A Republican bill with 5 Democratic cosponsors · See all 15 cosponsors
Last activity — ASSUMING FIRST SPONSORSHIP - Mr. LaHood asked unanimous consent that he may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 2424, a bill originally introduced by Representative LaMalfa, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII. Agreed to without objection.
Introduced, nothing more yet
Formally proposed, and not yet handed to a committee.
Nearly every bill is sent to a committee within days. Introduction alone is not a sign of support, of momentum, or of any likelihood of passing — any member may introduce any bill.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
What this bill would do
The "Modern, Clean, and Safe Trucks Act of 2025" aims to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The primary purpose of the bill is to repeal the existing 12-percent Federal retail excise tax on heavy trucks, tractors, and trailers. By removing this tax, the bill seeks to reduce the cost of new heavy-duty vehicles. This change is intended to encourage the replacement of older vehicles with newer models that feature advanced safety and environmental technologies. The repeal would apply to sales and installations occurring on or after the date the Act is introduced.
Yes· 3 of 16
- Scored +7
Would business owners be better off under this?
The repeal significantly reduces the capital costs of essential equipment for heavy-duty vehicle owners.
- Scored +6
Would farmers be better off under this?
Reducing the cost of heavy tractors and trailers directly benefits agricultural operations.
- Scored +6
Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change?
The repeal encourages the replacement of older trucks with cleaner, more fuel-efficient, and zero-emission models.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this repair or build roads and bridges?
The loss of excise tax revenue may negatively impact the Highway Trust Fund used for infrastructure.
- Scored -2
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?
The repeal creates revenue uncertainty for the Highway Trust Fund, which relies on these excise tax receipts.
- Scored -1
Does this give the federal government more power?
The repeal reduces a federal revenue stream used for national infrastructure.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Lower Costs for Heavy Equipment: Repealing the 12-percent tax could reduce the cost of new trailers by $7,000 or more, clean diesel trucks by $20,000 or more, and advanced engine technology trucks by as much as $50,000 (Section 2).
-
Increased Vehicle Safety and Environmental Technology: Eliminating the tax is intended to advance the deployment of modern, clean, and safe trucks by making it easier to replace older internal combustion engine trucks with new ones (Section 2).
-
Encouraging Clean Energy Adoption: The repeal aims to reduce the disproportionate impact the tax currently has on electric and alternative-fueled trucks, which have higher upfront costs (Section 2).
-
Fuel Savings for Owners: The bill notes that owners of Class 8 trucks using the latest clean diesel engines can expect to save approximately 2,200 gallons of fuel annually compared to older technology (Section 2).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Impact on Highway Trust Fund Revenue: The bill notes that current receipts from the tax deposited in the Highway Trust Fund vary greatly and suggests that Congress should consider a more reliable and consistent revenue mechanism to fund the Highway Trust Fund (Section 2).
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? — The repeal significantly reduces the capital costs of essential equipment for heavy-duty vehicle owners. Would farmers be better off under this? — Reducing the cost of heavy tractors and trailers directly benefits agricultural operations. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Reduced equipment costs benefit the agricultural and transport-heavy rural economy. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Cleaner truck technology will help reduce air pollution in urban areas. Would union members be better off under this? — Potential job creation in the manufacturing and trucking industries may benefit labor sectors. Would children be better off under this? — Reduced emissions contribute to better long-term air quality for future generations.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change? — The repeal encourages the replacement of older trucks with cleaner, more fuel-efficient, and zero-emission models. Does this put more money into wind, solar and other renewable power? — The act makes electric and alternative-fueled heavy-duty vehicles more financially attractive. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — By accelerating the adoption of modern engine technologies, the bill aims to reduce overall nitrogen oxide and particulate matter emissions. Does this invest in rural communities? — Lower costs for heavy equipment can benefit agricultural operations and rural transport. Does this reduce how much oil, gas and coal is produced? — Improved fuel economy in newer trucks leads to reduced overall diesel consumption. Does this repair or build roads and bridges? — The loss of excise tax revenue may negatively impact the Highway Trust Fund used for infrastructure.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Reducing the cost of essential heavy equipment provides direct relief to small trucking and agricultural businesses. Does this cut taxes for small businesses? — The repeal of the excise tax reduces capital expenditures for businesses purchasing heavy-duty trucks and trailers. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Reducing costs for heavy industry can provide a slight boost to economic activity in transport and logistics. Is this likely to create jobs? — Lowering costs for heavy equipment may stimulate demand in the manufacturing and trucking sectors. Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — The repeal creates revenue uncertainty for the Highway Trust Fund, which relies on these excise tax receipts.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make it easier to do business across state lines? — Lower costs for heavy-duty transport can facilitate more efficient interstate commerce. Does this give the federal government more power? — The repeal reduces a federal revenue stream used for national infrastructure.
- 8/3/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/22/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/16/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/29/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/8/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/29/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/19/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/14/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/30/2026
- ASSUMING FIRST SPONSORSHIP - Mr. LaHood asked unanimous consent that he may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 2424, a bill originally introduced by Representative LaMalfa, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII. Agreed to without objection.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/17/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/5/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/27/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
- 4 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.
Henry CuellarDemocrat · Texas
Salud CarbajalDemocrat · California
Angie CraigDemocrat · Minnesota
Donald DavisDemocrat · North Carolina
Brad FinstadRepublican · Minnesota
Jeff HurdRepublican · Colorado
Thomas KeanRepublican · New Jersey
Darin LaHoodRepublican · Illinois
Max MillerRepublican · Ohio
Scott PerryRepublican · Pennsylvania
Chris PappasDemocrat · New Hampshire
Elise StefanikRepublican · New York
David ValadaoRepublican · California
Derrick Van OrdenRepublican · Wisconsin
Rudy YakymRepublican · Indiana