PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 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.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 6, 2016
This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to treat any qualified ride-sharing service provided after the date of the enactment of this bill and before June 1, 2017, as a qualified transportation fringe benefit that is excluded from an employee's gross income.
A qualified ride-sharing service is transportation provided through a transportation network company if:
the transportation is in connection with travel between the employee's residence and place of employment, both of which are located within the Washington Metropolitan Area;
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
the employee is an employee of a government agency and receives transit benefits from the agency; and
the transportation is through the use of services that utilize innovative mobility technologies to provide alternatives to driving alone.
The benefit is subject to a limit on the aggregate amount of certain transportation fringe benefits that may be excluded from gross income.
During the period beginning with the enactment of this bill and ending on the earlier of June 1, 2017, or the completion of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority's maintenance program (commonly referred to as "SafeTrack"), agencies that provide transit benefits to employees must provide benefits for using transportation network companies within the Washington Metropolitan Area in the same manner as benefits are provided for using public transportation services in the area.
People & committees
Rep. Meadows, Mark [R-NC-11] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 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 Oversight and Government Reform, 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 Oversight and Government Reform, 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.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.5647 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.5647 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.5647 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.5647 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.