PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Sep 27, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Charity Enhancement Act of 2008 - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to modify rules and definitions relating to the excise tax on distributions from donor advised funds (charitable funds in which a donor has, or reasonably expects to have, advisory privileges with respect to the distribution or investment of amounts held in such funds by reason of his or her status as a donor).
Excludes from the definition of "donor advised fund" charitable funds that receive contributions or are advised solely by one or more public charities or governmental entities.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Exempts certain scholarship distributions from the tax on distributions from donor advised funds.
Repeals the requirement of a written acknowledgment by a supporting organization (a charitable organization that maintains one or more donor advised funds) that it has exclusive legal control over assets contributed to it.
Exempts certain compensation and benefits paid to substantial contributors by supporting organizations from treatment as excess benefits.
Exempts certain supporting organizations established before January 1, 1970, from applicable holdings and payout requirements.
Treats contributions to tax-exempt organizations by Indian tribal governments in the same manner as contributions by states for purposes of determining the classification of an organization as a public charity or private foundation.
Requires certain tax-exempt organizations that file at least five tax returns annually with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to use electronic filing.
Extends the bad check penalty to payments of tax by commercially acceptable means (e.g., electronic payments).
People & committees
Rep. Lewis, John [D-GA-5] · D–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H10196-10197)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H10196-10197)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 7083.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10196-10198)
Mr. Lewis (GA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
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.7083 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.7083 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.7083 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.7083 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.