PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 1, 2013
Strict Standards and Accountability Act - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to require the Secretary of the Treasury to: (1) acknowledge in writing the receipt of an application submitted by a non-profit social welfare organization for recognition of its tax-exempt status within 28 days; (2) inform such organization of the status of its application if the Secretary has not approved or denied such application within six months after acknowledgment of receipt, enumerate the reasons for such delay, provide an estimate of when a final decision may be made, and consider such application under fast track procedures; (3) inform such organization in writing as to the status of its application if it is not approved or denied within 365 days after acknowledgment of receipt and enumerate reasons specific to the application for its delay; and (4) report to the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee on extenuating circumstances that prevent a timely determination of pending applications and on the number of applications pending for over 365 days.
People & committees
Rep. Marchant, Kenny [R-TX-24] · R–TX
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 12, 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.2924 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.2924 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.2924 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.2924 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.