PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Hazardous Materials, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 4, 1995
Investment for America Act - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to reinstate a ten percent investment tax credit for domestic property placed in service after December 31, 1992. Defines domestic property as property completed in the United States and at least 60 percent of the basis of the property is attributable to value added within the United States. Allows a tax credit for seven percent of the aggregate amount paid for the purchase of domestic durable goods. Limits such credit to $1,000. Permits a tax credit equal to qualified payments made for the purchase of an American automobile. Defines "qualified payments" as State or local sales tax imposed on the purchase of the automobile and interest on the automobile loan. Prohibits a product from bearing a label which suggests that it was made in America unless: (1) the product has been registered with the Department of Commerce; and (2) the Secretary of Commerce has determined that 60 percent of the product was manufactured in, and final assembly took place in, the United States. Requires the registry of American-made products with the Department of Commerce. Prescribes penalties for the fraudulent use of labels.
People & committees
Rep. Traficant, James A., Jr. [D-OH-17] · D–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Hazardous Materials, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Commerce, 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 the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Commerce, 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 the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Commerce, 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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E11)
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 21, 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.392 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.392 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.392 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.392 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.