[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 58 (Wednesday, March 29, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H3909-H3915]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


   CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 831, PERMANENT EXTENSION OF THE HEALTH 
               INSURANCE DEDUCTION FOR THE SELF-EMPLOYED

  Mr. ARCHER submitted the following conference report and statement on 
the bill (H.R. 831) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 
permanently extend the deduction for health insurance costs of self-
employed individuals, to repeal the provision permitting nonrecognition 
of gain on sales and exchanges effectuating policies of the Federal 
Communications Commission, and for other purposes:

                  Conference Report (H. Rept. 104-92)

       The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the 
     two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 
     831), to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 
     permanently extend the deduction for the health insurance 
     costs of self-employed individuals, to repeal the provision 
     permitting nonrecognition of gain on sales and exchanges 
     effectuating policies of the Federal Communications 
     Commission, and for other purposes, having met, after full 
     and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do 
     recommend to their respective Houses as follows:
       That the House recede from its disagreement to the 
     amendment of the Senate and 
      [[Page H3910]] agree to the same with an amendment as 
     follows:
       In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the Senate 
     amendment, insert the following:
     SECTION 1. PERMANENT EXTENSION AND INCREASE OF DEDUCTION FOR 
                   HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS OF SELF-EMPLOYED 
                   INDIVIDUALS.

       (a) Permanent Extension.--Subsection (l) of section 162 of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to special rules 
     for health insurance costs of self-employed individuals) is 
     amended by striking paragraph (6).
       (b) Increase in Deduction.--Paragraph (1) of section 162(l) 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 
     ``25 percent'' and inserting ``30 percent''.
       (c) Effective Dates.--
       (1) Extension.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
     apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1993.
       (2) Increase.--The amendment made by subsection (b) shall 
     apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1994.
     SEC. 2. REPEAL OF NONRECOGNITION ON FCC CERTIFIED SALES AND 
                   EXCHANGES.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter O of chapter 1 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking part V (relating 
     to changes to effectuate FCC policy).
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Sections 1245(b)(5) and 
     1250(d)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 are each 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``section 1071 (relating to gain from sale 
     or exchange to effectuate polices of FCC) or'', and
       (2) by striking ``1071 and'' in the heading thereof.
       (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of parts for such 
     subchapter O is amended by striking the item relating to part 
     V.
       (d) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall 
     apply to--
       (A) sales and exchanges on or after January 17, 1995, and
       (B) sales and exchanges before such date if the FCC tax 
     certificate with respect to such sale or exchange is issued 
     on or after such date.
       (2) Binding contracts.--
       (A) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall 
     not apply to any sale or exchange pursuant to a written 
     contract which was binding on January 16, 1995, and at all 
     times thereafter before the sale or exchange, if the FCC tax 
     certificate with respect to such sale or exchange was applied 
     for, or issued, on or before such date.
       (B) Sales contingent on issuance of certificate.--
       (i) In general.--A contract shall be treated as not binding 
     for purposes of subparagraph (A) if the sale or exchange 
     pursuant to such contract, or the material terms of such 
     contract, were contingent, at any time on January 16, 1995, 
     on the issuance of an FCC tax certificate. The preceding 
     sentence shall not apply if the FCC tax certificate for such 
     sale or exchange is issued on or before January 16, 1995.
       (ii) Material terms.--For purposes of clause (i), the 
     material terms of a contract shall not be treated as 
     contingent on the issuance of an FCC tax certificate solely 
     because such terms provide that the sales price would, if 
     such certificate were not issued, be increased by an amount 
     not greater than 10 percent of the sales price otherwise 
     provided in the contract.
       (3) FCC tax certificate.--For purposes of this subsection, 
     the term ``FCC tax certificate'' means any certificate of the 
     Federal Communications Commission for the effectuation of 
     section 1071 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as in 
     effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this 
     Act).

     SEC. 3. SPECIAL RULES RELATING TO INVOLUNTARY CONVERSIONS.

       (a) Replacement Property Acquired by Corporations From 
     Related Persons.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1033 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (relating to involuntary conversions) is amended by 
     redesignating subsection (i) as subsection (j) and by 
     inserting after subsection (h) the following new subsection:
       ``(i) Nonrecognition Not To Apply if Corporation Acquires 
     Replacement Property From Related Person.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of--
       ``(A) a C corporation, or
       ``(B) a partnership in which 1 or more C corporations own, 
     directly or indirectly (determined in accordance with section 
     707(b)(3)), more than 50 percent of the capital interest, or 
     profits interest, in such partnership at the time of the 
     involuntary conversion,

     subsection (a) shall not apply if the replacement property or 
     stock is acquired from a related person. The preceding 
     sentence shall not apply to the extent that the related 
     person acquired the replacement property or stock from an 
     unrelated person during the period described in subsection 
     (a)(2)(B).
       ``(2) Related person.--For purposes of this subsection, a 
     person is related to another person if the person bears a 
     relationship to the other person described in section 267(b) 
     or 707(b)(1).''
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
     shall apply to involuntary conversions occurring on or after 
     February 6, 1995.
       (b) Application of Section 1033 to Certain Sales Required 
     for Microwave Relocation.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1033 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (relating to involuntary conversions), as amended by 
     subsection (a), is amended by redesignating subsection (j) as 
     subsection (k) and by inserting after subsection (i) the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(j) Sales or Exchanges To Implement Microwave Relocation 
     Policy.--
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of this subtitle, if a 
     taxpayer elects the application of this subsection to a 
     qualified sale or exchange, such sale or exchange shall be 
     treated as an involuntary conversion to which this section 
     applies.
       ``(2) Qualified sale or exchange.--For purposes of 
     paragraph (1), the term `qualified sale or exchange' means a 
     sale or exchange before January 1, 2000, which is certified 
     by the Federal Communications Commission as having been made 
     by a taxpayer in connection with the relocation of the 
     taxpayer from the 1850-1990MHz spectrum by reason of the 
     Federal Communications Commission's reallocation of that 
     spectrum for use for personal communications services. The 
     Commission shall transmit copies of certifications under this 
     paragraph to the Secretary.''
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
     shall apply to sales or exchanges after March 14, 1995.

     SEC. 4. DENIAL OF EARNED INCOME CREDIT FOR INDIVIDUALS HAVING 
                   EXCESSIVE INVESTMENT INCOME.

       (a) In General.--Section 32 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 is amended by redesignating subsections (i) and (j) as 
     subsections (j) and (k), respectively, and by inserting after 
     subsection (h) the following new subsection:
       ``(i) Denial of Credit for Individuals Having Excessive 
     Investment Income.--
       ``(1) In general.--No credit shall be allowed under 
     subsection (a) for the taxable year if the aggregate amount 
     of disqualified income of the taxpayer for the taxable year 
     exceeds $2,350.
       ``(2) Disqualified income.--For purposes of paragraph (1), 
     the term `disqualified income' means--
       ``(A) interest or dividends to the extent includible in 
     gross income for the taxable year,
       ``(B) interest received or accrued during the taxable year 
     which is exempt from tax imposed by this chapter, and
       ``(C) the excess (if any) of--
       ``(i) gross income from rents or royalties not derived in 
     the ordinary course of a trade or business, over
       ``(ii) the sum of--

       ``(I) the deductions (other than interest) which are 
     clearly and directly allocable to such gross income, plus
       ``(II) interest deductions properly allocable to such gross 
     income.''

       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     1995.

     SEC. 5. EXTENSION OF SPECIAL RULE FOR CERTAIN GROUP HEALTH 
                   PLANS.

       Section 13442(b) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 
     of 1993 (Public Law 103-66) is amended by striking ``May 12, 
     1995'' and inserting ``December 31, 1995''.

     SEC. 6. STUDY OF EXPATRIATION TAX.

       (a) In General.--The staff of the Joint Committee on 
     Taxation shall conduct a study of the issues presented by any 
     proposals to affect the taxation of expatriation, including 
     an evaluation of--
       (1) the effectiveness and enforceability of current law 
     with respect to the tax treatment of expatriation,
       (2) the current level of expatriation for tax avoidance 
     purposes,
       (3) any restrictions imposed by any constitutional 
     requirement that the Federal income tax apply only to 
     realized gains,
       (4) the application of international human rights 
     principles to taxation of expatriation,
       (5) the possible effects of any such proposals on the free 
     flow of capital into the United States,
       (6) the impact of any such proposals on existing tax 
     treaties and future treaty negotiations,
       (7) the operation of any such proposals in the case of 
     interests in trusts,
       (8) the problems of potential double taxation in any such 
     proposals,
       (9) the impact of any such proposals on the trade policy 
     objectives of the United States,
       (10) the administrability of such proposals, and
       (11) possible problems associated with existing law, 
     including estate and gift tax provisions.
       (b) Report.--The Chief of Staff of the Joint Committee on 
     Taxation shall, not later than June 1, 1995, report the 
     results of the study conducted under subsection (a) to the 
     Chairmen of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate.

       And the Senate agree to the same.

     Bill Archer,
     Philip Crane,
     Wm. Thomas,
     Charles B. Rangel,
                                Managers on the Part of the House.
     Bob Packwood,
     Bob Dole,
     Bill Roth,
     John H. Chafee,
     Chuck Grassley,
     Daniel Patrick Moynihan,
     Max Baucus,
     Carol Moseley-Braun,
                               Managers on the Part of the Senate.
       JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF THE COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE

       The managers on the part of the House and the Senate at the 
     conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the 
     amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 831) to amend the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
     deduction for the health insurance costs of self-employed 
     individuals, to repeal the provision permitting 
     nonrecognition of gain on sales and exchanges effectuating 
     policies of the Federal Communications Commission, and for 
     other purposes, submit the following joint statement to the 
     House and the Senate in explanation of the effect of the 
     action agreed upon 
      [[Page H3911]] by the managers and recommended in the 
     accompanying conference report:
       The Senate amendment struck all of the House bill after the 
     enacting clause and inserted a substitute text.
       The House recedes from its disagreement to the amendment of 
     the Senate with an amendment that is a substitute for the 
     House bill and the Senate amendment. The differences between 
     the House bill, the Senate amendment, and the substitute 
     agreed to in conference are noted below, except for clerical 
     corrections, conforming changes made necessary by agreements 
     reached by the conferences, and minor drafting and clerical 
     changes.

  A. Permanently Extend Deduction for Health Insurance Costs of Self-
                          Employed Individuals

 (Sec. 1 of the House bill, sec. 1 of the Senate amendment, sec. 1 of 
         the conference agreement and sec. 162(l) of the Code)

                              Present Law

       Under present law, the tax treatment of health insurance 
     expenses depends on whether the taxpayer is an employee and 
     whether the taxpayer is covered under a health plan paid for 
     by the employee's employer. An employer's contribution to a 
     plan providing accident or health coverage for the employee 
     and the employee's spouse and dependents is excludable from 
     an employee's income. The exclusion is generally available in 
     the case of owners of a business who are also employees.
       In the case of self-employed individuals (i.e., sole 
     proprietors or partners in a partnership), no equivalent 
     exclusion applies. However, prior law provided a deduction 
     for 25 percent of the amount paid for health insurance for a 
     self-employed individual and the individual's spouse and 
     dependents. The 25-percent deduction was available with 
     respect to the cost of self-insurance as well as commercial 
     insurance. In the case of self insurance, the deduction was 
     not available unless the self-insured plan was in fact 
     insurance (e.g., there was appropriate risk shifting) and not 
     merely a reimbursement arrangement. The 25-percent deduction 
     was not available for any month if the taxpayer was eligible 
     to participate in a subsidized health plan maintained by the 
     employer of the taxpayer or the taxpayer's spouse. In 
     addition, no deduction was available to the extent that the 
     deduction exceeded the taxpayer's earned income. The amount 
     of expenses paid for health insurance in excess of the 
     deductible amount could be taken into account in determining 
     whether the individual was entitled to an itemized deduction 
     for medical expenses. The 25-percent deduction expired for 
     taxable years beginning after December 31, 1993.
       For purposes of these rules, more than 2-percent 
     shareholders of S corporations are treated the same as self-
     employed individuals. Thus, they were entitled to the 25-
     percent deduction.
       Other individuals who purchase their own health insurance 
     (e.g., someone whose employer does not provide health 
     insurance) can deduct their insurance premiums only to the 
     extent that the premiums, when combined with other 
     unreimbursed medical expenses, exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted 
     gross income.

                               House Bill

       The House bill would retroactively reinstate the deduction 
     for 25 percent of health insurance costs of self-employed 
     individuals for 1994 and would extend the deduction 
     permanently.
       Effective date.--The provision would be effective for 
     taxable years beginning after December 31, 1993.
                            Senate Amendment

       The Senate amendment is the same as the House bill, except 
     that the deduction would be increased to 30 percent for years 
     beginning after December 31, 1994.
       Effective date.--The provision generally would be effective 
     for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1993. The 
     increase in the deduction to 30 percent of health insurance 
     costs would be effective for taxable years beginning after 
     December 31, 1994.

                          Conference Agreement

       The conference agreement follows the Senate amendment.

    B. Repeal of Special Rules Applicable to FCC-Certified Sales of 
                           Broadcast Property

 (Sec. 2 of the House bill, sec. 2 of the Senate amendment, sec. 2 of 
          the conference agreement, and sec. 1071 of the Code)

                       Present Law and Background

     Tax treatment of a seller of broadcast property
       General tax rules
       Under generally applicable Code provisions, the seller of a 
     business, including a broadcast business, recognizes gain to 
     the extent the sale price (and any other consideration 
     received) exceeds the seller's basis in the property. The 
     recognized gain is then subject to the current income tax 
     unless the gain is deferred or not recognized under a special 
     tax provision.
       Special rules under Code section 1033
       Under Code section 1033, gain realized by a taxpayer from 
     certain involuntary conversions of property is deferred to 
     the extent the taxpayer purchases property similar or related 
     in service or use to the converted property. The replacement 
     property may be acquired directly or by acquiring control of 
     a corporation (generally, 80 percent of the stock of the 
     corporation) that owns replacement property. The taxpayer's 
     basis in the replacement property generally is the same as 
     the taxpayer's basis in the converted property, decreased by 
     the amount of any money or loss recognized on the conversion, 
     and increased by the amount of any gain recognized on the 
     conversion.
       Only involuntary conversions that result from destruction, 
     theft, seizure, or condemnation (or threat or imminence 
     thereof) are eligible for deferral under Code section 1033. 
     In addition, the term ``condemnation'' refers to the process 
     by which private property is taken from public use without 
     the consent of the property owner but upon the award and 
     payment of just compensation, according to a ruling by the 
     Internal Revenue Service (IRS).\1\ Thus, for example, an 
     order by a Federal court to a corporation to divest itself of 
     ownership of certain stock because of anti-trust rules is not 
     a condemnation (or a threat or imminence thereof), and the 
     divestiture is not eligible for deferral under this 
     provision.\2\ Under another IRS ruling, the ``threat or 
     imminence of condemnation'' test is satisfied if, prior to 
     the execution of a binding contract to sell the property, 
     ``the property owner is informed, either orally or in writing 
     by a representative of a governmental body or public official 
     authorized to acquire property for public use, that such body 
     or official has decided to acquire his property, and from the 
     information conveyed to him has reasonable grounds to believe 
     that his property will be condemned if a voluntary sale is 
     not arranged.''\3\ However, under this ruling, the threatened 
     taking also must constitute a condemnation, as defined above.
     \1\Rev. Rul. 58-11, 1958-1 C.B. 273.
     \2\Id.
     \3\Rev. Rul. 74-8, 1974-1 C.B. 200.
       Special rules under Code section 1071
       Under Code section 1071, if the FCC certifies that a sale 
     or exchange of property is necessary or appropriate to 
     effectuate a change in a policy of, or the adoption of a new 
     policy by, the FCC with respect to the ownership and control 
     of ``radio broadcasting stations,'' a taxpayer may elect to 
     treat the sale or exchange as an involuntary conversion. The 
     FCC is not required to determine the tax consequences of 
     certifying a sale or to consult with the IRS about the 
     certification process.
       Under Code section 1071, the replacement requirement in the 
     case of FCC-certified sales may be satisfied by purchasing 
     stock of a corporation that owns broadcasting property, 
     whether or not the stock represents control of the 
     corporation. In addition, even if the taxpayer does not 
     reinvest all the sales proceeds in similar or related 
     replacement property, the taxpayer nonetheless may elect to 
     defer recognition of gain if the basis of depreciable 
     property that is owned by the taxpayer immediately after the 
     sale or that is acquired during the same taxable year is 
     reduced by the amount of deferred gain.
     Tax treatment of a buyer of broadcast property
       Under generally applicable Code provisions, the purchaser 
     of a broadcast business, or any other business, acquires a 
     basis equal to the purchase price paid. In an asset 
     acquisition, a buyer must allocate the purchase price among 
     the purchased assets to determine the buyer's basis in these 
     assets. In a stock acquisition, the buyer generally takes a 
     basis in the stock equal to the purchase price paid, and the 
     business retains its basis in the assets. This treatment 
     applies whether or not the seller of the broadcast property 
     has received an FCC certificate exempting the sale 
     transaction from the normal tax treatment.
     FCC tax certificate program
       Multiple ownership policy
       The FCC originally adopted multiple ownership rules in the 
     early 1940s.\4\ These rules prohibited broadcast station 
     owners from owning more than one station in the same service 
     area, and, generally, more than six high frequency (radio) or 
     three television stations. Owners wishing to acquire 
     additional stations had to divest themselves of stations they 
     already owned in order to remain in compliance with the FCC's 
     rules.
     \4\Fed. Reg. 2382 (June 26, 1940) (multiple ownership rules 
     for high frequency broadcast stations); 5 Fed. Reg. 2284 (May 
     6, 1941) (multiple ownership rules for television stations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
       In November 1943, the FCC adopted a rule that prohibited 
     duopolies (ownership of more than one station in the same 
     city).\5\ After these rules were adopted, owners wishing to 
     acquire additional stations in excess of the national 
     ownership limit had to divest themselves of stations they 
     already owned in order to remain in compliance with the FCC's 
     rules. After Code section 1071 was adopted in 1943, in some 
     cases, parties petitioned the FCC for tax certificates 
     pursuant to Code section 1071 when divesting themselves of 
     stations. These divestitures were labeled ``voluntary 
     divestitures'' by the FCC. When the duopoly rule was adopted, 
     35 licensees that held more than one license in a particular 
     city were required by the rule ``involuntarily'' to divest 
     themselves of one of the licenses.\6\
     \5\8 Fed. Reg. 16065 (Nov. 23, 1943).
     \6\FCC Announces New Policy Relating to Issuance of Tax 
     Certificates, 14 FCC2d 827 (1956).

[[Page H3912]]

       Minority ownership policy
       In 1978, the FCC announced a policy of promoting minority 
     ownership of broadcast facilities by offering an FCC tax 
     certificate to those who voluntarily sell such facilities 
     (either in the form of assets or stock) to minority 
     individuals or minority-controlled entities.\7\ The FCC's 
     policy was based on the view that minority ownership of 
     broadcast stations would provide a significant means of 
     fostering the inclusion of minority views in programming, 
     thereby serving the needs and interests of the minority 
     community as well as enriching and educating the non-minority 
     audience. The FCC subsequently expanded its policy to include 
     the sale of cable television systems to minorities as 
     well.\8\
     \7\Minority Ownership of Broadcasting Facilities, 68 FCC2d 
     979 (1978).
     \8\Minority Ownership of Cable Television Systems, 52 R.R.2d 
     1469 (1982).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
       ``Minorities,'' within the meaning of the FCC's policy, 
     include ``Blacks, Hispanics, American Indians, Alaska 
     Natives, Asians, and Pacific Islanders.''\9\ As a general 
     rule, a minority-controlled corporation is one in which more 
     than 50 percent of the voting stock is held by minorities. A 
     minority-controlled limited partnership is one in which the 
     general partner is a minority or minority-controlled, and 
     minorities have at least a 20-percent interest in the 
     partnership.\10\ The FCC requires those who acquire broadcast 
     properties with the help of the FCC tax certificate policy to 
     hold those properties for at least one year.\11\ An 
     acquisition can qualify even if there is a pre-existing 
     agreement (or option) to buy out the minority interests at 
     the end of the one-year holding period, providing that the 
     transaction is at arm's-length.
     \9\52 R.R.2d at n. 1.
     \10\Commission's Policy Regarding the Advancement of Minority 
     Ownership in Broadcasting, Policy Statement, and Notice of 
     Proposed Rulemaking, 92 FCC2d 853-855 (1982).
     \11\See Amendment of Section 73.3597 of the Commission's 
     Rules (Applications for Voluntary Assignments or Transfers of 
     Control), 57 R.R.2d 1149 (1985). Anti-trafficking rules 
     require cable properties to be held for at least three years 
     (unless the property is sold pursuant to a tax certificate).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
       In 1982, the FCC further expanded its tax certificate 
     policy for minority ownership. At that time, the FCC decided 
     that, in addition to those who sell properties to minorities, 
     investors who contribute to the stabilization of the capital 
     base of a minority enterprise would be entitled to a tax 
     certificate upon the subsequent sale of their interest in the 
     minority entity.\12\ To qualify for an FCC tax certificate in 
     this circumstance, an investor must either (1) provide start-
     up financing that allows a minority to acquire either 
     broadcast or cable properties, or (2) purchase shares in a 
     minority-controlled entity within the first year after the 
     license necessary to operate the property is issued to the 
     minority. An investor can qualify for a tax certificate even 
     if the date of the interest occurs after participation by a 
     minority in the entity has ceased. In these situations, the 
     status of the divesting investor and the purchaser of the 
     divested interest is irrelevant, because the goal is to 
     increase the financing opportunities available to minorities.
     \12\Commission Policy Regarding the Advancement of Minority 
     Ownership in Broadcasting, 92 FCC2d 849 (1982).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Personal communications services ownership policy
       In 1993, Congress provided for the orderly transfer of 
     frequencies, including frequencies that can be licensed 
     pursuant to competitive bidding procedures.\13\ The FCC has 
     adopted rules to conduct auctions for the award of more than 
     2,000 licenses to provide personal communications services 
     (``PCS''). PCS will be provided by means of a new generation 
     of communication devices that will include small, 
     lightweight, multi-function portable phones, portable 
     facsimile and other imaging devices, new types of multi-
     channel cordless phones, and advanced paging devices with 
     two-way data capabilities. The PCS auctions (which began last 
     year) will constitute the largest auction of public assets in 
     American history and are expected to generate billions of 
     dollars for the United States Treasury.\14\
     \13\Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, P.L. 103-66, 
     Title VI.
     \14\Fifth Report and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 5532 (1994).
       The FCC has designed procedures to ensure that small 
     businesses, rural telephone companies and businesses owned by 
     women and minorities have ``the opportunity to participate in 
     the provision'' of PCS, as Congress directed in 1993.\15\ To 
     help minorities and women participate in the auction of the 
     PCS licenses, the FCC took several steps including up to a 
     25-percent bidding credit, a reduced upfront payment 
     requirement, a flexible installment payment schedule and an 
     extension of the tax certificate program for businesses owned 
     by minorities and women.\16\
     \15\Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, P.L. 103-66, 
     section 6002(a).
     \16\Installment payments are available to small businesses 
     and rural telephone companies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
       The FCC will employ the tax certificate program in three 
     ways: (1) initial investors (who provide ``start-up'' 
     financing or purchase interests within the first year after 
     license issuance) in minority and woman-owned PCS businesses 
     will be eligible for FCC tax certificates upon the sale of 
     their investments; (2) holders of PCS licenses will be able 
     to obtain FCC tax certificates upon the sale of the business 
     to a company controlled by minorities and women; and (3) a 
     cellular operator that sells its interest in an overlapping 
     cellular system to a minority or a woman-owned business to 
     come into compliance with the FCC PCS/cellular cross-
     ownership rule will be eligible for a tax certificate. In 
     addition, as discussed below, the FCC will issue tax 
     certificates for PCS to encourage fixed microwave operators 
     voluntarily to relocate to clear a portion of the spectrum 
     for PCS technologies.
       Microwave relocation policy
       PCS can operate only on frequencies below 3GHz. However, 
     because that frequency range is currently occupied by various 
     private fixed microwave communications systems (such as 
     railroads, oil pipelines, and electric utilities), there are 
     no large blocks of unallocated spectrum available to PCS. To 
     accommodate PCS, the FCC has reallocated the spectrum; the 
     1850-1990MHz spectrum will be used for PCS, and the microwave 
     systems will be required to move to higher frequencies. 
     Current occupants of the 1850-1990MHz spectrum allocated to 
     PCS must relocate to higher frequencies not later than three 
     years after the close of the bidding process.\17\ In 
     accordance with FCC rules, these current occupants have the 
     right to be compensated for the cost of replacing their old 
     equipment, which can operate only on the 1850-1990MHz 
     spectrum, with equipment that will operate at the new, higher 
     frequency. At a minimum, the winners of the new PCS licenses 
     must pay for and install new facilities to enable the 
     incumbent microwave operators to relocate. The amount of 
     these payments and characteristics of the new equipment will 
     be the subject of negotiation between the incumbent microwave 
     operators and the PCS licensees; thus, the nature of the 
     compensation (i.e., solely replacement equipment, or a 
     combination of replacement equipment plus a cash payment) is 
     unknown at present. If no agreement is reached within the 3-
     year voluntary negotiation period, the microwave operators 
     will be required by the FCC to vacate the spectrum; however, 
     the timing of such relocation is uncertain because the 
     relocation would take place only after completion of a formal 
     negotiation process in which the FCC would be a participant.
     \17\The PCS auctions for the 1850-1990MHz spectrum commenced 
     in December, 1994.
       The FCC will employ the tax certificate program for PCS to 
     encourage fixed microwave operators voluntarily to relocate 
     from the 1850-1990 MHz band to clear the band for PCS 
     technologies.\18\ Tax certificates will be available to 
     incumbent microwave operators that relocate voluntarily 
     within three years following the close of the bidding 
     process. Thus, the certificates are intended to encourage 
     such occupants to relocate more quickly than they otherwise 
     would and to clarify the tax treatment of such 
     transactions.\19\
     \18\See, Third Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and 
     Order, 8 FCC Rcd 6589 (1993).
     \19\The transaction between the PCS licensee and the 
     incumbent microwave operator might qualify for tax-free 
     treatment as a like-kind exchange under Code section 1031 or 
     as an involuntary conversion under Code section 1033. 
     However, the availability of deferral under these Code 
     provisions may be uncertain in certain circumstances. For 
     example, it may be unclear whether the transaction would 
     qualify as an involuntary conversion under currently 
     applicable IRS standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Congressional appropriations rider
       Since fiscal year 1988, in appropriations legislation, the 
     Congress has prohibited the FCC from using any of its 
     appropriated funds to repeal, to retroactively apply changes 
     in, or to continue to reexamination of its comparative 
     licensing, distress sale and tax certificate policies.\20\ 
     This limitation has not prevented an expansion of the 
     existing program.\21\ The current rider will expire at the 
     end of the 1995 fiscal year, September 30, 1995.
     \20\Pub. L. No. 100-202 (1987).
     \21\The appropriations restriction ``does not prohibit the 
     agency from taking steps to create greater opportunity for 
     minority ownership.'' H. Rept. No. 103-708 (Conf. Rept.) 103d 
     Cong. 2d Sess. 40 (1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               House Bill

       The House bill would repeal Code section 1071. Thus, a sale 
     or exchange of broadcast properties would be subject to the 
     same tax rules applicable to all other taxpayers engaged in 
     the sale or exchange of a business.
       Effective date.--The repeal of section 1071 would be 
     effective for (1) sales or exchanges on or after January 17, 
     1995, and (2) sale or exchanges before that date if the FCC 
     tax certificate with respect to the sale or exchange is 
     issued on or after that date. The provision would not apply 
     to taxpayers who have entered into a binding written contract 
     (or have completed a sale or exchange pursuant to a binding 
     written contract) before January 17, 1995, and who have 
     applied for an FCC tax certificate by that date. A contract 
     would be treated as not binding for this purpose if the sale 
     or exchange pursuant to the contract (or the material terms 
     of the contract) were contingent on January 16, 1995, on 
     issuance of an FCC tax certificate. A sale or exchange would 
     not be contingent on January 16, 1995, on issuance of an FCC 
     tax certificate if the tax certificate had been issued by the 
     FCC by that date.

                            Senate Amendment

       The Senate amendment is the same as the House bill.

                          Conference Agreement

       The conference agreement follows the House bill and the 
     Senate amendment with a clarification that the material terms 
     of an 
      [[Page H3913]] otherwise binding contract in effect on 
     January 16, 1995, would not be treated as contingent on the 
     issuance of an FCC tax certificate solely because the 
     contract provides that the sales price is increased by an 
     amount not greater than 10 percent of the sales price in the 
     event an FCC tax certificate is not issued.
                  C. Modification of Code Section 1033

 (Sec. 3 of the House bill, sec. 3 of the Senate amendment, sec. 3 of 
          the conference agreement, and sec. 1033 of the Code)

                              Present Law

       As described above (item B), under Code section 1033, gain 
     realized by a taxpayer from certain involuntary conversions 
     of property is deferred to the extent the taxpayer purchases 
     property similar or related in service or use to the 
     converted property within a specified period.
       Under rulings issued by the IRS to taxpayers, property 
     (stock or assets) purchased from a related person may, in 
     some cases, qualify as property similar or related in service 
     or use to the converted property.\22\ Thus, in certain 
     circumstances, related taxpayers may obtain significant (and 
     possible indefinite or permanent) tax deferral without any 
     additional cash outlay to acquire new properties. In cases in 
     which a taxpayer purchases stock as replacement property, 
     section 1033 permits the taxpayer to reduce basis of stock, 
     but does not require any reduction in the basis of the 
     underlying assets. Thus, the reduction in basis of stock does 
     not result in reduced depreciation deductions.
     \22\See, e.g., PLR 8132072, PLR 8020069. Private letter 
     rulings do not have precedential authority and may not be 
     relied upon by any taxpayer other than the taxpayer receiving 
     the ruling but are some indication of IRS administrative 
     practice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               House Bill

       Under the House bill, a taxpayer would not be entitled to 
     defer gain under Code section 1033 when the replacement 
     property or stock is purchased from a related person. For 
     purposes of the bill, a person would be treated as related to 
     another person if the relationship between the persons would 
     result in a disallowance of losses under the rules of Code 
     section 267 or 707(b). The provision would be intended to 
     apply to all cases involving relationships to the taxpayer 
     described in Code section 267(b) or 707(b)(1), including 
     members of controlled groups under Code section 267(f).
       Effective date.--The provision would apply to replacement 
     property or stock acquired on or after February 6, 1995.

                            Senate Amendment

     Related-party transactions
       Under the Senate amendment, subchapter C corporations would 
     not be entitled to defer gain under Code section 1033 if the 
     replacement property or stock is purchased from a related 
     person. A person would be treated as related to another 
     person if the person bears a relationship to the other person 
     described in Code section 267(b) or 707(b)(1). An exception 
     to the general rule would provide that a taxpayer could 
     purchase replacement property or stock from a related person 
     and defer gain under Code section 1033 to the extent the 
     related person acquired the replacement property or stock 
     from an unrelated person within the period prescribed under 
     Code section 1033. Thus, property acquired from outside the 
     group within the period prescribed by section 1033 and 
     retransferred to the taxpayer member of the group within the 
     prescribed time period, would qualify in the hands of the 
     taxpayer to the extent that the property's basis or other net 
     tax consequences to the group do not change as a result of 
     the transfer.
     Microwave relocation transactions
       The Senate amendment would provide that sales or exchanges 
     that are certified by the FCC as having been made by a 
     taxpayer in connection with the relocation of the taxpayer 
     from the 1850-1990MHz spectrum by reason of the FCC's 
     reallocation of that spectrum for use for PCS would be 
     treated as involuntary conversions to which Code section 1033 
     applies.
     Effective date
       The provision prohibiting the purchase of qualified 
     replacement property from a related party would apply to 
     involuntary conversions occurring on or after February 6, 
     1995.
       The provision treating certain microwave relocation 
     transactions as involuntary conversions would apply to sales 
     or exchanges occurring before January 1, 2000.

                          Conference Agreement

       The conference agreement follows the Senate amendment with 
     a modification to provide that the amendments made to section 
     1033 will apply not only to C corporations, but also to 
     certain partnerships. Specifically, the provision will apply 
     to a partnership if more than 50 percent of the capital 
     interest, or profits interest, of the partnership are owned, 
     directly or indirectly (as determined under section 
     707(b)(3)), by C corporations at the time of the involuntary 
     conversion. If the provision applies to a partnership under 
     the above rule, the provision would apply to all partners of 
     the partnership, including partners that are not C 
     corporations. If a partnership is not described by the above 
     rule, none of the partners of the partnership will be subject 
     to the provision by reason of their interest in the 
     partnership.
       In addition, the conference agreement clarifies that the 
     determination of whether or not a partnership is related to 
     another party will be made at the partnership level.

          D. Unearned Income Test for Earned Income Tax Credit

 (Sec. 4 of the House bill, sec. 4 of the Senate amendment, sec. 4 of 
           the conference agreement, and sec. 32 of the Code)

                              Present Law

       Eligible low-income workers are able to claim a refundable 
     earned income tax credit (EITC). The amount of the credit an 
     eligible taxpayer may claim depends upon whether the taxpayer 
     has one, more than one, or no qualifying children and is 
     determined by multiplying the credit rate by the taxpayer's 
     earned income up to an earned income threshold. The maximum 
     amount of the credit is the product of the credit rate and 
     the earned income threshold. For taxpayers with earned income 
     (or adjusted gross income, if greater) in excess of the 
     phaseout threshold, the credit amount is reduced by the 
     phaseout rate multiplied by the amount of earned income (or 
     adjusted gross income, if greater) in excess of the phaseout 
     threshold. The credit is not allowed if earned income (or 
     adjusted gross income, if greater) exceeds the phaseout 
     limit. There is no additional limitation on the amount of 
     unearned income that the taxpayer may receive.
       The parameters for the EITC depend upon the number of 
     qualifying children the taxpayer claims. For 1995, the 
     parameters are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Two or more       One           No     
                                 qualifying    qualifying    qualifying 
                                 children--      child--     children-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Credit rate...................        36.00%        34.00%         7.65%
Phaseout rate.................         20.22        15.98%         7.65%
Earned income threshold.......        $8,640        $6,160        $4,100
Maximum credit................        $3,110        $2,094          $314
Phaseout threshold............       $11,290       $11,290        $5,130
Phaseout limit................       $26,673       $24,396        $9,230
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The earned income threshold and the phaseout threshold are 
     indexed for inflation; because the phaseout limit depends on 
     those amounts, the phaseout rate, and the credit rate, the 
     phaseout limit will also increase if there is inflation. 
     Earned income consists of wages, salaries, other employee 
     compensation, and net self-employment income.
       The credit rates and phaseout rates for the EITC change 
     over time under present law. For 1996 and after, the credit 
     rate will be 40 percent and the phaseout rate will be 21.06 
     percent for taxpayers with two or more qualifying children. 
     The credit rate and the phaseout rate for taxpayers with one 
     qualifying child or no qualifying children will be the same 
     as those listed in the table above.
       In order to claim the EITC, a taxpayer must either have a 
     qualifying child or must meet other requirements. A 
     qualifying child must meet a relationship test, an age test, 
     and a residence test. In order to claim the EITC without a 
     qualifying child, a taxpayer must not be a dependent and must 
     be over age 24 and under age 65.

                               House Bill

       Under the House bill, a taxpayer would not be eligible for 
     the EITC if the aggregate amount of interest and dividends 
     includible in the taxpayer's income for the taxable year 
     exceeds $3,150. The otherwise allowable EITC amount would be 
     phased out ratably for taxpayers with aggregate taxable 
     interest and dividend income between $2,500 and $3,150. For 
     taxable years beginning after 1996, the $2,500 threshold and 
     the $650 size of the phaseout would be indexed for inflation 
     with rounding to the nearest multiple of $10.
       Effective date.--The provision would be effective for 
     taxable years beginning after December 31, 1995.

                            Senate Amendment

       Under the Senate amendment, a taxpayer would not be 
     eligible for the EITC if the aggregate amount of 
     ``disqualified income'' of the taxpayer for the taxable year 
     exceeds $2,450. Disqualified income would be the sum of:
       (1) interest (whether or not subject to tax) received or 
     accrued in the taxable year,
       (2) dividends to the extent includible in gross income for 
     the taxable year, and
       (3) net income (if greater than zero) from rents and 
     royalties not derived in the ordinary course of business.
       Effective date.--Same as the House bill.

                          Conference Agreement

       The conference agreement provides that a taxpayer is not 
     eligible for the EITC if the aggregate amount of 
     ``disqualified income'' of the taxpayer for the taxable year 
     exceeds $2,350. Disqualified income is the sum of:
       (1) interest and dividends includible in gross income for 
     the taxable year,
       (2) tax-exempt interest received or accrued in the taxable 
     year, and
       (3) net income (if greater than zero) from rents and 
     royalties not derived in the ordinary course of business.

     Tax-exempt interest is defined as amounts required to be 
     reported on the taxpayer's return under Code section 6012(d).
       Effective date.--The provision is effective for taxable 
     years beginning after December 31, 1995.

          E. Extension of Rule for Certain Group Health Plans

    (Sec. 5 of the conference agreement and sec. 162(n) of the Code)

                              Present Law

       In general, present law disallows employer deductions for 
     any amounts paid or incurred in connection with a group 
     health plan if the plan fails to reimburse hospitals for 
     inpatient services provided in the State of New 
      [[Page H3914]] York at the same rate that licensed 
     commercial insurers are required to reimburse hospitals for 
     inpatient services of individuals not covered by a group 
     health plan. This provision applies with respect to inpatient 
     hospital services provided to participants after February 2, 
     1993, and on or before May 12, 1995.

                               House Bill

       No provision.

                            Senate Amendment

       No provision.

                          Conference Agreement

       The conference agreement extends the present-law deduction 
     disallowance for expenses in connection with certain group 
     health plans through December 31, 1995.
       Effective date.--The provision is effective on the date of 
     enactment.
    F. Imposition of Tax on U.S. Citizens Who Relinquish Citizenship

 (Sec. 5 of the Senate amendment, sec. 6 of the conference agreement, 
      proposed new sec. 877A, and secs. 877 and 7701 of the Code)

                              Present Law

       U.S. citizens and residents generally are subject to U.S. 
     income taxation on their worldwide income. The United States 
     imposes tax on gains recognized by foreign persons that are 
     attributable to dispositions of interests in U.S. real 
     property. Distributions, including lump-sum distributions, 
     that foreign persons receive from qualified U.S. retirement 
     plans generally are subject to U.S. tax at a 30-percent rate.
       A U.S. citizen who relinquishes U.S. citizenship with a 
     principal purpose to avoid Federal tax may be subjected to an 
     alternative taxing method for 10 years after expatriation 
     (sec. 877). Under this alternative method, the expatriate 
     generally is taxed on his U.S. source income (net of certain 
     deductions), as well as on certain business profits, at rates 
     applicable to U.S. citizens and residents.
       The United States imposes its estate tax on the worldwide 
     estates of persons who were citizens or domiciliaries of the 
     United States at the time of death, and on certain property 
     belonging to nondomiciliaries of the United States which is 
     located in the United States at the time of their death. The 
     U.S. gift tax is imposed on all gifts made by U.S. citizens 
     and domiciliaries, and on gifts of property made by 
     nondomiciliaries where the property is located in the United 
     States at the time of the gift. Special rules apply to the 
     estate and gift tax treatment of individuals who relinquished 
     their U.S. citizenship within 10 years of death or gift, if 
     the individual's loss of U.S. citizenship has as one of its 
     principal purposes a tax avoidance motive.

                               House Bill

       No provision.

                            Senate Amendment

       Under the Senate amendment, a U.S. citizen who relinquishes 
     citizenship generally would be treated as having sold all of 
     his property at fair market value immediately prior to the 
     expatriation. Gain or loss from the deemed sale would be 
     recognized at that time, generally without regard to other 
     provisions of the Code. Net gain on the deemed sale would be 
     recognized under the bill only to the extent it exceeds 
     $600,000 ($1.2 million in the case of married individuals 
     filing a joint return, both of whom expatriate).
       Property treated as sold by an expatriating citizen under 
     the provision would include all items that would be included 
     in the individual's gross estate under the Federal estate tax 
     if such individual were to die on the day of the deemed sale, 
     plus certain trust interests that are not otherwise 
     includible in the gross estate and other interests that may 
     be specified by the Treasury Department in order to carry out 
     the purposes of the provision.
       Certain types of property generally would not be taken into 
     account for purposes of determining the expatriation tax: 
     U.S. real property interests, interests in qualified 
     retirement plans (other than interests attributable to excess 
     contributions or contributions that violate any condition for 
     tax-favored treatment), and, under regulations, interests in 
     foreign pension plans and similar retirement plans or 
     programs (up to a maximum amount of $500,000).
       Under the amendment, an expatriate who is a beneficiary of 
     a trust would be deemed to own a separate trust consisting of 
     the assets allocable to his share of the trust, in accordance 
     with his interest in the trust. The separate trust would be 
     treated as selling its assets for fair market value 
     immediately before the beneficiary relinquishes his 
     citizenship, and distributing all resulting income and corpus 
     to the beneficiary.
       Under the amendment, a U.S. citizen who renounces his U.S. 
     nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the 
     United States would be treated as having relinquished his 
     citizenship on the date, provided that the renunciation is 
     later confirmed by the issuance of a certificate of loss of 
     nationality (``CLN'') by the U.S. Department of State. A U.S. 
     citizen who furnishes to the Department of State a signed 
     statement of voluntary relinquishment of U.S. nationality 
     confirming the performance of an expatriating act would be 
     treated as having relinquished his citizenship on the date 
     such statement is so furnished, provided that the voluntary 
     relinquishment is later confirmed by the issuance of a CLN. 
     Any other U.S. citizen to whom the Department of State issues 
     a CLN would be treated as having relinquished his citizenship 
     on the date the CLN is issued to the individual. A 
     naturalized citizen is treated as having relinquished his 
     citizenship on the date a court of the United States cancels 
     his certificate of naturalization.
       Under the amendment, an individual who is subject to the 
     tax on expatriation would be required to pay a tentative tax 
     equal to the amount of tax that would have been due based on 
     a hypothetical short tax year that ended on the date the 
     individual relinquished his citizenship. The tentative tax 
     would be due on the 90th day after the date of 
     relinquishment.
       The amendment would provide that the time for the payment 
     of the tax on expatriation may be extended for a period not 
     to exceed 10 years at the request of the taxpayer, as 
     provided by section 6161.
       The amendment would authorize the Treasury Department to 
     issue regulations to permit a taxpayer to allocate the 
     taxable gain (net of any applicable exclusion) to the basis 
     of assets taxed under this provision, thereby preventing 
     double taxation if the assets remain subject to U.S. tax 
     jurisdiction.
       Effective date.--The amendment would be effective for U.S. 
     citizens who relinquish their U.S. citizenship (as determined 
     under the provision) on or after February 6, 1995. The 
     tentative tax would not be required to be paid until 90 days 
     after the date of enactment.
       Present law would continue to apply to U.S. citizens who 
     relinquished their citizenship prior to February 6, 1995.

                          Conference Agreement

       The conference agreement does not include the Senate 
     amendment.
       The conference agreement, however, directs that the staff 
     of the Joint Committee on Taxation undertake a study of the 
     issues presented by any proposals to affect the tax treatment 
     of expatriation, including an evaluation of (1) the 
     effectiveness and enforceability of current law with respect 
     to the tax treatment of expatriation, (2) the current level 
     of expatriation for tax avoidance purposes, (3) any 
     restrictions imposed by any constitutional requirement that 
     Federal income tax apply only to realized gains, (4) the 
     application of international human rights principles to the 
     taxation of expatriation, (5) the possible effects of any 
     such proposals on the free flow of capital into the United 
     States, (6) the impact of any such proposals on existing tax 
     treaties and future treaty negotiations, (7) the operation of 
     any such proposals in the case of interests in trusts, (8) 
     the problems of potential double taxation in any such 
     proposals, (9) the impact of any such proposals on the trade 
     policy objectives of the United States, (10) the 
     administrability of such proposals, and (11) possible 
     problems associated with existing law, including estate and 
     gift tax provisions. The results of such study are to be 
     reported to the Chairman of the House Committee on Ways and 
     Means and to the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance 
     by June 1, 1995.

                                            ESTIMATED REVENUE EFFECTS OF H.R. 831 AS AGREED TO BY HOUSE AND SENATE CONFEREES--FISCAL YEARS 1995-2005                                            
                                                                                      [Millions of Dollars]                                                                                     
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Provision                              Effective             1995         1996         1997         1998         1999         2000       1995-00      2001-05      1995-05  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Extend self-employed health deduction: 25% for  tyba Dec. 31, 1993......         -514         -482         -527         -587         -649         -708       -3,467       -4,520       -7,987
 1994 and 30% thereafter.                                                                                                                                                                       
2. Repeal section 1071 (FCC tax certificate        Jan. 17, 1995...........          303          379          135          135          170          201        1,323        1,465        2,786
 program with transition).                                                                                                                                                                      
3. Modify section 1033 for corporations with       Feb. 6, 1995............            5            9           23           33           47           67          184          505          689
 transition rule for microwave relocation                                                                                                                                                       
 previously entitled to section 1071 (non-                                                                                                                                                      
 recognition of gain on involuntary conversions                                                                                                                                                 
 not to apply to acquisitions from related                                                                                                                                                      
 persons).                                                                                                                                                                                      
4. Deny earned income tax credit to individuals    Jan. 1, 1996............  ...........           22          436          487          521          556        2,023        3,515        5,538
 with interest, dividends, tax-exempt interest                                                                                                                                                  
 income, and net rental and royalty income over                                                                                                                                                 
 $2,350 (the threshold is not indexed for                                                                                                                                                       
 inflation)\1\.                                                                                                                                                                                 
5. Extension of rule for certain group health      DoE.....................          -42          -11  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........          -53  ...........          -53
 plans.                                                                                                                                                                                         
                                                                            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Net totals.................................  ........................         -248          -83           67           68           89          116           10          965         975 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Included in this estimate are decreases in EITC outlays of $18 million for FY 1996, $353 million for FY 1997, $397 million for FY 1998, $426 million for FY 1999, $449 million for FY 2000,  
  $495 million for FY 2001, $529 million for FY 2002, $566 million for FY 2003, $605 million for FY 2004, and $647 million for FY 2005.                                                         
Note.--Details may not add to totals due to rounding. Legend for ``Effective'' column: tyba=taxable years beginning after. DoE=date of enactment.                                               
Source: Joint Committee on Taxation.                                                                                                                                                            


[[Page H3915]]

     Bill Archer,
     Philip Crane,
     Wm. Thomas,
     Charles B. Rangel,
                                Managers on the Part of the House.
     Bob Packwood,
     Bob Dole,
     Bill Roth,
     John H. Chafee,
     Chuck Grassley,
     Daniel Patrick Moynihan,
     Max Baucus,
     Carol Moseley-Braun,
                               Managers on the Part of the Senate.
     

                          ____________________