Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 29, 2009
Vessel Repair Enhancement Act of 2009 - Expands, for capital construction fund provisions, the definition of "qualified vessel" to include: (1) a vessel documented under U.S. laws and maintained or repaired in a privately owned shipyard in the United States; and (2) any floating dry dock and related shipyard infrastructure (including marine railways) located in the United States and used to build, maintain, or repair U.S.-documented vessels.
Amends federal merchant marine law and the Internal Revenue Code to: (1) allow capital construction funds to be used for maintenance or repair of vessels documented under the laws of the United States; (2) establish the order of withdrawal for purposes of the tax treatment of qualified withdrawals from such funds; and (3) disallow a basis reduction for maintenance or repair withdrawals.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
Referred to House Transportation and Infrastructure
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 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 House Ways and Means
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
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 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.3370 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.3370 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.3370 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.3370 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.