To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the income cap for and make permanent the mortgage insurance premium deduction.
Analysis under review: This bill has generated analysis that may be too generic or incomplete. Clause-level evidence remains available below.
Summary
What This Bill Does
The bill requires increasing the income cap for and making permanent the mortgage insurance premium deduction (1) Section 163(h)(3)(E) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— in clause (ii), by striking $100,000. It relies on definition changes, tax deductions, and compliance mandates. The main policy areas are Homeowners and Housing.
Who Benefits and How
Homeowners, tenants, or housing market participants affected by the bill could gain revenue opportunities and Public beneficiaries or protected communities affected by the clause could face reduced risk.
Who Bears the Burden and How
Federal, state, or local agencies responsible for implementing the clause would take on compliance duties.
Key Provisions
- Requires increasing the income cap for and making permanent the mortgage insurance premium deduction (1) Section 163(h)(3)(E) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— in clause (ii), by striking $100,000...
Evidence Chain:
This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.
At a Glance
What This Bill Does
The bill requires increasing the income cap for and making permanent the mortgage insurance premium deduction (1) Section 163(h)(3)(E) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— in clause (ii), by striking $100,000.
Key Policy Areas
Homeowners, Housing
Primary Purpose
The bill requires increasing the income cap for and making permanent the mortgage insurance premium deduction (1) Section 163(h)(3)(E) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— in clause (ii), by striking $100,000.
Policy Domains
Whole bill
Identified Gains
- Homeowners, tenants, or housing market participants affected by the bill
- Public beneficiaries or protected communities affected by the clause
Identified Costs
- Federal, state, or local agencies responsible for implementing the clause
Sponsors
Legislative Progress
IntroducedMr. Buchanan (for himself and Mr. Panetta) introduced the following …
Impact analysis is available but no clear stakeholder effects identified. View clause-level analysis →
Bill Structure & Actor Mappings
Who is "The Secretary" in each section?
We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.
Learn more about our methodology