A Democratic bill with 4 Democratic cosponsors · See all 4 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
The Gas Prices Relief Act of 2026 aims to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to establish a gasoline tax holiday. Under this bill, the tax rate for gasoline sold between the date of enactment and October 1, 2026, would be zero. This change also removes the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund financing rate for that gasoline. To prevent a loss in funding, the Secretary of the Treasury would transfer money from the general fund to the Highway Trust Fund and the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund. Finally, the bill establishes a policy that the benefits of this tax reduction must be passed on to consumers.
Yes· 3 of 35
- Scored +10
Is this likely to lower the price at the pump?
The primary objective of the bill is to eliminate the gasoline tax to lower prices.
- Scored +7
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
Rural residents have higher mileage needs and are most impacted by gas price fluctuations.
- Scored +6
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Low-income households spend a larger percentage of their income on gasoline.
The opposite· 3 of 11
- Scored -4
Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change?
Lowering gas prices may incentivize increased fuel consumption and carbon emissions.
- Scored -3
Does this reduce what the federal government owes?
The bill requires transferring funds from the general fund to trust funds to cover lost tax revenue, potentially increasing the deficit.
- Scored -3
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?
Relies on general fund transfers to subsidize a tax holiday.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Lower Gasoline Costs: The rate of tax under section 4081(a)(2)(A)(i) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 would be reduced to zero, which is intended to allow consumers to immediately receive the benefit of the reduction in taxes (Section 2(a)(1) and Section 2(c)(1)(A)).
-
Price Reductions from Dealers: The bill states it is the policy of Congress that transportation motor fuels producers and other dealers take necessary actions to reduce prices to reflect the tax reduction (Section 2(c)(1)(B)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Monetary Penalties for Producers: Transportation motor fuels producers and other dealers that fail to reduce prices to reflect the tax reduction may be subject to monetary penalties that are at least equal to the amount of the tax reduction that should have been passed on to consumers (Section 2(c)(1)(C)).
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 people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural residents have higher mileage needs and are most impacted by gas price fluctuations. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income households spend a larger percentage of their income on gasoline. Would farmers be better off under this? — Farmers rely heavily on fuel for machinery and transport of goods. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Direct reduction in monthly transportation expenses. Would students be better off under this? — Significant cost relief for students commuting to college. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Provides cost relief for commuters and families. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — High impact for those in remote areas who rely heavily on long-distance driving. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Many people with disabilities rely exclusively on private vehicle transport. Would retired people be better off under this? — Helps retirees on fixed incomes manage their cost of living. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Fixed-income seniors benefit from reduced daily transportation costs. Would union members be better off under this? — Many union workers in trades rely on trucks and commute long distances. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults often have lower disposable income and are heavily impacted by gas prices. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact based on the reduction of costs for low-to-middle income commuters. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact based on the reduction of costs for low-to-middle income commuters. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact based on the reduction of costs for low-to-middle income commuters. Would immigrants be better off under this? — General cost relief for low-to-middle income consumers. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — General cost relief for low-to-middle income consumers. Would men be better off under this? — General cost relief for household management and commuting. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Benefit is positive, though potentially lower than rural residents due to transit options. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — General cost relief for commuters. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact based on the reduction of costs for low-to-middle income commuters. Would women be better off under this? — General cost relief for household management and commuting. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Benefit is positive but represents a smaller fraction of their total budget. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Minimal impact relative to total wealth. Would children be better off under this? — Indirect benefit via lower family travel costs. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Minimal impact relative to total wealth. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Minimal impact relative to total wealth. Would business owners be better off under this? — Fuel business owners face risk of monetary penalties if they cannot lower prices fast enough.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Grants the Treasury Secretary authority to penalize producers and dealers.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Lowering fuel costs provides indirect financial relief to low-income families.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Includes mandates and penalties to ensure tax savings are passed directly to the consumer. Does this cut taxes for middle-income families? — Reduces the effective cost of gasoline for middle-class consumers through a tax holiday. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Increased consumer disposable income from lower fuel costs can stimulate spending. Is this likely to slow the rise in prices? — Lowering gas prices can reduce overall inflationary pressure on transportation and goods. Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — Relies on general fund transfers to subsidize a tax holiday. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — The bill requires transferring funds from the general fund to trust funds to cover lost tax revenue, potentially increasing the deficit. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Small fuel retailers may face penalties if they cannot immediately adjust pricing models to the tax holiday. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — Increases general fund expenditures to maintain the Highway Trust Fund. Does this cut taxes for small businesses? — While it reduces the tax burden, small fuel dealers face potential monetary penalties if they fail to lower prices.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Is this likely to lower the price at the pump? — The primary objective of the bill is to eliminate the gasoline tax to lower prices. Does this invest in rural communities? — Rural residents are typically more dependent on gasoline for transport and benefit more from price drops. Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change? — Lowering gas prices may incentivize increased fuel consumption and carbon emissions. Does this reduce how much oil, gas and coal is produced? — Lowering the cost to the consumer typically maintains or increases demand for fossil fuels. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — Decreasing the cost of fossil fuels generally discourages a shift toward greener alternatives. Does this improve buses, trains and other public transport? — Cheaper gas may lead users to prefer private cars over public transportation. Does this put more money into wind, solar and other renewable power? — Cheaper gasoline makes electric vehicles less economically attractive in the short term.
- 5/15/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/13/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/12/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 3/12/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
- Introduced in House
3 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Mike LevinDemocrat · California
Greg LandsmanDemocrat · Ohio
Josh RileyDemocrat · New York
Eugene VindmanDemocrat · Virginia