HR-3549-119
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Sponsored by Morgan Luttrell (R-TX)
What it does
This bill would create a new federal tax credit equal to 30% of the purchase and installation costs of an electric generator for certain businesses located in areas at high risk of flooding or hurricanes. Eligible businesses would include hospitals, nursing homes, grocery stores, and gas stations, as well as other businesses formally designated as critical in the aftermath of a flood or hurricane. Taxpayers who claim the credit would be required to reduce the tax basis of the generator by the credit amount and could not also claim other federal tax benefits for the same generator expenses.
Who benefits
Owners of hospitals, nursing homes, grocery stores, and gas stations in high-risk flood and hurricane zones who would receive a 30% reduction in the after-tax cost of purchasing and installing a generator. Patients and residents of hospitals and nursing homes who would benefit from uninterrupted power during disasters. Communities in hurricane- and flood-prone regions — particularly along the Gulf Coast, Atlantic Coast, and in low-lying inland areas — who would have greater access to critical goods and services after a disaster. Emergency management agencies that rely on these businesses remaining operational. Electricians and generator installation contractors who may see increased demand for their services.
Who is hurt
The federal government would forgo tax revenue for each credit claimed, with the cost borne broadly by all taxpayers. Businesses in high-risk areas that already own generators would not benefit. Businesses in disaster-prone areas not formally designated as "critical" — such as pharmacies, hardware stores, or dialysis centers — may be excluded unless the designation process is expanded. Generator manufacturers and retailers not serving the covered business types would see no direct benefit. Competing businesses outside high-risk zones would not receive the same tax advantage, potentially creating an uneven competitive landscape.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that power outages following hurricanes and floods can last days or weeks, and that the failure of hospitals, nursing homes, and fuel and food suppliers during these periods has caused preventable deaths and suffering — as documented after Hurricane Katrina (2005) and Hurricane Maria (2017), when nursing home residents and hospital patients died due to loss of power. They contend that a targeted 30% tax credit lowers the financial barrier for critical businesses to invest in resilience infrastructure, reducing the burden on emergency responders and government disaster relief programs after major storms.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that a 30% tax credit primarily benefits businesses that are already profitable enough to owe federal taxes, leaving the smallest and most financially vulnerable operators — who may need backup power most — with little practical benefit. They contend that the bill's designation process for "critical" businesses is undefined in the bill text, creating potential for inconsistent application and lobbying-driven expansion of eligibility, and that direct grants or low-interest loans would more efficiently reach businesses that cannot benefit from a non-refundable tax credit.