HR-1529-119
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Sponsored by Mike Kelly (R-PA)
What it does
This bill would create a refundable income tax credit for out-of-pocket spending on qualified access technology (hardware, software, or other information technology whose primary function is to convert visual information into formats blind people can use). The credit would cover the taxpayer, spouse, or dependent who is blind under the Internal Revenue Code's definition, and would be capped at $2,000 per blind individual in any 3-consecutive-year period, adjusted for inflation after 2026. Spending reimbursed by insurance or otherwise, or already deducted or credited elsewhere, would not count. The credit would apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025, and would not apply to amounts paid in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2030.
Who benefits
Blind taxpayers, and taxpayers with a blind spouse or dependent, who buy screen readers, braille displays, text-to-speech or similar tools and would receive a refundable credit, including those with little or no income tax liability. Makers and sellers of such assistive technology may see more demand if lower net prices lead to more purchases. Employers and schools may benefit indirectly if more blind workers and students can afford the tools they use.
Who is hurt
Federal taxpayers generally would bear the cost through reduced revenue or higher deficits, since refundable credits can exceed tax owed. The IRS would need to administer the new credit and verify blindness status and eligible purchases. Blind individuals whose technology costs are covered by insurance or other sources, or who spend more than the cap, would receive no benefit or only partial benefit. Because the credit is reimbursement-based and ends after 2030, those who cannot pay upfront may gain less.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that access technology is costly, often running to thousands of dollars, and that blind people face high unemployment and lower incomes, so a refundable credit helps those who owe little income tax. They contend the $2,000 cap, the bar on double benefits, and the 2030 sunset keep the cost targeted and limited while supporting employment and independence.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that adding another refundable credit complicates the tax code and creates administrative and improper-claim risks for the IRS, which would need to verify blindness and eligible purchases. They contend that direct spending programs, vocational rehabilitation funding, or insurance coverage would target need better, and that a credit reduces revenue without offsets.
Constitutional context
Congress's power to lay taxes and provide for the general welfare under Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 and the Sixteenth Amendment supports tax credits like this one. As a revenue measure it must originate in the House under the Origination Clause, and it raises no other apparent constitutional question.
Checks and balances
Congress defines the credit and its limits, the Treasury and IRS would administer and enforce it, and the sunset after 2030 requires Congress to act again to extend it.
Historical precedent
Congress has previously used targeted tax provisions for disability-related expenses, such as the additional standard deduction for blind taxpayers and the credit for the elderly or disabled, though this bill's refundable credit for access technology is a new mechanism.