A Republican bill with 5 Republican cosponsors · See all 5 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 "Pay Less at the Pump Act of 2026," proposes changes to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. It seeks to terminate the Hazardous Substance Superfund financing rate. Under this proposal, the rate would no longer apply after December 31, 2025. Additionally, the bill modifies the authority for advances related to the Fund. These changes are intended to take effect starting in early 2026.
Yes· 3 of 26
- Scored +4
Would farmers be better off under this?
Farmers often face high fuel costs, so terminating the financing rate may significantly reduce their input costs.
- Scored +3
Would business owners be better off under this?
Businesses that rely on petroleum products may see reduced operational costs.
- Scored +3
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
Rural residents typically rely more heavily on driving, so lower gas prices provide greater relative relief.
The opposite
- Scored -6
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The termination of the Superfund financing rate reduces the dedicated funding used for environmental cleanup and hazardous substance remediation.
- Scored -5
Does this raise the taxes companies pay?
The bill terminates the Hazardous Substance Superfund financing rate which is a tax levied on certain petroleum products.
- Scored -3
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
By terminating the Superfund financing rate, the bill reduces a stream of federal revenue used for environmental cleanup.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Termination of the financing rate: The bill amends Section 4611 to ensure the Hazardous Substance Superfund financing rate does not apply after December 31, 2025 (Section 2(a)). This could result in lower costs for those affected by the rate.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Changes to authority for advances: The bill amends Section 9507(d)(3)(B) to change the date for authority for advances to the date of the enactment of this Act (Section 2(b)). This replaces the previous deadline of December 31, 2032.
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 farmers be better off under this? — Farmers often face high fuel costs, so terminating the financing rate may significantly reduce their input costs. Would business owners be better off under this? — Businesses that rely on petroleum products may see reduced operational costs. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural residents typically rely more heavily on driving, so lower gas prices provide greater relative relief. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Reducing fuel taxes can provide slight economic relief to low-income households through lower gas prices. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The bill may reduce household expenses by lowering the cost of gasoline. Would retired people be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide economic relief to retirees on fixed incomes. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to African American households. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to Asian American households. Would billionaires be better off under this? — The reduction in fuel costs provides a marginal benefit to billionaires. Would gun owners be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to gun owners. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Lower fuel prices provide a marginal benefit to high-income households. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — The reduction in fuel costs provides a marginal benefit to high-net-worth individuals. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to Hispanic American households. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to immigrants. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to the LGBTQ community. Would men be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to men. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to Native American households. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to people with disabilities. Would students be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to students. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — The reduction in fuel costs provides a marginal benefit to the ultra-wealthy. Would union members be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to union workers. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to urban residents. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to veterans. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to white American households. Would women be better off under this? — Lower fuel costs provide marginal economic relief to women.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this raise the taxes companies pay? — The bill terminates the Hazardous Substance Superfund financing rate which is a tax levied on certain petroleum products. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — By terminating the Superfund financing rate, the bill reduces a stream of federal revenue used for environmental cleanup.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Is this likely to lower the price at the pump? — Eliminating the Superfund financing rate on petroleum products is intended to lower costs at the pump. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The termination of the Superfund financing rate reduces the dedicated funding used for environmental cleanup and hazardous substance remediation.
- 2/20/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/12/2026
- 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.
Kevin HernRepublican · Oklahoma
Nicole MalliotakisRepublican · New York
Carol MillerRepublican · West Virginia
Nathaniel MoranRepublican · Texas
Tony WiedRepublican · Wisconsin