Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD)
Back-to-School Supplies Affordability Act
A Democratic bill with 6 Democratic cosponsors · See all 6 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 "Back-to-School Supplies Affordability Act" aims to limit duties on school supplies and educational materials. It prohibits duties that exceed the rates in effect on January 19, 2025, for specific items. These items include those designated by the Secretary of Commerce and Education, as well as specific products like backpacks, notebooks, and pens. The Secretary of Commerce must report the exempt items to Congress every 180 days. Congress also retains the ability to pass joint resolutions of disapproval to remove specific items from the exemption.
Yes· 3 of 19
- Scored +8
Would students be better off under this?
Directly lowers the cost of tools and materials required for their education.
- Scored +7
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Significantly reduces the cost barrier for essential school materials for low-income families.
- Scored +5
Would children be better off under this?
Ensures school supplies remain affordable for children's educational needs.
The opposite
- Scored -1
Does this reduce what the federal government owes?
Reducing tariffs may slightly decrease customs revenue for the federal government.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Lower costs for educational materials: The bill states in Section 2 that "arbitrary and chaotic tariffs increase the cost of school supplies for students, families, teachers, schools, and local governments," implying that limiting these duties would lower those costs.
-
Exemption of common school items: Section 3(c)(2) lists specific items that would be subject to these duty limits, including backpacks, lunchboxes, notebooks, coloring books, keyboards, and writing utensils, which directly benefits those purchasing these materials.
-
Flexible inclusion of classroom needs: Section 3(c)(1) allows the Secretary of Commerce, working with the Secretary of Education, to designate other items used in elementary or secondary school classrooms for duty limitations.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Limited scope of duty relief: Section 3(b) excludes certain duties from these limitations, specifically those imposed under title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 or proclaimed under section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974.
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 students be better off under this? — Directly lowers the cost of tools and materials required for their education. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Significantly reduces the cost barrier for essential school materials for low-income families. Would children be better off under this? — Ensures school supplies remain affordable for children's educational needs. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Decreases the annual cost of back-to-school shopping for middle-class families. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact via increased affordability of educational materials for families. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact via increased affordability of educational materials for families. Would business owners be better off under this? — Importers and retailers of school supplies experience more stable pricing. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact via increased affordability of educational materials for families. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Reduces the financial burden on parents purchasing school supplies. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact via increased affordability of educational materials for families. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Positive impact via increased affordability of educational materials for families. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Provides modest savings on school supplies. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Lowers costs for students in secondary education.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Retailers of school supplies may benefit from more stable and lower procurement costs. Is this likely to slow the rise in prices? — Capping duties on school supplies helps prevent price increases for these specific consumer goods. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — Reducing tariffs may slightly decrease customs revenue for the federal government.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Lowering the cost of essential educational materials reduces the financial burden on low-income families.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into public schools? — Reducing the cost of supplies lowers the operational expenses for public schools.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires the Secretary of Commerce to report exempt items to Congress every 180 days.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this make trade with other countries easier? — Limiting duties on imports can facilitate smoother trade for school-related goods.
- 8/6/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
- 6 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
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.
Lisa Blunt RochesterDemocrat · Delaware
Christopher CoonsDemocrat · Delaware
John HickenlooperDemocrat · Colorado
Andy KimDemocrat · New Jersey
Jacky RosenDemocrat · Nevada
Chris Van HollenDemocrat · Maryland