PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 20, 2024
Getting Rid of Abusive Trust Schemes Act or the GRATS Act
This bill imposes new requirements on grantor retained annuity trusts (GRATs) to discourage tax avoidance schemes by wealthy taxpayers. Specifically, such trusts must have a minimum term of 15 years and a maximum term of the life expectancy of the annuitant plus 10 years. The bill also prohibits any decrease in a GRAT during its term and requires that the remainder interests in such trusts at the time of their transfer must have a minimum value for gift tax purposes.
The bill also treats a transfer of property between a GRAT and its deemed owner as a sale or exchange for income tax purposes, with specified exceptions.
The bill designates any income tax paid on the income of a GRAT as a gift for purposes of the gift tax unless the owner of the trust is reimbursed during the same calendar year. The amount of the gift may not be reduced through the use of certain deductions, including the charitable or marital deduction, or gifts of tuition or medical care.
People & committees
Sen. Wyden, Ron [D-OR] · D–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Introduced in Senate
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: May 27, 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 S.3988 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 S.3988 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 S.3988 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 S.3988 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.