PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 19, 2005
Historic Rehabilitation Enhancement Act of 2005 - Provides that: (1) the receipt of a state historic tax credit and the transfer, disposition, or refund of such credit shall not constitute income for income tax purposes, unless the taxpayer elects to include such tax credit amount in income; (2) the adjusted basis of property for which a state historic tax credit is allowed shall be reduced by the tax credit amount; and (3) the transfer or disposition of the state historic tax credit shall not affect or reduce qualified rehabilitation expenditures under the rehabilitation tax credit or trigger recapture of income.
People & committees
Rep. Carnahan, Russ [D-MO-3] · D–MO
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 15, 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.2488 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.2488 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.2488 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.2488 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.