United States 119th Congress Status: In Committee 4 R cosponsors
Similar bills in 1 other state →

HR 427 — Interstate Commerce Simplification Act of 2025

Last action — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed House
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill is in committee in the House. Introduced January 15, 2025. It must pass committee before a floor vote.

Next likely step: a committee vote, then a floor vote in the House.

Prognosis

Stalled 24% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

Low

How often bills like it became law.

  • In Committee

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 4 sponsors

    1 primary, 3 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (4 R).

  • Spreading across states

    Near-identical bills in 1 other state — cross-state momentum.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

In plain language

HR 427 aims to reform the judicial process in federal courts.

This bill seeks to improve how cases are processed in federal courts. It focuses on increasing efficiency and accessibility for all users.

Summary

Interstate Commerce Simplification Act of 2025This bill expands the definition of solicitation of orders to include business activities that serve an independently valuable business function apart from the solicitation of orders for purposes of the limitation on a state’s authority to impose a net income tax on an out-of-state seller.Under current law, a state is prohibited from imposing a net income tax on income derived from within the state from interstate commerce if the only business activity within the state is the solicitation of orders for the sale of tangible personal property, provided that the orders are approved (or rejected) and filled by shipment or delivery from outside of the state. Further, the Supreme Court has held that the term solicitation of orders includes (1) activities that are strictly essential to making requests for purchases, and (2) ancillary activities that serve no independent business function apart from their connection to requests for purchases.Under the bill, the definition of solicitation of orders is expanded to include business activities that facilitate the solicitation of orders even if such business activities serve an independently valuable business function apart from the solicitation.

Bill Text

How this bill changes current law

3 changes Share ↗

AI-generated reading aid from the bill's amendatory text — verify against the official bill.

The bill expands the definition of 'solicitation of orders' under Public Law 86-272 to include more activities that facilitate order solicitation.

  • Public Law 86-272 Section 101(d)

    and

    This change modifies the existing list by continuing the list with 'and', indicating that additional specifications will follow.

  • Public Law 86-272 Section 101(d)

    the period at the end → ; and

    This change allows for the addition of a new specification by linking it to the previous statement.

  • Public Law 86-272 Section 101(d)

    (3) the term `solicitation of orders' means any business activity that facilitates the solicitation of orders even if that activity may also serve some independently valuable business function apart from solicitation.

    This addition expands the definition of 'solicitation of orders' to cover a broader range of business activities that assist in soliciting orders.

Action History

  1. Introduced in House

  2. Introduced in House

  3. Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 3 co-sponsors · 543 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (3)

Not signed on (543)

543 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 543 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Subjects

taxation

Similar bills in other states

Bills in other jurisdictions that match this one by MEANING — title, summary and subject, compared across every state we track. A strong signal the same policy is moving elsewhere.

Pick a bill from “Similar bills” above and click Compare text to see how its language differs from HR 427.

Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does HR 427 do?
Interstate Commerce Simplification Act of 2025This bill expands the definition of solicitation of orders to include business activities that serve an independently valuable business function apart from the solicitation of orders for purposes of the limitation on a state’s authority to impose a net income tax on an out-of-state seller.Under current law, a state is prohibited from imposing a net income tax on income derived from within the state from interstate commerce if the only business activity within the state is the solicitation of orders for the sale of tangible personal property, provided that the orders are approved (or rejected) and filled by shipment or delivery from outside of the state. Further, the Supreme Court has held that the term solicitation of orders includes (1) activities that are strictly essential to making requests for purchases, and (2) ancillary activities that serve no independent business function apart from their connection to requests for purchases.Under the bill, the definition of solicitation of orders is expanded to include business activities that facilitate the solicitation of orders even if such business activities serve an independently valuable business function apart from the solicitation.
Who sponsors HR 427?
HR 427 is sponsored by Fitzgerald, Scott (Republican), Grothman, Glenn (Republican), Tiffany, Thomas P. (Republican), and Steil, Bryan (Republican).
What is the current status of HR 427?
This bill is in committee in the House. Introduced January 15, 2025. It must pass committee before a floor vote.
Where can I track HR 427?
Track HR 427 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on HR 427

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of HR 427

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →