PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 6, 2017
CO2 Regulatory Certainty Act
This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to revise requirements for the secure geological storage of carbon dioxide for the purpose of the tax credit for carbon dioxide sequestration.
The bill establishes a December 31, 2017, deadline and requirements for regulations that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is required, under current law, to establish for determining adequate security measures for the geological storage of the carbon dioxide such that carbon dioxide does not escape into the atmosphere.
The IRS regulations must consider the carbon dioxide to be disposed of in secure geological storage if it is stored in compliance with specified rules promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Air Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act for the geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide, the injection of carbon dioxide, and the criteria and standards for underground injection control programs that are applicable to Class II wells.
People & committees
Rep. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND-At Large] · R–ND
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 currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 6, 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.2010 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.2010 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.2010 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.2010 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.