Lizzie Fletcher (D-TX)
Pink Tariffs Study Act
A Democratic bill with 12 Democratic cosponsors · See all 12 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 "Pink Tariffs Study Act," directs a study regarding how U.S. import tariffs affect different people. The Secretary of the Treasury is required to lead this study in coordination with several trade and customs agencies. The goal is to examine if tariff rates are regressive or show a bias based on gender. It specifically looks at how these costs fall on consumers and how they impact different household types and income levels. The results must be submitted to Congress within one year of the Act being passed.
Yes· 3 of 7
- Scored +1
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The study examines whether tariffs disproportionately burden lower-income consumers.
- Scored +1
Would middle-income households be better off under this?
The study examines whether tariffs disproportionately burden middle-income consumers.
- Scored +1
Would women be better off under this?
The study explicitly investigates gender bias in tariffs, such as higher costs for women's clothing.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Transparency on Economic Burdens: The study aims to determine if tariffs are regressive by looking at whether they fall harder on mass-market goods than luxury goods (Section 2, paragraph 1). This could help the public understand how trade costs impact everyday consumer goods.
-
Identification of Gender Bias: The bill seeks to find if tariffs show a bias toward specific genders, such as higher rates on women's clothing compared to men's (Section 2, paragraph 2). This could highlight inequities in how goods are taxed based on who is likely to use them.
-
Understanding of Household Disparities: The study requires looking at how tariff burdens affect different income levels and household types, such as single-parent or double-parent families (Section 2, paragraph 3). This provides insight into how trade policies impact the financial stability of various family structures.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No specific negative impacts are explicitly stated in the text provided.
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 households on low incomes be better off under this? — The study examines whether tariffs disproportionately burden lower-income consumers. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The study examines whether tariffs disproportionately burden middle-income consumers. Would women be better off under this? — The study explicitly investigates gender bias in tariffs, such as higher costs for women's clothing.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated? — The study aims to identify potential gender bias in tariff rates on goods. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Identifying regressive tariffs could help inform policies that reduce economic burdens on low-income households.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The study may lead to better consumer protections by identifying regressive tariff burdens.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The study increases transparency regarding the economic impact of tariff structures.
- 11/21/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/24/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/21/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/8/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/21/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 3/11/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
- 6 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Donald BeyerDemocrat · Virginia
André CarsonDemocrat · Indiana
Sharice DavidsDemocrat · Kansas
Henry JohnsonDemocrat · Georgia
Rick LarsenDemocrat · Washington
April McClain DelaneyDemocrat · Maryland
Kelly MorrisonDemocrat · Minnesota
Sarah McBrideDemocrat · Delaware
Brittany PettersenDemocrat · Colorado
Mike QuigleyDemocrat · Illinois
Marc VeaseyDemocrat · Texas
Bonnie Watson ColemanDemocrat · New Jersey