PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 11.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Feb 9, 2015
Conservation Easement Incentive Act of 2015
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to make permanent after 2014 the tax deduction for charitable contributions by individuals and corporations of real property interests for conservation purposes.
The bill also allows a tax deduction for conservation contributions made by a Native Corporation of land conveyed under the Alaska Claims Settlement Act.
People & committees
Rep. Kelly, Mike [R-PA-3] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 11.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Ways and Means. H. Rept. 114-17.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Ways and Means. H. Rept. 114-17.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 24 - 14.
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.
Source last updated: Dec 6, 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.641 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.641 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.641 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.641 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.