PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on the Legislative and Budget Process.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 5, 1995
National Dividend Act of 1995 - Establishes a program for the distribution of certain corporate tax revenues to the registered voters of each State in the form of dividend payments. Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to pay to the chief financial officer of each State, in accordance with a prescribed schedule, an amount equal to the National Dividend Payment, as computed under this Act, multiplied by the number of registered voters in the State. Establishes in the Treasury the National Dividend Payment Trust Fund. Authorizes payment into the Fund of specified amounts from revenue received from: (1) the corporate income tax; (2) the tax on the unrelated business income of certain tax-exempt organizations; (3) the capital gains tax; (4) the tax on insurance company income; and (5) the alternative minimum tax on corporations. Establishes a National Dividend Review Board to review the manner in which payments are made from the Fund and to make investments of Fund amounts. Amends the Internal Revenue Code to exclude from gross income all dividend income received by a taxpayer from domestic corporations, including dividends received under this Act. Increases the corporate income tax deduction for dividends received by a corporation on the preferred stock of a public utility. Prohibits corporate income tax rates from exceeding 34 percent. Amends the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to declare it out of order in either the House of Representatives or the Senate to consider budget resolutions for FY 1995 and thereafter that would increase the level of total budget outlays beyond those budgeted for FY 1995.
People & committees
Rep. Tauzin, W. J. (Billy) [R-LA-3] · R–LA
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 the Legislative and Budget Process.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E179)
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, 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 Rules, 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 Rules, 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.
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.430 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.430 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.430 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.430 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.