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
This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make sure that high net-worth individuals cannot avoid paying taxes on their income and assets. Officially titled the Redistribution Of Billions by Instituting New High-income Obligations on Overlooked Debt Act of 2026 or the ROBINHOOD Act of 2026, the legislation targets loans issued to applicable taxpayers. Under the bill, when an applicable taxpayer takes out a loan, an amount of their long-term capital assets equal to or greater than the loan is treated as sold for fair market value. The legislation defines applicable taxpayers based on specific income and asset tests, establishing rules for how assets and loans are valued. These new tax rules are set to apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2026.
Yes· 3 of 5
- Scored +8
Does this raise taxes on the highest earners?
The bill targets high net-worth individuals by treating loans and long-term leases as capital asset sales to ensure they pay taxes on unrealized wealth.
- Scored +2
Does this reduce what the federal government owes?
By increasing tax obligations on high-income individuals, the bill could potentially generate additional federal revenue.
- Scored +2
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?
The legislation enhances fiscal oversight by closing loopholes used by ultra-wealthy individuals to avoid taxes.
The opposite· 3 of 4
- Scored -10
Would billionaires be better off under this?
Billionaires utilizing loan strategies to circumvent income and asset taxes are directly targeted by the ROBINHOOD Act.
- Scored -9
Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this?
Ultra-wealthy individuals are the primary target of the legislation, which imposes taxes on asset values tied to loans and leases.
- Scored -8
Would high-income households be better off under this?
High net-worth individuals face significantly stricter tax burdens and lose the ability to use loans and long-term leases to avoid capital gains taxes.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Taxing Wealthy Borrowers (Section 2, adding Section 1299(a)): This provision treats loans issued to applicable taxpayers as capital asset sales when the long-term capital gain equals or exceeds the loan amount. This ensures that ultra-wealthy individuals cannot use loans to tap into their wealth tax-free.
-
Closing Lease Loopholes (Section 2, adding Section 1299(f)): This part treats property leases with terms greater than five years the same as loans issued to the taxpayer. By doing this, the bill prevents wealthy individuals from using long-term leases to bypass tax obligations on their assets.
-
Preventing Corporate Pass-Through Avoidance (Section 2, adding Section 1299(h)): This section ensures that loans issued to pass-through entities like partnerships or S corporations are deemed issued to the owners on a pro rata basis. This stops wealthy owners from dodging the rules by taking loans out through business entities instead of personal accounts.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Increased Paperwork and Reporting Costs (Section 2, adding Section 1299(i)): The bill requires applicable taxpayers and loan-issuing entities to handle complex reporting and compliance tasks. These added rules may increase administrative and financial burdens for individuals and businesses complying with the new mandates.
-
Strict Asset Valuation Rules (Section 2, adding Section 1299B(d)): This provision sets rigid guidelines for determining the applicable value of nontradable covered assets based on the highest of several financial metrics. Taxpayers face strict valuation standards that could lead to higher calculated asset values and increased financial stress.
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 billionaires be better off under this? — Billionaires utilizing loan strategies to circumvent income and asset taxes are directly targeted by the ROBINHOOD Act. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Ultra-wealthy individuals are the primary target of the legislation, which imposes taxes on asset values tied to loans and leases. Would high-income households be better off under this? — High net-worth individuals face significantly stricter tax burdens and lose the ability to use loans and long-term leases to avoid capital gains taxes. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — The legislation explicitly targets individuals with high incomes and large asset portfolios by restricting tax-free borrowing against capital assets.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this raise taxes on the highest earners? — The bill targets high net-worth individuals by treating loans and long-term leases as capital asset sales to ensure they pay taxes on unrealized wealth. Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — The legislation enhances fiscal oversight by closing loopholes used by ultra-wealthy individuals to avoid taxes. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — By increasing tax obligations on high-income individuals, the bill could potentially generate additional federal revenue.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill introduces strict reporting and notification requirements for loans and assets held by applicable taxpayers and pass-through entities. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal tax authority and reporting regulations through the Internal Revenue Service.
- 6/2/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
- Introduced in Senate