Bill · H.R. 7286· House(119-HR-7286)
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to revoke the tax-exempt status of organizations that provide, or provide funding for, abortion.
- Introduced
- 1/30/2026
- Last activity
- 1/30/2026 — Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
- Sponsored by
- Harriet Hageman
- Cosponsors
- - 20 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill proposes an amendment to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. It aims to revoke the tax-exempt status of organizations that provide or provide funding for abortion. The bill includes a specific definition for the term abortion. It also establishes specific exceptions to this rule. The changes would take effect for taxable years beginning after the Act is enacted.
Yes
Does this raise the taxes companies pay?+5
The bill revokes the tax-exempt status of organizations that provide or fund abortion, effectively making them subject to taxation.
The opposite· 3 of 5
Does this make abortion easier to get?-8
The bill creates financial and tax-based barriers for organizations that provide or fund abortion services.
Would women be better off under this?-6
The bill's restriction on abortion-providing organizations negatively impacts women's access to reproductive healthcare.
Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated?-5
By targeting organizations that provide abortion, the bill impacts reproductive autonomy which disproportionately affects women.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Tax Status Changes: An organization would not be exempt from taxation if it provides, or provides funding for, abortion (Section 1(a)(1)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Loss of Tax-Exempt Status: Organizations that provide or provide funding for abortion would lose their tax-exempt status under subsection (a) and would not be treated as described in section 170(c) (Section 1(a)(1)).
-
Loss of Status Despite Specific Exceptions: An organization could lose its status even if the abortion was necessary to save the life of the mother or if the pregnancy resulted from an act of rape or incest (Section 1(a)(3)).
-
Loss of Status Despite Specific Medical Intentions: An organization could lose its status even if the intention was to produce a live birth and preserve the life and health of a child born alive after viability, or to remove a dead unborn child (Section 1(a)(2)(B)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Healthcare
- Improves Abortion Access-8Improves Healthcare Access-3
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Women-6Good For Low Income Households-3
- Economy And Finance
- Increases Corporate Taxes+5
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Gender Equality-5
- 2/24/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/13/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 2/11/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/9/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/4/2026
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- 2/3/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/2/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/30/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
- 10 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Mike BostRepublican · Illinois
Andy BiggsRepublican · Arizona
Sheri BiggsRepublican · South Carolina
Andrew ClydeRepublican · Georgia
Warren DavidsonRepublican · Ohio
Troy DowningRepublican · Montana
Paul GosarRepublican · Arizona
Glenn GrothmanRepublican · Wisconsin
Clay HigginsRepublican · Louisiana
Barry LoudermilkRepublican · Georgia
Anna Paulina LunaRepublican · Florida
Mary MillerRepublican · Illinois
Mark MessmerRepublican · Indiana
John McGuireRepublican · Virginia
Addison McDowellRepublican · North Carolina
Andrew OglesRepublican · Tennessee
John RoseRepublican · Tennessee
Christopher SmithRepublican · New Jersey
W. SteubeRepublican · Florida
Matt Van EppsRepublican · Tennessee