Modern, Clean, and Safe Trucks Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. LaMalfa, Doug [R-CA-1]
- Committees
- Ways and Means Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 30, 2026
Bottom line
The bill eliminates a 12-percent excise tax on heavy trucks and trailers, aiming to reduce costs for the trucking industry and accelerate the adoption of newer, cleaner, and safer vehicles, but it would result in a significant loss of revenue for the Highway Trust Fund.
What it actually does
This bill repeals the 12-percent Federal retail excise tax on new heavy trucks, tractors, and trailers, which was first levied in 1917. It also includes several conforming amendments to the Internal Revenue Code to remove references to the repealed tax and adjust related definitions. The repeal would apply to sales and installations occurring on or after the bill's introduction date.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that repealing this excise tax will significantly reduce the upfront cost of new heavy-duty trucks, encouraging trucking companies to replace older, less fuel-efficient, and less environmentally friendly vehicles with modern ones. They contend this will lead to reduced carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions, improve road safety, and support American manufacturing jobs. Supporters also highlight that the current tax disproportionately impacts electric and alternative-fueled trucks, hindering the transition to zero-emission vehicles, and that the tax's revenue stream is unreliable for the Highway Trust Fund.
Opponents contend
Opponents, or those concerned about the bill's fiscal implications, would likely argue that repealing the excise tax would result in a substantial loss of dedicated revenue for the Highway Trust Fund, potentially jeopardizing critical infrastructure projects and maintenance. They might contend that the tax functions as a user fee, ensuring that those who benefit most from road infrastructure contribute to its upkeep. Critics could also raise concerns about the lack of a specified offset for the lost revenue, which could exacerbate the federal deficit.
The bill is short and relatively straightforward, making it accessible for a quick read and evaluation by an informed reader.
Section 3(a)
Repeal of Excise Tax on Heavy Trucks and Trailers
This provision directly strikes Subchapter C of Chapter 31 from the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. This subchapter is where the 12-percent Federal retail excise tax on the first retail sale of heavy trucks, tractors, and trailers is codified, effectively eliminating the tax.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that repealing this tax will stimulate the economy by lowering costs for businesses, encourage the adoption of newer, safer, and more environmentally friendly trucks, and ultimately benefit consumers through potentially lower shipping costs. They highlight the tax's historical origins (WWI) and its current burden on modernizing fleets.
Critics contend
Opponents would contend that eliminating this tax without a clear replacement funding mechanism will severely impact the solvency of the Highway Trust Fund, which relies on these revenues for crucial infrastructure projects. They might argue that the tax serves as a necessary user fee for those who benefit most from the nation's roadways.
Tradeoffs
The primary tension is between providing economic relief and incentivizing fleet modernization for the trucking industry versus maintaining a stable and sufficient funding source for national infrastructure projects through the Highway Trust Fund.
Section 3(b)
Conforming Amendments to the Internal Revenue Code
This section makes a series of technical changes to various sections of the Internal Revenue Code (e.g., 4072(c), 4221, 4222(d), 4293, 4483(g), 6416(b)(2), 6416(b)(6), 9503(b)(1)). These amendments remove references to the repealed excise tax and adjust definitions or cross-references to ensure consistency within the tax code after the repeal of Subchapter C of Chapter 31.
Section 3(c)
Effective Date of Repeal
This provision specifies that the repeal of the excise tax on heavy trucks and trailers, along with the conforming amendments, will take effect for all sales and installations that occur on or after the date the bill is introduced in the House of Representatives.
This conforming amendment redefines 'tires of the type used on highway vehicles' by striking the previous reference to Subchapter C of chapter 31 (the repealed heavy truck tax) and instead provides a standalone definition. It clarifies that this term applies to tires on motor vehicles which are highway vehicles or vehicles used in connection with them, while explicitly excluding tires used exclusively on 'mobile machinery' (e.g., construction or farming equipment).
Section 3(b)(1) amending Section 4072(c)
Why it matters:The redefinition is necessary because the original definition relied on the existence of the heavy truck excise tax. Its burial is standard legislative practice for technical adjustments to maintain consistency in the tax code.
Case for: This amendment ensures that other related excise taxes, such as the tire excise tax, continue to apply correctly and consistently after the repeal of the heavy truck tax. It prevents unintended consequences or ambiguities regarding which tires are subject to other taxes.
Case against: There is no direct case against this specific technical amendment, as its purpose is to maintain clarity and consistency within the tax code. Any opposition would be to the underlying repeal that necessitates this change.
Estimated impact: Ensures the correct application of existing tire excise taxes, preventing potential revenue loss or confusion for the IRS and affected industries.
This conforming amendment strikes subparagraph (B) from Section 9503(b)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code, which currently designates the revenues from the heavy truck and trailer excise tax (under subchapter C of chapter 31) as amounts to be transferred to the Highway Trust Fund. Its removal means these revenues will no longer be directed to the HTF.
Section 3(b)(8) amending Section 9503(b)(1)
Why it matters:The amendment is a direct consequence of repealing the tax itself; if the tax no longer exists, its revenue cannot be allocated. Its placement among other technical changes is standard for ensuring all related code sections are updated.
Case for: This amendment is a necessary administrative step to reflect the repeal of the excise tax. If the tax is eliminated, the mechanism for allocating its non-existent revenue must also be removed to accurately reflect the tax code and the funding structure of the Highway Trust Fund.
Case against: While technically necessary if the tax is repealed, this amendment highlights the significant fiscal impact of the bill by explicitly removing a source of funding for the Highway Trust Fund. Opponents of the overall repeal would point to this as evidence of the bill's negative impact on infrastructure funding.
Estimated impact: Eliminates a significant, albeit variable, source of revenue for the Highway Trust Fund, estimated to be billions of dollars annually, thereby increasing the fund's reliance on other revenue streams or potentially leading to shortfalls.