, the bill provides that such payments from a state catastrophe loss mitigation program do not increase the basis of the property for which the payments are made.
People & committees
Rep. LaMalfa, Doug [R-CA-1] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
ASSUMING FIRST SPONSORSHIP - Mr. Murphy asked unanimous consent that he may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 1849, a bill originally introduced by Representative LaMalfa, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII. Agreed to without objection.
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 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.1849 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.1849 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.1849 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.1849 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 · 2025-03-05 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 Disaster Mitigation and Tax Parity Act of 2025 would let individual property owners exclude qualifying payments from income for federal tax purposes. It would cover payments received through specified State-related programs, including payments made on an owner's behalf, to improve that owner's property solely to reduce damage from windstorms, earthquakes, or wildfires.
This Act may be cited as the Disaster Mitigation and Tax Parity Act of 2025.
Gross income shall not include any amount received by or paid for the benefit of an individual as a qualified catastrophe mitigation payment under a program established by—
the term qualified catastrophe mitigation payment means any amount which is received by or paid for the benefit of the owner of any property to make improvements to such property for the sole purpose of reducing the damage that would be done to such property by a windstorm, earthquake, or wildfire.
Eligible programs would have to be established to make these payments by a State, a State's political subdivision or public instrumentality, or a joint powers authority. Programs could also qualify if established by a State-created entity that ensures an adequate market of last resort for essential or basic property insurance and is subject to regulatory oversight by a State agency or insurance department.
under a program established by— (A) a State or any political subdivision or public instrumentality thereof, (B) a joint powers authority, or (C) an entity created by State law to ensure the availability of an adequate market of last resort for essential property insurance or basic property insurance, over which a State agency or State department of insurance has regulatory oversight, for the purpose of making such payments.
A qualifying payment would have to be received by, or paid for the benefit of, a property owner to improve that property. The definition requires the improvements' sole purpose to be reducing damage from windstorms, earthquakes, or wildfires; it does not describe payments for repairing damage that has already occurred.
the term qualified catastrophe mitigation payment means any amount which is received by or paid for the benefit of the owner of any property to make improvements to such property for the sole purpose of reducing the damage that would be done to such property by a windstorm, earthquake, or wildfire.
Under a provision titled “No increase in basis,” the bill would apply rules similar to existing section 139(g)(3). The referenced rules are not reproduced, so the precise operation of this restriction cannot be determined from the supplied text alone.
(3) No increase in basis Rules similar to the rules of subsection (g)(3) shall apply in the case of this subsection.
The bill would insert the new exclusion as section 139(h), move the existing subsection (h) to subsection (i), and add references to qualified catastrophe mitigation payments in subsection (d) and the newly numbered subsection (i). The affected existing provisions are not reproduced, limiting what can be said about these related changes.
Section 139 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating subsection (h) as subsection (i) and by inserting after subsection (g) the following new subsection:
(b) Conforming amendments (1) Section 139(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking and qualified and inserting , qualified catastrophe mitigation payments, and qualified. (2) Section 139(i) of such Code (as redesignated by subsection (a)) is amended by striking or qualified and inserting , qualified catastrophe mitigation payment, or qualified.
The proposed changes would apply retroactively to tax years beginning after December 31, 2020.
The amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2020.
The Treasury Secretary or the Secretary's delegate would have to give individuals an opportunity to claim the exclusion, including by filing an amended tax return. The bill does not specify a deadline or detailed process for that opportunity.
The Secretary of the Treasury, or the Secretary’s delegate, shall provide an opportunity for individuals to claim the exclusion from gross income under section 139(h) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by this section, including by amended return.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated September 19, 2026, records introduction and referral to the House Committee on Ways and Means on March 5, 2025. It also records that on February 4, 2026, the House agreed without objection to let Mr. Murphy be considered the first sponsor of the bill originally introduced by Representative LaMalfa, for purposes of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings. This snapshot does not establish passage or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-19T23:41:28Z.
2025-03-05: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. 2025-03-05: Introduced in House
2026-02-04: ASSUMING FIRST SPONSORSHIP - Mr. Murphy asked unanimous consent that he may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 1849, a bill originally introduced by Representative LaMalfa, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII. Agreed to without objection.
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-05. 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 after reviewing 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 after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials. Formal earmark status cannot be established for materials 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 beyond the proposed policy's ordinary eligibility rules was identified after reviewing 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