A Democratic bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
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 bill, cited as the Keep Your Pay Act, proposes changes to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 concerning taxes and credits for individuals and families. It temporarily increases the standard deduction and raises income tax rates for the highest earners for taxable years from 2026 through 2035. Additionally, the legislation makes permanent certain earned income credit rules for individuals without qualifying children and extends these benefits to U.S. possessions. Workers are given the option to use prior year earned income when determining their credits. Finally, the bill establishes a refundable monthly child tax credit and monthly advance payments while terminating the previous annual child tax credit.
Yes· 3 of 16
- Scored +9
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Significant expansions to the earned income tax credit and the monthly refundable child tax credit directly alleviate poverty for low-income households.
- Scored +8
Would children be better off under this?
The creation of a refundable monthly child tax credit provides consistent and direct financial support for children's well-being.
- Scored +8
Would middle-income households be better off under this?
The temporary increase in the standard deduction provides substantial tax relief to middle-class households.
The opposite· 3 of 4
- Scored -5
Would high-income households be better off under this?
The bill increases income tax rates for the highest earners from 35% to 41% and from 37% to 43%.
- Scored -5
Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this?
Higher top marginal income tax brackets directly impact high-net-worth individuals.
- Scored -5
Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this?
The legislation raises income tax rates for top earners.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 101 temporarily increases the standard deduction, which lowers the amount of income subject to tax for individuals and families during the applicable years.
-
Section 201 permanently extends earned income credit rules for individuals without qualifying children, lowers the minimum age for the credit, eliminates the maximum age, and increases credit percentages and amounts, providing ongoing financial support to workers.
-
Section 203 allows taxpayers to elect to use their prior year earned income if their current year earned income is lower, helping protect workers' credit amounts during income drops.
-
Section 204 establishes a refundable monthly child tax credit with monthly advance payments, delivering regular financial assistance directly to families with children.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Section 102 increases income tax rates for the highest earners, shifting a heavier tax burden onto individuals falling into those top income brackets.
-
Section 204 introduces strict rules and potential tax increases or repayment obligations if advance child payments exceed a taxpayer's allowed credit due to changes in income, filing status, or eligibility errors, which could create unexpected financial strain.
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? — Significant expansions to the earned income tax credit and the monthly refundable child tax credit directly alleviate poverty for low-income households. Would children be better off under this? — The creation of a refundable monthly child tax credit provides consistent and direct financial support for children's well-being. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The temporary increase in the standard deduction provides substantial tax relief to middle-class households. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Lowering the minimum age for the earned income tax credit benefits many young adults and former foster or homeless youth entering the workforce. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Increased standard deductions and tax relief provisions help middle-aged workers and families keep more of their earnings. Would students be better off under this? — The legislation allows certain student workers to qualify for the earned income credit at younger ages under specific criteria. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Targeted poverty reduction and refundable tax credit expansions generally provide meaningful financial support to minority communities. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — The bill extends child tax credit benefits and provisions to U.S. possessions such as Puerto Rico, benefiting Hispanic populations. Would women be better off under this? — Single mothers and female-headed households frequently benefit significantly from refundable child tax credits and earned income credit expansions. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Top income earners face increased tax rates under the provisions of the bill. Would high-income households be better off under this? — The bill increases income tax rates for the highest earners from 35% to 41% and from 37% to 43%. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Higher top marginal income tax brackets directly impact high-net-worth individuals. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — The legislation raises income tax rates for top earners.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make child care cost less? — The establishment of a refundable monthly child tax credit with monthly advance payments directly helps families cover childcare and related expenses. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Expanding the earned income tax credit for workers without qualifying children and creating a monthly child tax credit strongly target poverty reduction. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — Expanded tax credits and poverty reduction measures often disproportionately benefit marginalized demographic groups and communities of color. Is this likely to reduce homelessness? — By explicitly supporting qualified homeless youth within the earned income tax credit rules, the bill offers targeted assistance to vulnerable populations.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this cut taxes for middle-income families? — The bill temporarily increases the standard deduction and expands the earned income and child tax credits, significantly lowering tax burdens for middle-class individuals and families. Does this raise taxes on the highest earners? — The bill increases income tax rates for the highest earners from 35% to 41% and from 37% to 43%. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Providing regular monthly child tax credits and expanding the earned income tax credit can boost consumer spending power among lower- and middle-income families.
- 3/10/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
- Introduced in Senate
6 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.
- 119-HR-2763: American Family Act
- 119-HR-2764: Tax Cut for Workers Act of 2025
- 119-HR-6634: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to establish a refundable childhood education tax credit with monthly advance payments.
- 119-HR-6900: American Affordability Act of 2025
- 119-S-1372: Tax Cut for Workers Act of 2025
- 119-S-1393: American Family Act