Bill · H.R. 2660· House(119-HR-2660)
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt qualified student loan bonds from the volume cap and the alternative minimum tax.
- Introduced
- 4/7/2025
- Last activity
- 4/7/2025 — Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
- Sponsored by
- Randy Feenstra
- Cosponsors
- - 5 - 1
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill proposes amendments to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The primary goal is to exempt qualified student loan bonds from the volume cap. It also seeks to exempt these bonds from the alternative minimum tax. These changes would specifically exclude student borrowers from the definition of 'ultimate borrower' for certain pooled financing bond rules. The changes would apply to obligations issued after the date of the Act's enactment.
Yes· 3 of 5
Would students be better off under this?+5
The bill facilitates the issuance of qualified student loan bonds, potentially increasing access to education financing.
Does this make college cost less?+5
By exempting student loan bonds from the volume cap and AMT, the bill facilitates increased issuance of student loan financing.
Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this?+4
Increased accessibility to student loan financing may benefit young adults entering higher education.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Exemption From Volume Cap: By inserting "any qualified student loan bond" into Section 146(g), the bill removes the volume cap restriction on these specific bonds (Section 1(a)(1)).
-
Exemption From Alternative Minimum Tax: The bill amends Section 57(a)(5)(C) so that "private activity bonds" do not include qualified student loan bonds issued after the enactment date, which removes the tax burden for these bonds (Section 1(b)).
-
Special Rule for Pooled Financing: The bill amends Section 149(f)(6) to ensure that the term "ultimate borrower" does not include any student borrower (Section 1(a)(2)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts are explicitly stated in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Students+5Good For Young Adults+4Good For Low Income Households+3Good For Middle Class Households+2
- Education And Technology
- Improves College Affordability+5
- 6/8/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/16/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/9/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/11/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/12/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/21/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/7/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
- 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.
Ashley HinsonRepublican · Iowa
Abraham HamadehRepublican · Arizona
Daniel MeuserRepublican · Pennsylvania
Seth MagazinerDemocrat · Rhode Island
Zachary NunnRepublican · Iowa
Pete SessionsRepublican · Texas