Nanette Barragán (D-CA)
Housing Tariff Exclusion Act
A Democratic bill with 8 Democratic cosponsors · See all 8 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the Housing Tariff Exclusion Act, requires the Secretary of Commerce to establish a process allowing U.S. entities to request exemptions from certain import duties on home construction materials. It outlines specific criteria for the Secretary to grant these exclusions, such as a product being a critical homebuilding product or not being available in sufficient quantities from domestic sources. The legislation mandates timely processing of these requests, sets rules for retroactive duty refunds, and requires transparency through public website postings and reports to Congress. Additionally, the bill provides detailed lists of specific product categories and definitions relevant to home construction. Finally, the authority for the Secretary to grant new exclusions ends on October 1, 2029.
Yes· 3 of 32
- Scored +7
Does this make housing cost less?
The bill directly targets housing affordability by reducing the cost of construction materials.
- Scored +5
Would business owners be better off under this?
Construction and real estate business owners benefit from lower material costs.
- Scored +4
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Lower housing and rental costs directly assist low-income households.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this make trade with other countries easier?
The bill focuses on bypassing trade duties, which may create friction in trade relationships.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 3(a) and Section 3(b) allow U.S. entities to request and receive exclusions from certain duties for covered articles used in home construction if the items are critical homebuilding products or are not available in sufficient quantities domestically. This could lower the cost of building materials, helping to address the severe housing affordability crisis by making homes less expensive to build, buy, or rent.
-
Section 3(d) establishes strict deadlines requiring the Secretary of Commerce to adjudicate exclusion requests within 15 days for critical homebuilding products and 60 days for other covered articles. This ensures that businesses do not face unnecessary bureaucratic delays when trying to secure cheaper building supplies.
-
Section 3(e) provides for retroactive application, allowing entities to receive refunds or liquidations on duties paid for entries of covered articles if an exclusion is granted after the duty was initially imposed. This can put money back into the pockets of builders and developers who already paid extra costs, potentially lowering overall construction expenses.
-
Section 3(f) and Section 3(g) require the Secretary of Commerce to publish adjudication results online within 15 days and submit quarterly reports to specific congressional committees. This holds officials accountable and keeps the public informed about how the exclusion process is being managed.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Section 3(i) places a sunset date of October 1, 2029, on the Secretary's authority to grant new exclusions from covered duties. After this date, relief from these tariffs through this specific process will no longer be available, which could cause building material costs to rise again if tariffs remain in place.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Construction and real estate business owners benefit from lower material costs. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Lower housing and rental costs directly assist low-income households. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The bill helps build more homes across all residential areas. Would union members be better off under this? — Increased construction activity may lead to more jobs for construction workers. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Increased supply and affordability can mitigate urban housing crises. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Increased housing affordability can help address wealth gaps through homeownership. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? Would immigrants be better off under this? Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Reduced housing costs provide financial relief for middle-aged households. Would Native Americans be better off under this? Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Improved affordability helps all vulnerable populations, including people with disabilities. Would retired people be better off under this? Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Affordability improvements can benefit seniors on fixed incomes. Would students be better off under this? — Lower housing costs benefit students looking for rental housing. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Lower housing costs can assist veterans seeking homes. Would white Americans be better off under this? Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Lower housing costs benefit younger generations entering the market. Would billionaires be better off under this? Would high-income households be better off under this? — High-income individuals may see some benefit through increased real estate investment opportunities. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this?
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make housing cost less? — The bill directly targets housing affordability by reducing the cost of construction materials. Is this likely to reduce homelessness? — By increasing housing supply and affordability, the bill could indirectly help reduce homelessness. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Lower housing costs can alleviate financial burdens for low-income families.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — Lower construction costs may spur investment in the residential building industry. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Reducing tariff-related costs can benefit small-scale homebuilders and construction entities. Is this likely to create jobs? — Reducing construction costs may stimulate investment and job creation in the housing sector. Is this likely to slow the rise in prices? — Lowering material costs could help mitigate price pressures in the housing market.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires the Secretary to publish adjudication results on an accessible website. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill mandates timely adjudication periods for exclusion requests. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands the Secretary of Commerce's authority to grant duty exclusions.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this make trade with other countries easier? — The bill focuses on bypassing trade duties, which may create friction in trade relationships.
- 10/26/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/19/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/24/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 9/21/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 9/16/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Yvette ClarkeDemocrat · New York
Joe CourtneyDemocrat · Connecticut
Laura FriedmanDemocrat · California
Robert GarciaDemocrat · California
Josh HarderDemocrat · California
Sarah McBrideDemocrat · Delaware
Donald NorcrossDemocrat · New Jersey
Mary Gay ScanlonDemocrat · Pennsylvania