To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to revoke the tax-exempt status of organizations that provide, or provide funding for, abortion.

Bill Number

H.R. 7286

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 2

Policy Area

Taxation

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2026-01-30: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.

Last Updated

2026-02-25T09:06:13Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This bill aims to deny tax-exempt status to nonprofit organizations that directly provide abortion services or fund such services, effectively limiting their financial benefits under federal tax law.

Key Provisions

• Amendment to Tax Code: Adds a new subsection (s) to Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, stating that organizations providing or funding abortions are ineligible for tax exemption under subsection (a) and cannot be treated as qualified for tax-deductible contributions under Section 170(c).
• Definition of Abortion: Defines "abortion" as the intentional use of any instrument, medicine, drug, substance, or device to kill an unborn child of a known pregnant woman or to terminate a known pregnancy, excluding actions intended solely to:
• Produce a live birth after viability while preserving the life and health of the child, or
• Remove a dead unborn child.
• Exceptions: The revocation does not apply if the abortion is necessary to save the mother's life or if the pregnancy results from rape or incest.
• Effective Date: Applies to taxable years beginning after the date of enactment.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Previously, organizations like charities or nonprofits could qualify for tax-exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) if they operated for exempt purposes (e.g., educational, charitable), even if they provided reproductive health services including abortions. This bill introduces a specific prohibition, overriding general eligibility for any organization involved in or supporting abortions, except in limited cases.
• It also bars tax deductions for donations to these organizations, changing how contributions are treated for donors.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) would need to enforce the new rules, potentially increasing administrative workload for reviewing and revoking exemptions, and handling appeals or audits of affected organizations.
• On Citizens: Donors to such organizations would lose tax deductions on contributions, possibly reducing charitable giving. Individuals seeking abortion services might face reduced access if funding for providers dries up, particularly in underserved areas.
• On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though U.S.-based nonprofits with global operations (e.g., providing international reproductive health aid) could see funding disruptions, affecting U.S. foreign aid partnerships.
• Broader effects could include shifts in how reproductive health services are funded, potentially increasing reliance on private or state-level support.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Nonprofit Organizations: Primarily those providing abortion services (e.g., clinics like Planned Parenthood) or funding them (e.g., advocacy groups), who risk losing tax-exempt status and deductible donations.
• Donors and Contributors: Individuals and entities giving to these organizations, facing loss of tax benefits.
• Patients and Service Users: Women seeking abortion or related reproductive care, who may experience reduced availability of services.
• Pro-Life and Pro-Choice Advocates: Groups on both sides of the abortion debate, with pro-life stakeholders potentially gaining leverage and pro-choice groups facing operational challenges.
• Taxpayers and Government: Indirectly affected through changes in tax revenue and IRS enforcement priorities.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal Implications: The broad definition of "abortion" and "providing funding" could lead to disputes over what constitutes support (e.g., general healthcare funding), potentially resulting in lawsuits challenging IRS decisions. Organizations might argue violations of equal protection or due process under administrative law.
• Constitutional Implications: Raises First Amendment concerns regarding free speech and association, as revoking exemptions could be seen as penalizing organizations for their activities or advocacy. It may also intersect with reproductive rights established in cases like Roe v. Wade (overturned) and Dobbs v. Jackson (2022), though this bill focuses on tax policy rather than direct bans.
• Political Implications: Aligns with ongoing national debates on abortion post-Dobbs, likely polarizing Congress and the public. If enacted, it could influence midterm or presidential elections by mobilizing voters, and face veto or court challenges depending on the administration.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Hageman, Harriet M. [R-WY-At Large]

Cosponsors (20)

Rep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17], Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6], Rep. Clyde, Andrew S. [R-GA-9], Rep. Rose, John W. [R-TN-6], Rep. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-9], Rep. Miller, Mary E. [R-IL-15], Rep. Messmer, Mark B. [R-IN-8], Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3], Rep. McGuire, John J. [R-VA-5], Rep. Downing, Troy [R-MT-2], Rep. Biggs, Sheri [R-SC-3], Rep. McDowell, Addison P. [R-NC-6], Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5], Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4], Rep. Luna, Anna Paulina [R-FL-13], Rep. Ogles, Andrew [R-TN-5], Rep. Van Epps, Matt [R-TN-7], Rep. Loudermilk, Barry [R-GA-11], Rep. Bost, Mike [R-IL-12], Rep. Davidson, Warren [R-OH-8]

Recent Actions

• 2026-01-30: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
• 2026-01-30: Introduced in House
• 2026-01-30: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to revoke the tax-exempt status of organizations that provide, or provide funding for, abortion. — issued 2026-01-30 — PDF (3 pages)