Congressional Record, Volume 163 Issue 153 (Monday, September 25, 2017)

[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 153 (Monday, September 25, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H7457-H7469]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

DISASTER TAX RELIEF AND AIRPORT AND AIRWAY EXTENSION ACT OF 2017

Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
pass the bill (H.R. 3823) to amend title 49, United States Code, to
extend authorizations for the airport improvement program, to amend the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the funding and expenditure
authority of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, to provide disaster tax
relief, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:

H.R. 3823

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Disaster
Tax Relief and Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2017''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

TITLE I--FEDERAL AVIATION PROGRAMS

Sec. 101. Extension of airport improvement program.
Sec. 102. Extension of expiring authorities.
Sec. 103. Federal Aviation Administration operations.
Sec. 104. Small community air service.
Sec. 105. Air navigation facilities and equipment.
Sec. 106. Research, engineering, and development.
Sec. 107. Funding for aviation programs.

TITLE II--AVIATION REVENUE PROVISIONS

Sec. 201. Expenditure authority from Airport and Airway Trust Fund.
Sec. 202. Extension of taxes funding Airport and Airway Trust Fund.

TITLE III--EXPIRING HEALTH PROVISIONS

Sec. 301. Extension of certain public health programs.
Sec. 302. Extension of Medicare Patient IVIG Access Demonstration
Project.
Sec. 303. Funds from the Medicare Improvement Fund.

TITLE IV--DEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATE FLOOD INSURANCE MARKET

Sec. 401. Private flood insurance.

TITLE V--TAX RELIEF FOR HURRICANES HARVEY, IRMA, AND MARIA

Sec. 501. Definitions.
Sec. 502. Special disaster-related rules for use of retirement funds.
Sec. 503. Disaster-related employment relief.
Sec. 504. Additional disaster-related tax relief provisions.
Sec. 505. Budgetary effects.

TITLE I--FEDERAL AVIATION PROGRAMS

SEC. 101. EXTENSION OF AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) In general.--Section 48103(a) of title 49, United
States Code, is amended by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``and $1,670,410,959 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2017, and ending on March 31, 2018.''.
(2) Obligation of amounts.--Subject to limitations
specified in advance in appropriations Acts, sums made
available pursuant to the amendment made by paragraph (1) may
be obligated at any time through September 30, 2018, and
shall remain available until expended.
(3) Program implementation.--For purposes of calculating
funding apportionments and meeting other requirements under
sections 47114, 47115, 47116, and 47117 of title 49, United
States Code, for the period beginning on October 1, 2017, and
ending on March 31, 2018, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall--
(A) first calculate such funding apportionments on an
annualized basis as if the total amount available under
section 48103 of such title for fiscal year 2018 were
$3,350,000,000; and
(B) then reduce by 50 percent--
(i) all funding apportionments calculated under
subparagraph (A); and
(ii) amounts available pursuant to sections 47117(b) and
47117(f)(2) of such title.

[[Page H7458]]

(b) Project Grant Authority.--Section 47104(c) of title 49,
United States Code, is amended in the matter preceding
paragraph (1) by striking ``September 30, 2017,'' and
inserting ``March 31, 2018,''.

SEC. 102. EXTENSION OF EXPIRING AUTHORITIES.

(a) Section 47107(r)(3) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``October 1, 2017'' and inserting ``April
1, 2018''.
(b) Section 47114(c)(1)(F) of title 49, United States Code,
is amended--
(1) in the subparagraph heading by striking ``for fiscal
year 2017''; and
(2) in the matter preceding clause (i) by striking ``for
fiscal year 2017 an amount'' and inserting ``for each of
fiscal years 2017 and 2018 an amount''.
(c) Section 47115(j) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by inserting ``and for the period beginning on
October 1, 2017, and ending on March 31, 2018'' after
``fiscal years 2012 through 2017''.
(d) Section 47124(b)(3)(E) of title 49, United States Code,
is amended by inserting ``and not more than $5,160,822 for
the period beginning on October 1, 2017, and ending on March
31, 2018,'' after ``fiscal years 2012 through 2017''.
(e) Section 47141(f) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``September 30, 2017'' and inserting
``March 31, 2018''.
(f) Section 186(d) of the Vision 100--Century of Aviation
Reauthorization Act (117 Stat. 2518) is amended by inserting
``and for the period beginning on October 1, 2017, and ending
on March 31, 2018,'' after ``fiscal years 2012 through
2017''.
(g) Section 409(d) of the Vision 100--Century of Aviation
Reauthorization Act (49 U.S.C. 41731 note) is amended by
striking ``September 30, 2017'' and inserting ``March 31,
2018''.
(h) Section 140(c)(1) of the FAA Modernization and Reform
Act of 2012 (126 Stat. 28) is amended by striking ``2017''
and inserting ``2018''.
(i) Section 411(h) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act
of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 42301 prec. note) is amended by striking
``September 30, 2017'' and inserting ``March 31, 2018''.
(j) Section 822(k) of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act
of 2012 (49 U.S.C. 47141 note) is amended by striking
``September 30, 2017'' and inserting ``March 31, 2018''.
(k) Section 2306(b) of the FAA Extension, Safety, and
Security Act of 2016 (130 Stat. 641) is amended by striking
``October 1, 2017'' and inserting ``April 1, 2018''.

SEC. 103. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION OPERATIONS.

Section 106(k) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (D) by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (E) by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following:
``(F) $4,999,191,956 for the period beginning on October 1,
2017, and ending on March 31, 2018.';''; and
(2) in paragraph (3) by inserting ``and for the period
beginning on October 1, 2017, and ending on March 31, 2018''
after ``fiscal years 2012 through 2017''.

SEC. 104. SMALL COMMUNITY AIR SERVICE.

(a) Essential Air Service Authorization.--Section
41742(a)(2) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``and $175,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2016 and
2017'' and inserting ``$175,000,000 for each of fiscal years
2016 and 2017, and $74,794,521 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2017, and ending on March 31, 2018,''.
(b) Airports Not Receiving Sufficient Service.--Section
41743(e)(2) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
inserting ``and $4,986,301 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2017, and ending on March 31, 2018,'' after
``fiscal years 2012 through 2017''.

SEC. 105. AIR NAVIGATION FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT.

Section 48101(a) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(6) $1,423,589,041 for the period beginning on October 1,
2017, and ending on March 31, 2018.''.

SEC. 106. RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT.

Section 48102(a) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (8) by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (9) by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(10) $88,008,219 for the period beginning on October 1,
2017 and ending on March 31, 2018.''.

SEC. 107. FUNDING FOR AVIATION PROGRAMS.

(a) In General.--Section 48114 of title 49, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(2) by striking ``2017'' and inserting
``2018''; and
(2) in subsection (c)(2) by striking ``2017'' and inserting
``2018''.
(b) Compliance With Funding Requirements.--The budget
authority authorized in this title, including the amendments
made by this title, shall be deemed to satisfy the
requirements of subsections (a)(1)(B) and (a)(2) of section
48114 of title 49, United States Code, for the period
beginning on October 1, 2017, and ending on March 31, 2018.

TITLE II--AVIATION REVENUE PROVISIONS

SEC. 201. EXPENDITURE AUTHORITY FROM AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST
FUND.

(a) In General.--Section 9502(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) by striking
``October 1, 2017'' and inserting ``April 1, 2018''; and
(2) in subparagraph (A) by striking the semicolon at the
end and inserting ``or the Disaster Tax Relief and Airport
and Airway Extension Act of 2017;''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 9502(e)(2) of such Code
is amended by striking ``October 1, 2017'' and inserting
``April 1, 2018''.

SEC. 202. EXTENSION OF TAXES FUNDING AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST
FUND.

(a) Fuel Taxes.--Section 4081(d)(2)(B) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``September 30,
2017'' and inserting ``March 31, 2018''.
(b) Ticket Taxes.--
(1) Persons.--Section 4261(k)(1)(A)(ii) of such Code is
amended by striking ``September 30, 2017'' and inserting
``March 31, 2018''.
(2) Property.--Section 4271(d)(1)(A)(ii) of such Code is
amended by striking ``September 30, 2017'' and inserting
``March 31, 2018''.
(c) Fractional Ownership Programs.--
(1) Treatment as noncommercial aviation.--Section 4083(b)
of such Code is amended by striking ``October 1, 2017'' and
inserting ``April 1, 2018''.
(2) Exemption from ticket taxes.--Section 4261(j) of such
Code is amended by striking ``September 30, 2017'' and
inserting ``March 31, 2018''.

TITLE III--EXPIRING HEALTH PROVISIONS

SEC. 301. EXTENSION OF CERTAIN PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAMS.

(a) Extension of Program of Payments to Teaching Health
Centers That Operate Graduate Medical Education Programs.--
Section 340H(g) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
256h(g)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and $60,000,000'' and inserting ``,
$60,000,000''; and
(2) by inserting ``, and $15,000,000 for the first quarter
of fiscal year 2018'' before the period at the end.
(b) Extension of Special Diabetes Program for Indians.--
Section 330C(c)(2) of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 254c-3(c)(2)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(D) $37,500,000 for the first quarter of fiscal year
2018.''.
(c) Technical Corrections.--Part D of the Public Health
Service Act is amended by redesignating--
(1) the second subpart XI (42 U.S.C. 256i; relating to a
community-based collaborative care network program) as
subpart XII; and
(2) the second section 340H (42 U.S.C. 256i) as section
340I.

SEC. 302. EXTENSION OF MEDICARE PATIENT IVIG ACCESS
DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

Section 101(b) of the Medicare IVIG Access and
Strengthening Medicare and Repaying Taxpayers Act of 2012 (42
U.S.C. 1395l note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting after ``for a period of
3 years'' the following: ``and, subject to the availability
of funds under subsection (g)--
``(A) if the date of enactment of the Disaster Tax Relief
and Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2017 is on or before
September 30, 2017, for the period beginning on October 1,
2017, and ending on December 31, 2020; and
``(B) if the date of enactment of such Act is after
September 30, 2017, for the period beginning on the date of
enactment of such Act and ending on December 31, 2020' ''';
and
(2) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the following
new sentences: ``Subject to the preceding sentence, a
Medicare beneficiary enrolled in the demonstration project on
September 30, 2017, shall be automatically enrolled during
the period beginning on the date of the enactment of the
Disaster Tax Relief and Airport and Airway Extension Act of
2017 and ending on December 31, 2020, without submission of
another application.''.

SEC. 303. FUNDS FROM THE MEDICARE IMPROVEMENT FUND.

Section 1898(b)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 24 U.S.C.
1395iii(b)(1)) is amended by striking ``during and after
fiscal year 2021, $270,000,000'' and inserting ``during and
after fiscal year 2021, $220,000,000''.

TITLE IV--DEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATE FLOOD INSURANCE MARKET

SEC. 401. PRIVATE FLOOD INSURANCE.

(a) Flood Insurance Mandatory Purchase Requirement.--
(1) Amount and term of coverage.--Section 102 of the Flood
Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 4012a) is amended
by striking ``Sec. 102. (a)'' and all that follows through
the end of subsection (a) and inserting the following:
``Sec. 102. (a) Amount and Term of Coverage.--After the
expiration of sixty days following the date of the enactment
of this Act, no Federal officer or agency shall approve any
financial assistance for acquisition or construction purposes
for use in any area that has been identified by the
Administrator as an area having special flood hazards and in
which the sale of flood insurance has been made available
under the National

[[Page H7459]]

Flood Insurance Act of 1968, unless the building or mobile
home and any personal property to which such financial
assistance relates is covered by flood insurance: Provided,
That the amount of flood insurance (1) in the case of Federal
flood insurance, is at least equal to the development or
project cost of the building, mobile home, or personal
property (less estimated land cost), the outstanding
principal balance of the loan, or the maximum limit of
Federal flood insurance coverage made available with respect
to the particular type of property, whichever is less; or (2)
in the case of private flood insurance, is at least equal to
the development or project cost of the building, mobile home,
or personal property (less estimated land cost), the
outstanding principal balance of the loan, or the maximum
limit of Federal flood insurance coverage made available with
respect to the particular type of property, whichever is
less: Provided further, That if the financial assistance
provided is in the form of a loan or an insurance or guaranty
of a loan, the amount of flood insurance required need not
exceed the outstanding principal balance of the loan and need
not be required beyond the term of the loan. The requirement
of maintaining flood insurance shall apply during the life of
the property, regardless of transfer of ownership of such
property.''.
(2) Requirement for mortgage loans.--Subsection (b) of
section 102 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (42
U.S.C. 4012a(b)) is amended--
(A) by striking paragraph (7);
(B) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (7);
(C) by striking the subsection designation and all that
follows through the end of paragraph (5) and inserting the
following:
``(b) Requirement for Mortgage Loans.--
``(1) Regulated lending institutions.--Each Federal entity
for lending regulation (after consultation and coordination
with the Financial Institutions Examination Council
established under the Federal Financial Institutions
Examination Council Act of 1974) shall by regulation direct
regulated lending institutions not to make, increase, extend,
or renew any loan secured by improved real estate or a mobile
home located or to be located in an area that has been
identified by the Administrator as an area having special
flood hazards and in which flood insurance has been made
available under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968,
unless the building or mobile home and any personal property
securing such loan is covered for the term of the loan by
flood insurance: Provided, That the amount of flood insurance
(A) in the case of Federal flood insurance, is at least equal
to the outstanding principal balance of the loan or the
maximum limit of Federal flood insurance coverage made
available with respect to the particular type of property,
whichever is less; or (B) in the case of private flood
insurance, is at least equal to the outstanding principal
balance of the loan or the maximum limit of Federal flood
insurance coverage made available with respect to the
particular type of property, whichever is less.
``(2) Federal agency lenders and mortgage insurance and
guarantee agencies.--
``(A) Federal agency lenders.--A Federal agency lender may
not make, increase, extend, or renew any loan secured by
improved real estate or a mobile home located or to be
located in an area that has been identified by the
Administrator as an area having special flood hazards and in
which flood insurance has been made available under the
National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, unless the building or
mobile home and any personal property securing such loan is
covered for the term of the loan by flood insurance in
accordance with paragraph (1). Each Federal agency lender may
issue any regulations necessary to carry out this paragraph.
Such regulations shall be consistent with and substantially
identical to the regulations issued under paragraph (1).
``(B) Other federal mortgage entities.--
``(i) Coverage requirements.--Each covered Federal mortgage
entity shall implement procedures reasonably designed to
ensure that, for any loan that--

``(I) is secured by improved real estate or a mobile home
located in an area that has been identified, at the time of
the origination of the loan or at any time during the term of
the loan, by the Administrator as an area having special
flood hazards and in which flood insurance is available under
the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, and
``(II) is made, insured, held, or guaranteed by such
entity, or backs or on which is based any trust certificate
or other security for which such entity guarantees the timely
payment of principal and interest,

the building or mobile home and any personal property
securing the loan is covered for the term of the loan by
flood insurance in the amount provided in paragraph (1).
``(ii) Definition.--For purposes of this subparagraph, the
term `covered Federal mortgage entity' means--

``(I) the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, with
respect to mortgages insured under the National Housing Act;
``(II) the Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to loans
made, insured, or guaranteed under title V of the Housing Act
of 1949; and
``(III) the Government National Mortgage Association.

``(C) Requirement to accept flood insurance.--Each Federal
agency lender and each covered Federal mortgage entity shall
accept flood insurance as satisfaction of the flood insurance
coverage requirement under subparagraph (A) or (B),
respectively, if the flood insurance coverage meets the
requirements for coverage under such subparagraph and the
requirements relating to financial strength issued pursuant
to paragraph (4).
``(3) Government-sponsored enterprises for housing.--The
Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home
Loan Mortgage Corporation shall implement procedures
reasonably designed to ensure that, for any loan that is--
``(A) secured by improved real estate or a mobile home
located in an area that has been identified, at the time of
the origination of the loan or at any time during the term of
the loan, by the Administrator as an area having special
flood hazards and in which flood insurance is available under
the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, and
``(B) purchased or guaranteed by such entity,

the building or mobile home and any personal property
securing the loan is covered for the term of the loan by
flood insurance in the amount provided in paragraph (1). The
Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home
Loan Mortgage Corporation shall accept flood insurance as
satisfaction of the flood insurance coverage requirement
under paragraph (1) if the flood insurance coverage provided
meets the requirements for coverage under that paragraph and
the requirements relating to financial strength issued
pursuant to paragraph (4).
``(4) Requirements regarding financial strength.--The
Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, in
consultation with the Federal National Mortgage Association,
the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, the Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development, the Government National
Mortgage Association, and the Secretary of Agriculture shall
develop and implement requirements relating to the financial
strength of private insurance companies from which such
entities and agencies will accept private flood insurance,
provided that such requirements shall not affect or conflict
with any State law, regulation, or procedure concerning the
regulation of the business of insurance.
``(5) Applicability.--
``(A) Existing coverage.--Except as provided in
subparagraph (B), paragraph (1) shall apply on the date of
enactment of the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory
Improvement Act of 1994.
``(B) New coverage.--Paragraphs (2) and (3) shall apply
only with respect to any loan made, increased, extended, or
renewed after the expiration of the 1-year period beginning
on the date of enactment of the Riegle Community Development
and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994. Paragraph (1) shall
apply with respect to any loan made, increased, extended, or
renewed by any lender supervised by the Farm Credit
Administration only after the expiration of the period under
this subparagraph.
``(C) Continued effect of regulations.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of this subsection, the regulations to carry
out paragraph (1), as in effect immediately before the date
of enactment of the Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, shall continue to apply
until the regulations issued to carry out paragraph (1) as
amended by section 522(a) of such Act take effect.
``(6) Rule of construction.--Except as otherwise specified,
any reference to flood insurance in this section shall be
considered to include Federal flood insurance and private
flood insurance. Nothing in this subsection shall be
construed to supersede or limit the authority of a Federal
entity for lending regulation, the Federal Housing Finance
Agency, a Federal agency lender, a covered Federal mortgage
entity (as such term is defined in paragraph (2)(B)(ii)), the
Federal National Mortgage Association, or the Federal Home
Loan Mortgage Corporation to establish requirements relating
to the financial strength of private insurance companies from
which the entity or agency will accept private flood
insurance, provided that such requirements shall not affect
or conflict with any State law, regulation, or procedure
concerning the regulation of the business of insurance.'';
and
(D) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(8) Definitions.--In this section:
``(A) Flood insurance.--The term `flood insurance' means--
``(i) Federal flood insurance; and
``(ii) private flood insurance.
``(B) Federal flood insurance.--The term `Federal flood
insurance' means an insurance policy made available under the
National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et
seq.).
``(C) Private flood insurance.--The term `private flood
insurance' means an insurance policy that--
``(i) is issued by an insurance company that is--

``(I) licensed, admitted, or otherwise approved to engage
in the business of insurance in the State in which the
insured building is located, by the insurance regulator of
that State; or
``(II) eligible as a nonadmitted insurer to provide
insurance in the home State of the insured, in accordance
with sections 521 through 527 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 8201 through
8206);

``(ii) is issued by an insurance company that is not
otherwise disapproved as a surplus lines insurer by the
insurance regulator

[[Page H7460]]

of the State in which the property to be insured is located;
and
``(iii) provides flood insurance coverage that complies
with the laws and regulations of that State.
``(D) State.--The term `State' means any State of the
United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin
Islands, and American Samoa.''.
(b) Effect of Private Flood Insurance Coverage on
Continuous Coverage Requirements.--Section 1308 of the
National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4015) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(n) Effect of Private Flood Insurance Coverage on
Continuous Coverage Requirements.--For purposes of applying
any statutory, regulatory, or administrative continuous
coverage requirement, including under section 1307(g)(1), the
Administrator shall consider any period during which a
property was continuously covered by private flood insurance
(as defined in section 102(b)(8) of the Flood Disaster
Protection Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 4012a(b)(8))) to be a
period of continuous coverage.''.

TITLE V--TAX RELIEF FOR HURRICANES HARVEY, IRMA, AND MARIA

SEC. 501. DEFINITIONS.

(a) Hurricane Harvey Disaster Zone and Disaster Area.--For
purposes of this title--
(1) Hurricane harvey disaster zone.--The term ``Hurricane
Harvey disaster zone'' means that portion of the Hurricane
Harvey disaster area determined by the President to warrant
individual or individual and public assistance from the
Federal Government under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act by reason of Hurricane
Harvey.
(2) Hurricane harvey disaster area.--The term ``Hurricane
Harvey disaster area'' means an area with respect to which a
major disaster has been declared by the President before
September 21, 2017, under section 401 of such Act by reason
of Hurricane Harvey.
(b) Hurricane Irma Disaster Zone and Disaster Area.--For
purposes of this title--
(1) Hurricane irma disaster zone.--The term ``Hurricane
Irma disaster zone'' means that portion of the Hurricane Irma
disaster area determined by the President to warrant
individual or individual and public assistance from the
Federal Government under such Act by reason of Hurricane
Irma.
(2) Hurricane irma disaster area.--The term ``Hurricane
Irma disaster area'' means an area with respect to which a
major disaster has been declared by the President before
September 21, 2017, under section 401 of such Act by reason
of Hurricane Irma.
(c) Hurricane Maria Disaster Zone and Disaster Area.--For
purposes of this title--
(1) Hurricane maria disaster zone.--The term ``Hurricane
Maria disaster zone'' means that portion of the Hurricane
Maria disaster area determined by the President to warrant
individual or individual and public assistance from the
Federal Government under such Act by reason of Hurricane
Maria.
(2) Hurricane maria disaster area.--The term ``Hurricane
Maria disaster area'' means an area with respect to which a
major disaster has been declared by the President before
September 21, 2017, under section 401 of such Act by reason
of Hurricane Maria.

SEC. 502. SPECIAL DISASTER-RELATED RULES FOR USE OF
RETIREMENT FUNDS.

(a) Tax-favored Withdrawals From Retirement Plans.--
(1) In general.--Section 72(t) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 shall not apply to any qualified hurricane
distribution.
(2) Aggregate dollar limitation.--
(A) In general.--For purposes of this subsection, the
aggregate amount of distributions received by an individual
which may be treated as qualified hurricane distributions for
any taxable year shall not exceed the excess (if any) of--
(i) $100,000, over
(ii) the aggregate amounts treated as qualified hurricane
distributions received by such individual for all prior
taxable years.
(B) Treatment of plan distributions.--If a distribution to
an individual would (without regard to subparagraph (A)) be a
qualified hurricane distribution, a plan shall not be treated
as violating any requirement of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 merely because the plan treats such distribution as a
qualified hurricane distribution, unless the aggregate amount
of such distributions from all plans maintained by the
employer (and any member of any controlled group which
includes the employer) to such individual exceeds $100,000.
(C) Controlled group.--For purposes of subparagraph (B),
the term ``controlled group'' means any group treated as a
single employer under subsection (b), (c), (m), or (o) of
section 414 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
(3) Amount distributed may be repaid.--
(A) In general.--Any individual who receives a qualified
hurricane distribution may, at any time during the 3-year
period beginning on the day after the date on which such
distribution was received, make one or more contributions in
an aggregate amount not to exceed the amount of such
distribution to an eligible retirement plan of which such
individual is a beneficiary and to which a rollover
contribution of such distribution could be made under section
402(c), 403(a)(4), 403(b)(8), 408(d)(3), or 457(e)(16), of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as the case may be.
(B) Treatment of repayments of distributions from eligible
retirement plans other than iras.--For purposes of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, if a contribution is made
pursuant to subparagraph (A) with respect to a qualified
hurricane distribution from an eligible retirement plan other
than an individual retirement plan, then the taxpayer shall,
to the extent of the amount of the contribution, be treated
as having received the qualified hurricane distribution in an
eligible rollover distribution (as defined in section
402(c)(4) of such Code) and as having transferred the amount
to the eligible retirement plan in a direct trustee to
trustee transfer within 60 days of the distribution.
(C) Treatment of repayments for distributions from iras.--
For purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, if a
contribution is made pursuant to subparagraph (A) with
respect to a qualified hurricane distribution from an
individual retirement plan (as defined by section 7701(a)(37)
of such Code), then, to the extent of the amount of the
contribution, the qualified hurricane distribution shall be
treated as a distribution described in section 408(d)(3) of
such Code and as having been transferred to the eligible
retirement plan in a direct trustee to trustee transfer
within 60 days of the distribution.
(4) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
(A) Qualified hurricane distribution.--Except as provided
in paragraph (2), the term ``qualified hurricane
distribution'' means--
(i) any distribution from an eligible retirement plan made
on or after August 23, 2017, and before January 1, 2019, to
an individual whose principal place of abode on August 23,
2017, is located in the Hurricane Harvey disaster area and
who has sustained an economic loss by reason of Hurricane
Harvey,
(ii) any distribution (which is not described in clause
(i)) from an eligible retirement plan made on or after
September 4, 2017, and before January 1, 2019, to an
individual whose principal place of abode on September 4,
2017, is located in the Hurricane Irma disaster area and who
has sustained an economic loss by reason of Hurricane Irma,
and
(iii) any distribution (which is not described in clause
(i) or (ii)) from an eligible retirement plan made on or
after September 16, 2017, and before January 1, 2019, to an
individual whose principal place of abode on September 16,
2017, is located in the Hurricane Maria disaster area and who
has sustained an economic loss by reason of Hurricane Maria.
(B) Eligible retirement plan.--The term ``eligible
retirement plan'' shall have the meaning given such term by
section 402(c)(8)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
(5) Income inclusion spread over 3-year period.--
(A) In general.--In the case of any qualified hurricane
distribution, unless the taxpayer elects not to have this
paragraph apply for any taxable year, any amount required to
be included in gross income for such taxable year shall be so
included ratably over the 3-taxable year period beginning
with such taxable year.
(B) Special rule.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), rules
similar to the rules of subparagraph (E) of section
408A(d)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall apply.
(6) Special rules.--
(A) Exemption of distributions from trustee to trustee
transfer and withholding rules.--For purposes of sections
401(a)(31), 402(f), and 3405 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, qualified hurricane distributions shall not be treated
as eligible rollover distributions.
(B) Qualified hurricane distributions treated as meeting
plan distribution requirements.--For purposes the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, a qualified hurricane distribution
shall be treated as meeting the requirements of sections
401(k)(2)(B)(i), 403(b)(7)(A)(ii), 403(b)(11), and
457(d)(1)(A) of such Code.
(b) Recontributions of Withdrawals for Home Purchases.--
(1) Recontributions.--
(A) In general.--Any individual who received a qualified
distribution may, during the period beginning on August 23,
2017, and ending on February 28, 2018, make one or more
contributions in an aggregate amount not to exceed the amount
of such qualified distribution to an eligible retirement plan
(as defined in section 402(c)(8)(B) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986) of which such individual is a beneficiary and
to which a rollover contribution of such distribution could
be made under section 402(c), 403(a)(4), 403(b)(8), or
408(d)(3), of such Code, as the case may be.
(B) Treatment of repayments.--Rules similar to the rules of
subparagraphs (B) and (C) of subsection (a)(3) shall apply
for purposes of this subsection.
(2) Qualified distribution.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term ``qualified distribution'' means any
distribution--
(A) described in section 401(k)(2)(B)(i)(IV),
403(b)(7)(A)(ii) (but only to the extent such distribution
relates to financial hardship), 403(b)(11)(B), or
72(t)(2)(F), of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
(B) received after February 28, 2017, and before September
21, 2017, and
(C) which was to be used to purchase or construct a
principal residence in the Hurricane Harvey disaster area,
the Hurricane Irma disaster area, or the Hurricane Maria
disaster area, but which was not so purchased or constructed
on account of Hurricane Harvey, Hurricane Irma, or Hurricane
Maria.
(c) Loans From Qualified Plans.--

[[Page H7461]]

(1) Increase in limit on loans not treated as
distributions.--In the case of any loan from a qualified
employer plan (as defined under section 72(p)(4) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986) to a qualified individual made
during the period beginning on the date of the enactment of
this Act and ending on December 31, 2018--
(A) clause (i) of section 72(p)(2)(A) of such Code shall be
applied by substituting ``$100,000'' for ``$50,000'', and
(B) clause (ii) of such section shall be applied by
substituting ``the present value of the nonforfeitable
accrued benefit of the employee under the plan'' for ``one-
half of the present value of the nonforfeitable accrued
benefit of the employee under the plan''.
(2) Delay of repayment.--In the case of a qualified
individual with an outstanding loan on or after the qualified
beginning date from a qualified employer plan (as defined in
section 72(p)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986)--
(A) if the due date pursuant to subparagraph (B) or (C) of
section 72(p)(2) of such Code for any repayment with respect
to such loan occurs during the period beginning on the
qualified beginning date and ending on December 31, 2018,
such due date shall be delayed for 1 year,
(B) any subsequent repayments with respect to any such loan
shall be appropriately adjusted to reflect the delay in the
due date under paragraph (1) and any interest accruing during
such delay, and
(C) in determining the 5-year period and the term of a loan
under subparagraph (B) or (C) of section 72(p)(2) of such
Code, the period described in subparagraph (A) shall be
disregarded.
(3) Qualified individual.--For purposes of this
subsection--
(A) In general.--The term ``qualified individual'' means
any qualified Hurricane Harvey individual, any qualified
Hurricane Irma individual, and any qualified Hurricane Maria
individual.
(B) Qualified hurricane harvey individual.--The term
``qualified Hurricane Harvey individual'' means an individual
whose principal place of abode on August 23, 2017, is located
in the Hurricane Harvey disaster area and who has sustained
an economic loss by reason of Hurricane Harvey.
(C) Qualified hurricane irma individual.--The term
``qualified Hurricane Irma individual'' means an individual
(other than a qualified Hurricane Harvey individual) whose
principal place of abode on September 4, 2017, is located in
the Hurricane Irma disaster area and who has sustained an
economic loss by reason of Hurricane Irma.
(D) Qualified hurricane maria individual.--The term
``qualified Hurricane Maria individual'' means an individual
(other than a qualified Hurricane Harvey individual or a
qualified Hurricane Irma individual) whose principal place of
abode on September 16, 2017, is located in the Hurricane
Maria disaster area and who has sustained an economic loss by
reason of Hurricane Maria.
(4) Qualified beginning date.--For purposes of this
subsection, the qualified beginning date is--
(A) in the case of any qualified Hurricane Harvey
individual, August 23, 2017,
(B) in the case of any qualified Hurricane Irma individual,
September 4, 2017, and
(C) in the case of any qualified Hurricane Maria
individual, September 16, 2017.
(d) Provisions Relating to Plan Amendments.--
(1) In general.--If this subsection applies to any
amendment to any plan or annuity contract, such plan or
contract shall be treated as being operated in accordance
with the terms of the plan during the period described in
paragraph (2)(B)(i).
(2) Amendments to which subsection applies.--
(A) In general.--This subsection shall apply to any
amendment to any plan or annuity contract which is made--
(i) pursuant to any provision of this section, or pursuant
to any regulation issued by the Secretary or the Secretary of
Labor under any provision of this section, and
(ii) on or before the last day of the first plan year
beginning on or after January 1, 2019, or such later date as
the Secretary may prescribe.

In the case of a governmental plan (as defined in section
414(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986), clause (ii)
shall be applied by substituting the date which is 2 years
after the date otherwise applied under clause (ii).
(B) Conditions.--This subsection shall not apply to any
amendment unless--
(i) during the period--

(I) beginning on the date that this section or the
regulation described in subparagraph (A)(i) takes effect (or
in the case of a plan or contract amendment not required by
this section or such regulation, the effective date specified
by the plan), and
(II) ending on the date described in subparagraph (A)(ii)
(or, if earlier, the date the plan or contract amendment is
adopted),

the plan or contract is operated as if such plan or contract
amendment were in effect; and
(ii) such plan or contract amendment applies retroactively
for such period.

SEC. 503. DISASTER-RELATED EMPLOYMENT RELIEF.

(a) Employee Retention Credit for Employers Affected by
Hurricane Harvey.--
(1) In general.--For purposes of section 38 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, in the case of an eligible employer,
the Hurricane Harvey employee retention credit shall be
treated as a credit listed in subsection (b) of such section.
For purposes of this subsection, the Hurricane Harvey
employee retention credit for any taxable year is an amount
equal to 40 percent of the qualified wages with respect to
each eligible employee of such employer for such taxable
year. For purposes of the preceding sentence, the amount of
qualified wages which may be taken into account with respect
to any individual shall not exceed $6,000.
(2) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
(A) Eligible employer.--The term ``eligible employer''
means any employer--
(i) which conducted an active trade or business on August
23, 2017, in the Hurricane Harvey disaster zone, and
(ii) with respect to whom the trade or business described
in clause (i) is inoperable on any day after August 23, 2017,
and before January 1, 2018, as a result of damage sustained
by reason of Hurricane Harvey.
(B) Eligible employee.--The term ``eligible employee''
means with respect to an eligible employer an employee whose
principal place of employment on August 23, 2017, with such
eligible employer was in the Hurricane Harvey disaster zone.
(C) Qualified wages.--The term ``qualified wages'' means
wages (as defined in section 51(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, but without regard to section 3306(b)(2)(B) of
such Code) paid or incurred by an eligible employer with
respect to an eligible employee on any day after August 23,
2017, and before January 1, 2018, which occurs during the
period--
(i) beginning on the date on which the trade or business
described in subparagraph (A) first became inoperable at the
principal place of employment of the employee immediately
before Hurricane Harvey, and
(ii) ending on the date on which such trade or business has
resumed significant operations at such principal place of
employment.

Such term shall include wages paid without regard to whether
the employee performs no services, performs services at a
different place of employment than such principal place of
employment, or performs services at such principal place of
employment before significant operations have resumed.
(3) Certain rules to apply.--For purposes of this
subsection, rules similar to the rules of sections 51(i)(1)
and 52, of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, shall apply.
(4) Employee not taken into account more than once.--An
employee shall not be treated as an eligible employee for
purposes of this subsection for any period with respect to
any employer if such employer is allowed a credit under
section 51 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with respect
to such employee for such period.
(b) Employee Retention Credit for Employers Affected by
Hurricane Irma.--
(1) In general.--For purposes of section 38 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, in the case of an eligible employer,
the Hurricane Irma employee retention credit shall be treated
as a credit listed in subsection (b) of such section. For
purposes of this subsection, the Hurricane Irma employee
retention credit for any taxable year is an amount equal to
40 percent of the qualified wages with respect to each
eligible employee of such employer for such taxable year. For
purposes of the preceding sentence, the amount of qualified
wages which may be taken into account with respect to any
individual shall not exceed $6,000.
(2) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
(A) Eligible employer.--The term ``eligible employer''
means any employer--
(i) which conducted an active trade or business on
September 4, 2017, in the Hurricane Irma disaster zone, and
(ii) with respect to whom the trade or business described
in clause (i) is inoperable on any day after September 4,
2017, and before January 1, 2018, as a result of damage
sustained by reason of Hurricane Irma.
(B) Eligible employee.--The term ``eligible employee''
means with respect to an eligible employer an employee whose
principal place of employment on September 4, 2017, with such
eligible employer was in the Hurricane Irma disaster zone.
(C) Qualified wages.--The term ``qualified wages'' means
wages (as defined in section 51(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, but without regard to section 3306(b)(2)(B) of
such Code) paid or incurred by an eligible employer with
respect to an eligible employee on any day after September 4,
2017, and before January 1, 2018, which occurs during the
period--
(i) beginning on the date on which the trade or business
described in subparagraph (A) first became inoperable at the
principal place of employment of the employee immediately
before Hurricane Irma, and
(ii) ending on the date on which such trade or business has
resumed significant operations at such principal place of
employment.

[[Page H7462]]

of sections 51(i)(1) and 52, of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, shall apply.
(4) Employee not taken into account more than once.--An
employee shall not be treated as an eligible employee for
purposes of this subsection for any period with respect to
any employer if such employer is allowed a credit under
subsection (a), or section 51 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, with respect to such employee for such period.
(c) Employee Retention Credit for Employers Affected by
Hurricane Maria.--
(1) In general.--For purposes of section 38 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, in the case of an eligible employer,
the Hurricane Maria employee retention credit shall be
treated as a credit listed in subsection (b) of such section.
For purposes of this subsection, the Hurricane Maria employee
retention credit for any taxable year is an amount equal to
40 percent of the qualified wages with respect to each
eligible employee of such employer for such taxable year. For
purposes of the preceding sentence, the amount of qualified
wages which may be taken into account with respect to any
individual shall not exceed $6,000.
(2) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
(A) Eligible employer.--The term ``eligible employer''
means any employer--
(i) which conducted an active trade or business on
September 16, 2017, in the Hurricane Maria disaster zone, and
(ii) with respect to whom the trade or business described
in clause (i) is inoperable on any day after September 16,
2017, and before January 1, 2018, as a result of damage
sustained by reason of Hurricane Maria.
(B) Eligible employee.--The term ``eligible employee''
means with respect to an eligible employer an employee whose
principal place of employment on September 16, 2017, with
such eligible employer was in the Hurricane Maria disaster
zone.
(C) Qualified wages.--The term ``qualified wages'' means
wages (as defined in section 51(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, but without regard to section 3306(b)(2)(B) of
such Code) paid or incurred by an eligible employer with
respect to an eligible employee on any day after September
16, 2017, and before January 1, 2018, which occurs during the
period--
(i) beginning on the date on which the trade or business
described in subparagraph (A) first became inoperable at the
principal place of employment of the employee immediately
before Hurricane Maria, and
(ii) ending on the date on which such trade or business has
resumed significant operations at such principal place of
employment.

SEC. 504. ADDITIONAL DISASTER-RELATED TAX RELIEF PROVISIONS.

(a) Temporary Suspension of Limitations on Charitable
Contributions.--
(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in paragraph
(2), subsection (b) of section 170 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 shall not apply to qualified contributions and
such contributions shall not be taken into account for
purposes of applying subsections (b) and (d) of such section
to other contributions.
(2) Treatment of excess contributions.--For purposes of
section 170 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986--
(A) Individuals.--In the case of an individual--
(i) Limitation.--Any qualified contribution shall be
allowed only to the extent that the aggregate of such
contributions does not exceed the excess of the taxpayer's
contribution base (as defined in subparagraph (G) of section
170(b)(1) of such Code) over the amount of all other
charitable contributions allowed under section 170(b)(1) of
such Code.
(ii) Carryover.--If the aggregate amount of qualified
contributions made in the contribution year (within the
meaning of section 170(d)(1) of such Code) exceeds the
limitation of clause (i), such excess shall be added to the
excess described in the portion of subparagraph (A) of such
section which precedes clause (i) thereof for purposes of
applying such section.
(B) Corporations.--In the case of a corporation--
(i) Limitation.--Any qualified contribution shall be
allowed only to the extent that the aggregate of such
contributions does not exceed the excess of the taxpayer's
taxable income (as determined under paragraph (2) of section
170(b) of such Code) over the amount of all other charitable
contributions allowed under such paragraph.
(ii) Carryover.--Rules similar to the rules of subparagraph
(A)(ii) shall apply for purposes of this subparagraph.
(3) Exception to overall limitation on itemized
deductions.--So much of any deduction allowed under section
170 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as does not exceed
the qualified contributions paid during the taxable year
shall not be treated as an itemized deduction for purposes of
section 68 of such Code.
(4) Qualified contributions.--
(A) In general.--For purposes of this subsection, the term
``qualified contribution'' means any charitable contribution
(as defined in section 170(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986) if--
(i) such contribution--

(I) is paid during the period beginning on August 23, 2017,
and ending on December 31, 2017, in cash to an organization
described in section 170(b)(1)(A) of such Code, and
(II) is made for relief efforts in the Hurricane Harvey
disaster area, the Hurricane Irma disaster area, or the
Hurricane Maria disaster area,

(ii) the taxpayer obtains from such organization
contemporaneous written acknowledgment (within the meaning of
section 170(f)(8) of such Code) that such contribution was
used (or is to be used) for relief efforts described in
clause (i)(II), and
(iii) the taxpayer has elected the application of this
subsection with respect to such contribution.
(B) Exception.--Such term shall not include a contribution
by a donor if the contribution is--
(i) to an organization described in section 509(a)(3) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or
(ii) for the establishment of a new, or maintenance of an
existing, donor advised fund (as defined in section
4966(d)(2) of such Code).
(C) Application of election to partnerships and s
corporations.--In the case of a partnership or S corporation,
the election under subparagraph (A)(iii) shall be made
separately by each partner or shareholder.
(b) Special Rules for Qualified Disaster-related Personal
Casualty Losses.--
(1) In general.--If an individual has a net disaster loss
for any taxable year--
(A) the amount determined under section 165(h)(2)(A)(ii) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be equal to the sum
of--
(i) such net disaster loss, and
(ii) so much of the excess referred to in the matter
preceding clause (i) of section 165(h)(2)(A) of such Code
(reduced by the amount in clause (i) of this subparagraph) as
exceeds 10 percent of the adjusted gross income of the
individual,
(B) section 165(h)(1) of such Code shall be applied by
substituting ``$500'' for ``$500 ($100 for taxable years
beginning after December 31, 2009)'',
(C) the standard deduction determined under section 63(c)
of such Code shall be increased by the net disaster loss, and
(D) section 56(b)(1)(E) of such Code shall not apply to so
much of the standard deduction as is attributable to the
increase under subparagraph (C) of this paragraph.
(2) Net disaster loss.--For purposes of this subsection,
the term ``net disaster loss'' means the excess of qualified
disaster-related personal casualty losses over personal
casualty gains (as defined in section 165(h)(3)(A) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986).
(3) Qualified disaster-related personal casualty losses.--
For purposes of this subsection, the term ``qualified
disaster-related personal casualty losses'' means losses
described in section 165(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986--
(A) which arise in the Hurricane Harvey disaster area on or
after August 23, 2017, and which are attributable to
Hurricane Harvey,
(B) which arise in the Hurricane Irma disaster area on or
after September 4, 2017, and which are attributable to
Hurricane Irma, or
(C) which arise in the Hurricane Maria disaster area on or
after September 16, 2017, and which are attributable to
Hurricane Maria.
(c) Special Rule for Determining Earned Income.--
(1) In general.--In the case of a qualified individual, if
the earned income of the taxpayer for the taxable year which
includes the applicable date is less than the earned income
of the taxpayer for the preceding taxable year, the credits
allowed under sections 24(d) and 32 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 may, at the election of the taxpayer, be
determined by substituting--
(A) such earned income for the preceding taxable year, for
(B) such earned income for the taxable year which includes
the applicable date.
In the case of a resident of Puerto Rico determining the
credit allowed under section 24(d)(1)(B)(ii) of such Code,
the preceding sentence shall be applied by substituting
``social security taxes (as defined in section 24(d)(2)(A) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986)'' for ``earned income''
each place it appears.
(2) Qualified individual.--For purposes of this
subsection--
(A) In general.--The term ``qualified individual'' means
any qualified Hurricane Harvey individual, any qualified
Hurricane Irma individual, and any qualified Hurricane Maria
individual.
(B) Qualified hurricane harvey individual.--The term
``qualified Hurricane Harvey individual'' means any
individual whose principal place of abode on August 23, 2017,
was located--
(i) in the Hurricane Harvey disaster zone, or

[[Page H7463]]

(ii) in the Hurricane Harvey disaster area (but outside the
Hurricane Harvey disaster zone) and such individual was
displaced from such principal place of abode by reason of
Hurricane Harvey.
(C) Qualified hurricane irma individual.--The term
``qualified Hurricane Irma individual'' means any individual
(other than a qualified Hurricane Harvey individual) whose
principal place of abode on September 4, 2017, was located--
(i) in the Hurricane Irma disaster zone, or
(ii) in the Hurricane Irma disaster area (but outside the
Hurricane Irma disaster zone) and such individual was
displaced from such principal place of abode by reason of
Hurricane Irma.
(D) Qualified hurricane maria individual.--The term
``qualified Hurricane Maria individual'' means any individual
(other than a qualified Hurricane Harvey individual or a
qualified Hurricane Irma individual) whose principal place of
abode on September 16, 2017, was located--
(i) in the Hurricane Maria disaster zone, or
(ii) in the Hurricane Maria disaster area (but outside the
Hurricane Maria disaster zone) and such individual was
displaced from such principal place of abode by reason of
Hurricane Maria.
(3) Applicable date.--For purposes of this subsection, the
term ``applicable date'' means--
(A) in the case of a qualified Hurricane Harvey individual,
August 23, 2017,
(B) in the case of a qualified Hurricane Irma individual,
September 4, 2017, and
(C) in the case of a qualified Hurricane Maria individual,
September 16, 2017.
(4) Earned income.--For purposes of this subsection, the
term ``earned income'' has the meaning given such term under
section 32(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
(5) Special rules.--
(A) Application to joint returns.--For purposes of
paragraph (1), in the case of a joint return for a taxable
year which includes the applicable date--
(i) such paragraph shall apply if either spouse is a
qualified individual, and
(ii) the earned income of the taxpayer for the preceding
taxable year shall be the sum of the earned income of each
spouse for such preceding taxable year.
(B) Uniform application of election.--Any election made
under paragraph (1) shall apply with respect to both sections
24(d) and section 32, of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
(C) Errors treated as mathematical error.--For purposes of
section 6213 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, an
incorrect use on a return of earned income pursuant to
paragraph (1) shall be treated as a mathematical or clerical
error.
(D) No effect on determination of gross income, etc.--
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied without regard to any
substitution under paragraph (1).
(d) Application of Disaster-related Tax Relief to
Possessions of the United States.--
(1) Payments to possessions.--The Secretary of the Treasury
shall pay to each possession of the United States with a
mirror code tax system amounts equal to the loss in revenues
to that possession by reason of subsection (c). Such amounts
shall be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury based on
information provided by the government of the respective
possession.
(2) Definition and special rules.--
(A) Mirror code tax system.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term ``mirror code tax system'' means, with
respect to any possession of the United States, the income
tax system of such possession if the income tax liability of
the residents of such possession under such system is
determined by reference to the income tax laws of the United
States as if such possession were the United States.
(B) Treatment of payments.--For purposes of section 1324 of
title 31, United States Code, the payments under this
subsection shall be treated in the same manner as a refund
due from a credit provision referred to in subsection (b)(2)
of such section.
(C) Coordination with united states income taxes.--In the
case of any person with respect to whom a tax benefit is
taken into account with respect to the taxes imposed by any
possession of the United States by reason of this title, the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied with respect
to such person without regard to the provisions of this title
which provide such benefit.

SEC. 505. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.

(a) Emergency Designation.--This title is designated as an
emergency requirement pursuant to section 4(g) of the
Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (2 U.S.C. 933(g)).
(b) Designation in Senate.--In the Senate, this title is
designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section
403(a) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Curbelo) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.

{time} 1700

General Leave

Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks and include extraneous material on the bill currently under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, since Hurricane Irma hit south Florida earlier this
month, my staff and I have been on the ground in the Florida Keys and
South Dade helping our district with immediate recovery efforts and
listening to what our constituents need going forward.
In the lower and middle Florida Keys, it is hard to find someone who
hasn't been affected financially by this storm's devastation. From
restaurant workers who have been without a paycheck to fishermen whose
boats or traps were damaged, small businesses and the families that
depend on them are really struggling.
In South Dade, crops and agricultural structures critical to daily
operations were devastated by wind. Some small farms that were already
struggling to make ends meet have now exhausted their cash on hand to
pay for cleanup, leaving them little to pay workers or keep up with
their planting schedule.
Mr. Speaker, my district and similar communities throughout Florida,
Louisiana, Texas, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands need relief,
and this bill is a great start.
Through the business tax credit for wages, small-business owners like
Owen, a lobster and crab fisherman whose traps in the middle Keys were
destroyed by Hurricane Irma, will be able to claim a tax credit for 40
percent of employee wages. That is money Owen can use to get his
employees back to work as soon as possible.
The bill will also allow taxpayers to refer to earned income from the
immediately preceding year for purposes of determining the earned
income tax credit. That is over 415,000 hurricane survivors in Miami-
Dade, and nearly 7,500 in Monroe County, who will be able to keep more
of their paycheck when the time comes to pay taxes next year.
We are also going to make it easier for individuals and businesses,
like farmers struggling in South Dade and fishermen in the Keys, to
deduct more of the costs from the extensive property damage these
storms left behind.
This legislation would also give anyone struggling with initial
recovery immediate access to their retirement savings, without
penalties, so they can make ends meet and take care of their families.
Lastly, this legislation will lift caps on charitable giving to
qualified hurricane relief organizations, encouraging more American
businesses and individuals to continue generously supporting their
fellow citizens.
Mr. Speaker, Americans in Texas, Florida, Louisiana, the U.S. Virgin
Islands, and Puerto Rico need Congress to act. My constituents and
those in other communities like my district don't have time to wait.
They certainly don't have time to play political games. The Disaster
Tax Relief and Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2017 will give them
the means to recover faster and rebuild their communities better and
stronger than before. This tax relief package we are considering
deserves bipartisan support from my colleagues.
I thank Chairman Brady and the Ways and Means Committee for allowing
me to shape this legislation for the benefit of south Florida
residents, especially those in Monroe County who were hardest hit by
Hurricane Irma. I hope we can get this done today.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I stand in opposition to H.R. 3823, the Disaster Tax
Relief and Airport and Airway Extension Act, for one simple reason.
This is an anemic response to these disasters, whether they occur on
the mainland of the United States or within American possessions.
This should have been done on Friday afternoon with the two parties
working together. Instead, once again, this was put together by one
party, with minimal input from our side. These are all

[[Page H7464]]

members of the American family that have been impacted by what has
happened with this terrible weather.
The chance here for us to work together to make this an expanded
package, where we could be talking about a host of opportunities for
these folks who have been put in such a precarious situation, is now
being missed. There are 90 Members of this Congress who actually voted
against direct aid in the past for relief for members of the American
family, where we should have taken the position here, clearly: Let's
try to figure out what we can do for a robust tax package, what we can
do for immediate aid, and highlight the role that FEMA plays. And I
certainly have expressed to Mr. Curbelo time and again I am there on
board. I just think this needs to be more, and I think that is the
position that we are offering today.
Furthermore, a partisan position had to be taken in terms of many
priorities that we should have been consulted on, and even those could
have been turned into bipartisan moments. I support the disaster relief
that is in this bill, but it is clear that the package is woefully
inadequate. I would hope that we could work together on these
provisions.
The disaster relief package included in this bill does not provide
the comprehensive package of incentives and relief that will drive
investment and speed up recovery in the American communities that
include Texas, Florida, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico.
Without the fix that we want on this side, the effect of lost revenue
is going to mean that money is lost that otherwise would be needed for
normal operations and the response effort. It is going to take years to
adequately respond to what has happened and the devastation that these
folks are up against. We need to be sitting here, both parties working
together, to say: They are all members of the American family. Let's
get it done.

I consider this a missed opportunity, and I hope that we can do more
in the next few days to get back on track to help them bounce back from
these, indeed, tragedies. We should be sitting down here in the next 48
hours and putting together a massive package of relief for these States
and for these possessions and making sure that they have what is
necessary, rather than doing a piecemeal fix on what is sure to be a
very tormented time for members of these communities and these States
and these possessions.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, briefly, I want to first convey
my gratitude to the gentleman from Massachusetts because, indeed, the
first day I returned after being back home helping my community
recover, the gentleman expressed his disposition to work together. That
really meant a lot to me, and I know it meant a lot to all of our
colleagues who represent areas that were hit hard by the storm. We
should work more closely together. We can always do better. However,
let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
The bottom line is that there are a lot of provisions in this
legislation that are supported by Members of both parties, and there
are millions of Americans who are suffering, especially in south
Florida and especially in Puerto Rico that was hit hard by Maria just a
few days ago, and they are counting on us to deliver something. We can
always do more later, but this is a good package that will help people
get back up on their feet.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Shuster), the chairman of the House Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for
yielding me time.
I rise today in support of the Disaster Tax Relief and Airport and
Airway Extension Act of 2017.
This extension provides stability to our aviation system and extends
the funding to the FAA over the next 6 months while Congress continues
to make progress on a full FAA reauthorization bill. This extension is
absolutely necessary to prevent a shutdown in FAA programs, delays in
airport construction projects, and the possible furlough of thousands
of FAA employees across the country. I will be the first to admit I am
disappointed we have not passed a long-term bill yet.
Unfortunately, this is not a new problem for Congress. Between 2007
and 2012, Congress passed 23 extensions before approving a full
reauthorization. These short-term stopgaps, while necessary, create
long-term budget instability, and they contribute to the FAA's overall
inability to effectively manage the modernization of our antiquated air
traffic control system.
Congress has passed numerous piecemeal reforms over the years to try
to help the FAA act more like a business and efficiently modernize the
system. These reforms have not worked, and passing the same kind of
reforms again is not going to change the simple fact that the Federal
Government is not an innovative, high-tech service business.
It is time to face the truth that, without transformational reform,
the American people will not get the most modern and efficient air
traffic control system that they have been promised and deserve. For
too long, we have been trying to manage the symptoms of the problem
instead of finding a cure.
Thankfully, we now have that cure. H.R. 2997, the 21st Century AIRR
Act, and progress is being made every day on this bill to provide long-
overdue reform of the FAA.
While we have made progress, I believe we will move this bipartisan
bill through the House in the next few weeks. In the meantime, we have
to pass this extension today to provide 6 months' worth of certainty
and stability to the FAA, the aviation community, and the flying
public.
Without it, starting this Sunday, October 1, the FAA programs will
face a shutdown, thousands of FAA employees could be furloughed,
airport projects across the country will come to a halt, and
approximately $40 million a day in aviation trust fund revenue will go
uncollected. That is funding for air traffic control, airport
development, and other safety and modernization programs that will
never be recovered.
I want to remind my colleagues again that the very fact that we have
to pass this bill today is one of the many reasons we need fundamental,
comprehensive FAA reform.
In order to ensure America remains the world leader in aviation, I
look forward to bringing the bipartisan 21st Century AIRR Act to the
floor in the coming weeks. Until then, I urge my colleagues to support
today's bill.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Brady and Chairman Hensarling for their
work on this bill, and I thank my friend for yielding.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), a member of the Ways and Means Committee.
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, we have a problem here. My record is very,
very clear. I am providing assistance to any place in this country. In
fact, my record is 100 percent. So I have some credibility to come to
the floor to discuss this with my friend from Florida, and I hope he
will listen.
My heart goes out to those impacted my Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and
Maria the past several weeks. I am committed to providing for Federal
response and recovery.
I was pleased to support aid to those affected by Harvey and Irma,
and I will continue to do so. We urgently need to deliver relief and
assistance to those currently impacted by Hurricane Maria in the U.S.
Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, where the entire island has lost power
or many are without water. However, this bill today does not provide
that needed relief.
Let's be clear: we in New Jersey are not some Johnny-come-lately on
disaster tax relief. This is not a question of you got yours and I want
mine.
We have been working on disaster tax issues since 2012, based, in
part, on how we addressed helping victims of Hurricane Katrina more
than a decade ago. Let me remind you: Hurricane Sandy devastated the
northeastern United States in 2012, cost 233 lives, and caused $75
billion in damage. At the time, it was the costliest storm after
Hurricane Katrina.
While Congress, until then, had routinely provided tax relief to
communities in the wake of our worst storms--tax relief, I am talking
about--Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma, victims of Hurricane Sandy
did not receive the same treatment. In fact, we had to wait 3 months.
We just

[[Page H7465]]

did it in 3 days. We seem to have short memories.
179 Republicans in this body and 36 Senators voted against aid to
victims of Hurricane Sandy in 2013--that many. And today, those same
Members asked us to support not only aid for Hurricanes Harvey and
Irma, but tax relief provisions, which they never even considered after
Hurricane Sandy.
I was a ``yes'' vote a week before last for your aid, unequivocally.
Why should I take out on your citizens the foolishness that happened in
2013? That would be wrong. And I think you feel the same way, through
the Chair.
This whole debate smacks of a certain hypocrisy, and I know I am not
the first to point it out. In the weeks after Sandy, I worked in a
bipartisan manner to draft a tax relief bill that would make permanent
the most commonsense tax relief provisions to take politics out of the
equation when it comes to disaster relief.

{time} 1715

Over the years, I worked with many of my colleagues on both sides of
the aisle and from both Chambers of the Capitol.
Our bill, the National Disaster Tax Relief Act, led also by
Congressman Tom Reed from New York----
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding
additional time.
The bill provides tax relief to victims of Hurricane Sandy and puts
in place permanent provisions for all disaster areas going forward.
I am ready and waiting to debate these provisions and go through
regular order. Let's have hearings, let's have a markup, let's have
regular order on something that should be as noncontroversial as
helping those in need.
Instead of taking a bipartisan approach, some in the majority have
chosen to sneak in a few provisions taken from our bill and tack them
onto an unrelated aviation bill and apply them to only this year's
hurricane victims, leaving out all of the disaster victims that been
have waiting for support over the years.
A front-page story in the papers in New Jersey today says people are
still not back in their homes from Sandy, 2013. That is not fair. It is
not the American way.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has again expired.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding
additional time.
The specific provisions Republican leadership put in from our bill
include bigger-than-usual property casualty loss deductions, penalty-
free retirement withdrawals.
He may smile, but think about those people who are out of their homes
since 2013. That is no laughing matter, Mr. Speaker.
An increased threshold for charitable giving, a tax credit for
impacted employers, and flexibility in applying for the earned income
tax credit and child tax credit.
I would note that Puerto Ricans, despite being American citizens, are
ineligible for the earned income tax credit, and I have a bill to
correct this.
Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, no one was laughing at anything
that the gentleman said. We were listening intently.
The reason that we are all here is because the people of Florida, the
people of Texas, the people of Louisiana, the people of Puerto Rico,
and the people of the U.S. Virgin Islands need our help. They were hit
in the last few weeks, and they need our help. There are people
struggling in all of these communities.
Is this bill perfect?
No. I have never seen one.
Can we do more?
Yes. We must do more, but this is an important first step.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Hensarling), the distinguished chairman of the House Financial Services
Committee.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, it is so obvious to all as we have looked in horror on
our television screens to see the devastation of Harvey, Irma, and
Maria. There have been lots of tragic stories, harrowing tales of
survival.
I have been to Houston. I have met with a number of the victims. Mr.
Speaker, let me tell you about one tragic story. One tragic story is
that there are people who are living in homes that repeatedly flood
five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, even twenty times.
Something is fundamentally wrong in America and something is
fundamentally dangerous in America when people are living in harm's
way. Many of these people are ready to move.
Mr. Speaker, last week I made a comment about these repeatedly
flooded properties that was clearly inartful. It was not meant to be
taken literally, but it was. I regret the comment because it diverted
from a very important point that needs to be made, and the point is
this: if we care about our fellow citizens, if we wish to be
compassionate, then Federal aid and Federal policy will help move these
people to safer ground.
It is time to either help mitigate these homes or to help move these
homes. For this small set of properties, we must help. Otherwise, I
fear that the fatalities and the economic carnage will continue.
If we simply rebuild the same properties in the same manner, in the
same place, and expect a different result, we are not helping our
fellow citizens, we are not helping our first responders, and we are
certainly not helping the taxpayer.
Mr. Speaker, another tragedy of these storms is how many people
needed flood insurance but didn't have it. Many of them had no idea
that they actually needed it. In Houston, by some reports, 80 percent
of the damaged homes didn't have flood insurance.
Why?
One of the reasons, Mr. Speaker, is because we have a government
monopoly in flood insurance. Many people don't understand that flood is
not included in their typical homeowner's insurance policy. Many
people, unfortunately, took false security from living outside the
government-designated 100-year flood plain. Many have seen no options.
But help is on the way. Bipartisan help is on the way with the Flood
Insurance Market Parity and Modernization Act, known as the Ross-Castor
bill. It is a critical piece of legislation to give more people more
affordable options for flood insurance.
In the small part of the national market where we have competition,
particularly in Pennsylvania and in Florida, people are saving hundreds
of dollars, if not thousands of dollars, in many cases on their
flood insurance premiums.

The very respected firm of Millman, which studies insurance matters,
said that half of policy owners in Florida, two-thirds in Louisiana,
and 75 percent in Texas--my native State--could all save with private
flood insurance.
Think about it, Mr. Speaker. If we had a real competitive market with
multiple companies advertising and selling multiple policies, more
people would become educated about the need for flood insurance and
have that rolled into their normal homeowner's policy. This is vital.
Mr. Speaker, last year this bill passed this House 419-0. You can't
get any more bipartisan. It recently passed the Financial Services
Committee 58-0.
If there is one thing that we need to do--and it is urgent that we do
it now, with the National Flood Insurance Program, which is in debt,
facing another bailout and an uncertain future, which we must remedy--
as folks begin to rebuild, let's get them more affordable flood
insurance policies.
I appreciate the bill included in this package, and for the sake of
all the victims of the hurricanes, I urge its adoption.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I think that there is a sufficient opportunity
here going forward, as the previous gentlemen has spoken, to discuss
the whole issue of flood insurance. I just don't think this is the
moment to be discussing the flood insurance initiatives. Instead, I
think that ought to be subject to a full-throttled debate in this

[[Page H7466]]

institution about getting those things done. This is not, I think, the
appropriate forum for accomplishing that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr.
DeFazio), the ranking member of the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, this is purportedly an absolutely essential
extension of authorization for the Federal Aviation Administration to
continue to operate after October 1. Unfortunately, it has devolved
into other issues because it has turned into a Christmas tree on the
Republican side of the aisle.
We need to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration. The last
time Congress failed to do this--and the ticket tax, which is what pays
for air traffic control in America, expired--almost every airline in
America raised their rates 7.5 percent, got a $400 million windfall,
which the government lost, with the exception of two: I understand,
Alaska and Spirit.
So if we fail to reauthorize, we can expect that that will happen
again.
Actually, their long-term plan is to privatize the FAA, do away with
the ticket tax, reap a $10 billion windfall, and then impose a new per-
head fee to use our national airspace, which, by the way, Congress will
have nothing to say about that. No elected official will have any
authority over what new fees they charge. That is extraordinary.
That came out of the Republican side of the Ways and Means Committee.
What a bunch of losers. Come on. Give me a break. You are going to
allow the airlines to have the authority, a private corporation, to tax
people in America, and then say: Oh, it is not a tax; it is a user fee.
It sure feels like a tax to me, and it is going to feel like that to
your constituents. But when they complain, you will say: Oh, go talk to
the private corporation.
That is why we are here today, because the chairman of the committee
has stubbornly persisted in attempting to privatize the air traffic
organization of the United States of America, the most complex, the
most efficient, and the safest system in the world.
Yes, there are a few reforms that are needed there. Most of them have
to do with us. Congress sequesters their money. Even though there is
enough money raised in the ticket tax and other taxes to pay for the
system, we sequester their money, we shut them down. We do dumb things
like that.
So I introduced a bill to take care of those problems, to exempt them
from sequestration; to exempt them from budget shutdowns; and to
require reforms in their personnel procedures, their policy procedures
in terms of acquisitions; and to enhance the role of their coordinating
committee, which has been doing a great job coordinating between the
government and the airlines and all the people who use the system, not
just the commercial airlines; and authorize funds to rebuild some of
the major air traffic control centers, which are falling apart.
Instead, the chairman has insisted that we must privatize because
Canada did it, which is kind of a tiny fraction of what we are.
Then the airlines have this fake group called the Citizens for On
Time Flights, who say:

We have to fly zigzag routes, which are World War II radar.

No. Actually, we have deployed a system where you could fly all the
planes in America closer together with GPS, but the airlines haven't
bought the equipment, so they are blaming the FAA. That kind of stinks.
So that is why we are here today.
We have a bill that otherwise is totally agreed upon. If we were
voting today on an FAA bill to give them a 6-year extension without
privatization, with the reforms we need, we would be pressuring the
Senate to get something done.
Now, the Senate is hung up over whether or not you should have 1,500
hours of experience to sit in the copilot's seat. After the tragic
Colgan accident, reforms were adopted that made these requirements. So
they are hung up on that. On this side, we are hung up on privatizing
the system.
So it is sad that we have come to this point today. My hope is that
we will move forward soon in the bipartisan tradition of my committee,
and we will move an FAA bill and any amendments that are allowed, or
any riders or anything that is in it will have only to do with
aviation, not to do with flood insurance, not to do with any of all
these other miscellaneous things that are being thrown in here today.
We are here with the Ways and Means Committee on a bill that should be
a transportation bill.

Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise and want to make
comments actually echoing a lot of the comments that were made already.
The gentleman from Massachusetts talked about this needing to be a
bipartisan bill, and I agree. The gentleman from New Jersey talked
about Hurricane Sandy tax relief, and I agree. The gentleman from
Florida talked about the need to ensure that we are responding quickly
and appropriately in response to the devastating disasters that have
affected his State of Florida and the State of Texas. I also support
the gentleman from Pennsylvania's comments regarding a short-term
reauthorization to the FAA so we can continue to move forward on
reform.
But you may be wondering why, Mr. Speaker, groups like the
Association of State Floodplain Managers and the Consumer Federation of
America have expressed opposition to this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I include these letters in the Record.

Association of State

Floodplain Managers, Inc.,

September 24, 2017.
Re Private flood insurance in H.R. 3823, Disaster Tax Relief
and Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2017.

Dear Leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives: Early
this week, the House will consider legislation promoting
development of private flood insurance as part of a bill to
reauthorize the FAA for 6 months and provide hurricane tax
relief. The bill is scheduled to be taken up under suspension
this week. ASFPM strongly objects to consideration of private
flood outside the reauthorization of the NFIP. The proposed
bill does not insert HR 2901 from the 114th Congress as
mentioned in press reports, but inserts HR 1422, the Ross-
Castor bill from the 115th Congress as Title 4, with
provisions that as written could substantially weaken and
undermine the critical functioning of the National Flood
Insurance Program,. The NFIP not only provides flood
insurance, but is a comprehensive flood risk management
program.
Although we understand the potential benefits of more flood
insurance options, we point out that the private market has
been readily expanding since Biggert-Waters 2012 was passed
authorizing private flood insurance. ASFPM cannot support
authorization for private flood insurance as written in HR
1422. The temporary extension and reauthorization of the NFIP
expires on 8 Dec 2017, giving Congress ample time to consider
the full scope of the NFIP, into which private flood must
integrate, without causing irreparable damage to the other 3
fundamental elements of this comprehensive flood risk
management program. Those are floodplain mapping,
implementation of local floodplain ordinances to protect new
development, and hazard mitigation grants to reduce damage
and loss of life from flooding.
ASFPM has stated that three modifications of that HR 1422
language must be made to ensure continuity of the
comprehensive flood risk reduction aspects of the NFIP that
exist today. A federal policy fee on all NFIP policies pays
for almost half the cost of floodplain mapping and all of the
costs of floodplain management including technical assistance
to over 22,000 communities that have joined the NFIP. Hazard
mitigation grants are funded by premium income to the
program. None of these functions are provided by private
flood insurance policies.
Yet private insurance companies acknowledge that mapping
(i.e. identification of flood risk areas and areas of
mandatory purchase of flood insurance) and floodplain
management (i.e. reduced risk due to local requirements for
hazard-resistant construction) help them to target their
marketing and to price premiums lower where floodplain
ordinances exist.
First, private policies must also carry the federal policy
user fee to support the mapping and floodplain management
functions. Private flood policy holders, private insurance
companies, as well as the NFIP and its policy holders,
benefit from these functions by identifying at-risk areas,
ensuring building construction standards which facilitate
lower flood insurance premiums, and targeting areas and
structures which could benefit from mitigation actions
leading to lower premiums. As policies migrate to the private
sector, millions of dollars in revenue to support those
floodplain management and mapping functions will be lost
unless there is an equivalent policy user fee on private
policies.
Second, private policies to satisfy the mandatory purchase
requirement for properties in floodplains must only be sold
in communities that participate in the NFIP (meaning

[[Page H7467]]

they have adopted floodplain management ordinances to guide
safer development). In smaller communities with only a
handful of properties required to purchase flood insurance,
if that requirement can be met with private policies, those
communities may drop out of the NFIP and no longer maintain
floodplain management ordinances to reduce future losses.
This could result in lack of abililty to reduce future flood
losses and in taxpayers picking up disaster costs.
Third, several provisions of the existing definition of
private flood insurance must be retained. The Biggert-Waters
2012 legislation (42 USC 4012a(b)(7)) defines private flood
insurance, among other things, as providing coverage ``at
least as broad as'' that provided by the NFIP. The language
provides consumer protections to ensure policies would not
have excessive deductibles, exclusions, or eliminate some
essential coverages like Increased Cost of Compliance, which
provides assistance to policyholders to rebuild in a manner
that reduces flood damage in the future. Without these
important provisions in place, policyholders could face
unaffordable deductibles when they have a claim; communities
would find it much harder to help homeowners become eligible
for mitigation funding; and there would be a greater chance
that claim payments would not be applied to building repairs
resulting in increased community blight. ASFPM further notes
that with this language in place, the private market has
already been growing. The private flood insurance bill
strikes this language.
The nation's floodplain managers strongly urge adoption of
these elements if private flood language is added to the
House NFIP reauthorization bill. This would preserve the
flood risk mapping and floodplain management functions that
the NFIP provides and would protect consumers from purchasing
low-cost policies that provide less than adequate coverage
and/or higher deductibles they could not pay. This would not
happen if insureds had an NFIP policy.
The Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM) and
its 36 chapters represent more than 17,000 state and local
officials, as well as other professionals engaged in all
aspects of floodplain management and flood hazard mitigation
including management of local floodplain ordinances, flood
risk mapping, engineering, planning, community development,
hydrology, forecasting, emergency response, water resources
development and flood insurance. All ASFPM members are
concerned with reducing our nation's flood-related losses.
Again we urge you to oppose inclusion of these ill-advised
private flood provisions outside of the context of
comprehensive NFIP reauthorization legislation. The
suspension package makes it impossible to properly address
these issues. Thank you for seriously considering these
recommendations from the Association of State Floodplain
Managers.
Very sincerely,
Chad Berginnis,
ASFPM Executive Director.
____

Consumer Federation of America,

September 25, 2017.
Re Oppose adding flood insurance provisions of H.R. 1422 to
the FAA extension bill.

Dear Representative: Today, the House will consider
legislation promoting development of private flood insurance
as part of a bill to reauthorize the FAA for six months and
provide hurricane tax relief. The bill is scheduled to be
taken up under suspension this week. CFA strongly objects to
consideration of private flood insurance outside the
reauthorization of the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP). The proposed bill does not include H.R. 2901 from the
114th Congress as mentioned in press reports, but rather,
includes H.R. 1422, the Ross-Castor bill from the 115th
Congress as Title 4, with provisions that as written could
substantially weaken and undermine the critical functioning
of the NFIP.
We oppose the inclusion of H.R. 1422 for numerous reasons:
First, several provisions of the existing definition of
private flood insurance must be retained. The Biggert-Waters
2012 legislation (42 USC 4012a(b)(7)) defines private flood
insurance, among other things, as providing coverage ``at
least as broad as'' that provided by the NFIP. The language
provides consumer protections to ensure policies would not
have excessive deductibles, exclusions, or eliminate some
essential coverages like ``increased cost of compliance,''
which provides assistance to policyholders to rebuild in a
manner that reduces flood damage in the future. Without these
important consumer protective provisions in place,
policyholders could face unaffordable deductibles when they
have a claim; communities would find it much harder to help
homeowners become eligible for mitigation funding; and there
would be a greater chance that claim payments would not be
applied to building repairs resulting in increased community
blight. The Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM)
further notes that with this language in place, the private
market has already been growing. The private flood insurance
bill strikes this language which significantly eliminates
important consumer protections.
Second, the 45 day notice of cancellation provision must be
maintained or private insurers could cancel coverage when a
storm is approaching and not leave consumers with enough time
to get NFIP coverage, which has a 30-day waiting period for
coverage attachment. H.R. 1422 as included in this bill
problematically removes this notice provision.
Third, surplus line insurers should not be authorized to
sell flood insurance since they are not covered by state
guarantee funds should they fail after a big storm, and they
are not regulated by the states and should not be allowed to
offer flood insurance unless the policy provisions are at
least equal to the NFIP coverage and the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) is given some authority to regulate
claims practices. H.R. 1422, as included in this bill,
permits surplus line insurers to sell flood insurance,
placing consumers at risk.
Fourth, private policies must also carry the federal policy
user fee to support the mapping and floodplain management
functions. Private flood policy holders, private insurance
companies, as well as the NFIP and its policy holders,
benefit from these functions by identifying at-risk areas,
ensuring building construction standards which facilitate
lower flood insurance premiums, and targeting areas and
structures which could benefit from mitigation actions
leading to lower premiums. As policies migrate to the private
sector, millions of dollars in revenue to support those
floodplain management and mapping functions will be lost
unless there is an equivalent policy user fee on private
policies. H.R. 1422 would diminish flood mapping resources
and increase risk to consumers.
Fifth, private policies to satisfy the mandatory purchase
requirement for properties in floodplains must only be sold
in communities that participate in the NFIP (meaning they
have adopted floodplain management ordinances to guide safer
development). In smaller communities with only a handful of
properties required to purchase flood insurance, if that
requirement can be met with private policies, those
communities may drop out of the NFIP and no longer maintain
floodplain management ordinances to reduce future losses.
This could result in a lack of ability to reduce future flood
losses and in taxpayers picking up disaster costs.
We strongly urge you to oppose the inclusion of H.R. 1422
in the FAA extension bill.
Sincerely,
J. Robert Hunter,
Director of Insurances.

Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, extraneous provisions on flood
insurance that should not be pasted into this legislation were
included. These provisions actually undermine the very solvency of the
program. They are establishing a private market at a time when the
National Flood Insurance Program--the Federal program--is going to need
the resources to pay claims. Establishing a private market within 60
days is going to divert resources from the Federal program to private
insurers. It is going to divert these dollars to where they don't have
the resources to make the payments.
Private insurance companies are already involved in flood insurance,
and once we authorize them to step into these markets, they are going
to be able to cherry-pick low- and moderate-risk policies, leaving the
National Flood Insurance Program with only high-risk policies, leaving
them with the burden of flood mapping and leaving them with the burden
of a $24.6 billion debt. I don't understand how the program is going to
have the resources to pay the claims it underwrites.
Next, Mr. Speaker, one of the other big problems we have is that this
shows floods in Texas, floods in Louisiana, and gutting homes in
Louisiana here and in Texas there.

{time} 1730

These were both 1,000-year flood events. I don't understand the
difference on why we choose these folks get tax relief and these don't.
We introduced nearly identical legislation to address this.
We shouldn't be discriminating against folks in New Jersey and New
York and Louisiana in exchange for the others.
Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Curbelo for yielding me this
time.
Mr. Speaker, I just heard the ranking member get on the floor and
call me stubborn. I am pretty committed to what we are doing here
because this week will be the second year anniversary of this quote by
the ranking member in debate on the floor on H.R. 3614. ``The FAA is
the only agency in government worse at procurement than the Pentagon.
Congress has tried to reform it; it didn't stick. We have got to try
something different to get it more agile, to give us the 21st century
equipment and software that we need.''
That is exactly what we are trying to do in the 21st Century AIRR
Act. We

[[Page H7468]]

have tried for the last 40 years to get it modernized. We spent
somewhere around 40 to $50 billion, and we haven't been able to get it
done. This is a true transformational reform.
Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Denham).
Mr. DENHAM. Mr. Speaker, I support the 21st Century AIRR Act, H.R.
2997. This is something that needs to get done. We need to solve our
problems for America's airlines and our passengers who are traveling
across the country.
This is a short-term extension, but we have got to get our job done.
As well, we have got to get our job done on teaching hospitals. While
we continue to debate the healthcare of this Nation, we have got areas
like mine that have a lack of access. If you can't see a doctor today,
you have no healthcare.
I think it is important that our Teaching Health Center Graduate
Medical Education program gets extended long term. We have a bill to do
that. Just expanding it 3 months, if you are graduating from medical
school right now, you want to be able to have the certainty that you
are going to have a residency program long term.
I support this extension, but we have got to do a lot more. It is
time for both Houses to come together. More importantly, it is time for
both parties to come together to solve our issues for the FAA, for
modernization, making sure that we actually have an aviation system
that works. It is ridiculous that I can look at the Waze app on my
phone, yet we have got the airlines getting stalled across the entire
country. We can do better. We have got to come together to do that.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me reassure the gentleman from California that when
you talk about graduate medical education, believe me, in
Massachusetts, we are for graduate medical education. Be assured of
that.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, let me say that we all support
reauthorization of the FAA. What has happened here again is a breakdown
in the conversation that used to meld this institution together.
There was a chance on Friday for Republicans to consult with us in
the minority, put together a bipartisan package of many very important
provisions that are important to Mr. Curbelo, important to certainly
Texas, important to the Virgin Islands. It is certainly important to
Puerto Rico.
Let me give you a quick example of how this institution used to work.
We used to call this the national principle. The national principle
essentially said if there was an earthquake in California, we all rose
to the support of California. If there were forest fires in Alabama,
which there were, we would all come to the aid of the people of
Alabama. If there was a horrific, torrential downpour in Texas, we
simply said: We don't ask if it is a red State or a blue State, or if
they are Libertarians or Socialists or Democrats or Republicans. We
said: They are members of the American family. We said: Do what has to
be done and then send us the bill. We believe that there will be ample
opportunity to debate and discuss the size of the portionality at that
moment.
Instead, where we had this opportunity right here to provide a robust
package to the people of the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Florida, and
Texas, we decide to come back with an anemic proposal.
We are coming up short on our responsibility. We had a tornado in my
hometown 5 years ago. Those Federal employees did a spectacular job
everywhere in eight communities, and nobody said: Too much government.
They said: Let's fix this for, again, the American family to get this
straightened out.
I have said to Mr. Curbelo, and I will repeat it, we will put up 195
Democrats immediately for a bigger package for the people of Florida,
Texas, the Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico, not to piecemeal this
together.
By the way, let me use this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, for those of us
from the Northeast, the idea that 90 Members of this institution voted
against direct relief just a couple of weeks ago looking for a pay-for,
I wonder if they are going to use that same application of consistency
when we get to the tax proposals that are about to consume our time.
We want to provide adequate relief to these families and the
communities that need it. We could do this in the next 48 hours without
any problem whatsoever.
Mr. Speaker, at this time, because this is not big enough and not
supportive enough of the American family, I am going to urge my
colleagues to oppose this legislation, and I yield back the balance of
my time.
Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Brady and the Ways and Means
Committee staff for their work on this legislation. It has been a tough
couple weeks in the State of Florida, especially down in my
community. Again, I want to thank my colleague from Massachusetts, Mr.
Neal. As I said earlier, when I came back here, the first conversation
we had was about helping south Florida, and he said he was willing and
certainly able to do it.

Here today, we are trying to take that first step to help the people
of Florida, to help the people of Texas, of Louisiana, of the Virgin
Islands, of Puerto Rico. But as often happens in the House, if
something isn't perfect, then we get nothing. That is wrong. That is
wrong, because there are people out there who need the help, people who
don't have a roof, people who don't have a home, people who have been
without power.
I visited the Marathon Emergency Operations Center, Mr. Speaker. It
was replete with people buzzing, everyone working hard, full of energy,
even though they hadn't slept in days. The emergency operations manager
there told me that a third of the employees there who were helping
their fellow residents, conchs in the Florida Keys, had lost their
homes.
This is about them, and we can help improve their lives today, and we
can work together to do more later, and we should. But why should the
perfect be the enemy of the good? Why, when we have the opportunity to
help people, because some think we should be doing even more, we are
going to give them absolutely nothing? I think that is a major mistake,
and it sends the wrong message.
Throughout this debate, we have seen everything from posturing to
name calling, and we wonder why so many Americans reject this
institution and are disappointed by it. We have to do better, and we
can do better. It would send a strong message if we all voted for this
legislation to take this first step to helping the people of the
Florida Keys, of south Florida, of Texas, of Louisiana, of the U.S.
Virgin Islands, of Puerto Rico, help them get back up on their feet.
Mr. Speaker, this is very important, and on behalf of my community
and a lot of people who have, quite frankly, lost their lives, I ask
all of my colleagues to join together and to support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the funding
authorization for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is
currently set to expire on Saturday, September 30. The FAA depends
heavily on reliable and long-term funding provided through the Airport
and Airway Trust Fund and the spending levels set in a corresponding
authorization bill. This consistent and reliable funding is the
mainstay of the FAA's success in managing the safest and most complex
airspace in the world. Absent access to this funding through a long-
term authorization for FAA programs, we are threatening the safety,
reliability, and effectiveness of our airspace.
Sadly, Congress is yet again backed into a corner of taking up a
short-term, six-month measure that would extend this funding
authorization through March 31, 2018. This is simply unacceptable.
Congress needs to pass a long-term authorization bill so that the FAA
can focus on the important tasks of maintaining public safety, staffing
air traffic controllers, and bolstering our airport infrastructure
through the timely distribution of Airport Improvement Program (AIP)
dollars. A six-month extension poses new challenges for each of these
important aspects of managing our airspace.
The extension being debated today also adds several extraneous
provisions that run counter to regular order in the House and threatens
the success of passing an ever-important reauthorization. The bill
selectively extends the authorization for certain public health
programs, while leaving out other critical programs such as the State
Children's

[[Page H7469]]

Health Insurance Program (CHIP). The bill also includes language that
would encourage the creation of private flood insurance markets, while
stripping important consumer protections such as the 45 day of
cancellation provision that prevents private insurers from cancelling
cover Just moments before a devastating storm.
Mr. Speaker, allow me to be clear: I suppose a clean, long-term
reauthorization of the FAA's funding authority. However, the underlying
bill not only includes a host of extraneous provisions that I could not
support, but it was done so without the input of me or any of my
Democratic colleagues. If Republicans are serious about maintaining the
safest and most complex airspace in the world, they will pass a clean
reauthorization that authorizes FAA programs for several years, not
several months. We cannot politicize this issue with provisions related
to healthcare, or flood insurance, or privatizing our air traffic
control services. It is far too important and time is quickly running
out.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Curbelo) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 3823.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

____________________