Sponsors (4)
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Creates a large, targeted tax deduction for qualifying U.S. automobile manufacturers that meet strict pay, benefit, production, and labor-neutrality requirements. At the same time it cancels several recent EPA and NHTSA vehicle rules, strips states (including California) of authority to get emissions waivers, and orders new federal fuel-economy and greenhouse-gas standards for model years 2027–2035 with 180-day deadlines for agency action.
The bill seeks to raise pay, benefits, domestic auto production, and near-term consumer relief while providing large tax incentives, but it increases budgetary costs, regulatory complexity, and poses significant risks to air quality and long-term emissions reductions.
Middle-class families and taxpayers: the bill sets multi-year (2027–2035) fleet fuel-economy and GHG targets with mutual deemed-compliance and biennial reporting, which should lower lifetime fuel costs, improve air quality and public health, and give manufacturers clearer multi-year regulatory certainty for planning.
Auto manufacturing workers: employees at qualifying firms would see higher wages, stronger retirement security, and retained platinum-level retiree health coverage because eligible wages must meet the 75th-percentile test and employers must offer upgraded DB/DC plans.
U.S. manufacturers and their workers: the domestic-assembly and domestic-component thresholds (75% final assembly and 75% key components) create a strong incentive for domestic production, supporting U.S. manufacturing jobs.
All Americans—especially urban residents, children, seniors, and vulnerable communities: invalidating EPA and NHTSA emissions and efficiency rules risks higher air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, worsening public health and setting back U.S. climate progress.
Taxpayers and the federal budget: allowing a 200% wage deduction will reduce federal revenue and increase the budgetary cost of the tax code provision.
Consumers and middle-class families: the bill creates conflicting risks—if stronger standards are kept (or newly required) compliance costs could raise new-vehicle prices, while if standards are rolled back consumers may face higher long-term fuel costs—either pathway risks higher costs for buyers.
Introduced February 25, 2025 by Bernardo Moreno · Last progress February 25, 2025