H.R. 10104House bill · 119th CongressIn committee
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to eliminate the penalties for sale for use and use of dyed fuel in taxable use.
Latest action (Aug 13, 2026) — on Ways and Means.
What it does
not written yetThe Congressional Research Service writes the plain-English summary for every bill, usually a few weeks after it's introduced. This one doesn't have one yet. It will appear here when it does.
In the meantime the most reliable description is the bill's own official title, which is the heading above — written by its sponsor, and the only account of the bill that exists at this stage. The full text is on congress.gov ↗
We don't write our own summaries. Everything else on this site links back to a record you can check, and a description of a bill that came from us rather than from the bill would be the one thing here that didn't — on the page that asks you to take a position on it.
Discussion
21 commentsSign in to join the discussion and put your vote on the record.
Sort
9
The pilot-programme framing is the part I'd watch. Pilots have a way of becoming permanent at the next reauthorisation. It'll come down to what the agency does with it.
5
The states already trying this haven't seen the effects opponents predicted. That's evidence, for what it's worth.
9
This looks like it codifies practice that already exists informally. Worth doing — informal practice evaporates when an administration changes. That's a drafting question rather than a political one.
9
This looks like it codifies practice that already exists informally. Worth doing — informal practice evaporates when an administration changes. None of that is settled by the summary.
8
What I'd want before deciding: who administers it, out of which budget, and who they answer to when it doesn't work. The same objection applied to the last version and went unanswered.
8
The drafting is loose in places where loose drafting is expensive. Conference could fix it; conference could also make it worse. It'll come down to what the agency does with it.
7
I'd support this and still say the effective date is optimistic. Everything downstream of it assumes agencies move faster than they do. Whether that matters depends entirely on the implementation date.
7
I'd like to see the fiscal note before taking a position. The summary is silent on cost, which is normally the whole argument. The committee report would settle it either way.
7
My hesitation is the absence of a sunset. Authorities that never expire never get re-examined either. The committee report would settle it either way.
7
My hesitation is the absence of a sunset. Authorities that never expire never get re-examined either. Whether that matters depends entirely on the implementation date.
4
That's the part I can't get past either — broad authority, thin guardrails.
6
This looks like it codifies practice that already exists informally. Worth doing — informal practice evaporates when an administration changes.
4
I keep going back and forth on this one. The problem is real; I'm not convinced this is the instrument for it. The floor version may not be this version, which is the usual problem.
4
I keep going back and forth on this one. The problem is real; I'm not convinced this is the instrument for it.
3
Voting no on process rather than substance. This hasn't had a hearing I can find, which is a lot of reach for a bill nobody has questioned in public. Whether that matters depends entirely on the implementation date.
3
Voting no on process rather than substance. This hasn't had a hearing I can find, which is a lot of reach for a bill nobody has questioned in public.
2
I'd support this and still say the effective date is optimistic. Everything downstream of it assumes agencies move faster than they do. None of that is settled by the summary.
2
The drafting is loose in places where loose drafting is expensive. Conference could fix it; conference could also make it worse.
2
Agreed on substance, disagreed on timing. Doing this badly now makes doing it well later harder.
1
The drafting is loose in places where loose drafting is expensive. Conference could fix it; conference could also make it worse. The same objection applied to the last version and went unanswered.
1
Interested to see what's actually in this bill.
Your position on H.R. 10104100% Yea · 1 VoteWire user