[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 11]
[House]
[Pages 15133-15148]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    DISASTER TAX RELIEF AND AIRPORT AND AIRWAY EXTENSION ACT OF 2017

  Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 
538, I call up 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, and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 538, the 
amendment printed in House Report 115-333 is adopted, and the bill, as 
amended, is considered read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, 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.
       (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''.

[[Page 15134]]



     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 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 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

[[Page 15135]]

     (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 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

[[Page 15136]]

     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.--
       (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

[[Page 15137]]

     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.
     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 
     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

[[Page 15138]]

     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.
     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 
     subsection (a) or (b), or section 51 of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986, with respect to such employee for such period.

     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
       (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,

[[Page 15139]]

       (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 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 united states virgin islands and puerto 
     rico.--
       (A) United states virgin islands.--The Secretary of the 
     Treasury shall pay to the United States Virgin Islands 
     amounts equal to the loss in revenues to the United States 
     Virgin Islands by reason of the provisions of this title. 
     Such amounts shall be determined by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury based on information provided by the government of 
     the United States Virgin Islands.
       (B) Puerto Rico.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay 
     to Puerto Rico amounts estimated by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury as being equal to the aggregate benefits that would 
     have been provided to residents of Puerto Rico by reason of 
     the provisions of this title if a mirror code tax system had 
     been in effect in Puerto Rico. The preceding sentence shall 
     not apply with respect to Puerto Rico unless Puerto Rico has 
     a plan, which has been approved by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury, under which Puerto Rico will promptly distribute 
     such payments to its residents.
       (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. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour, with 
40 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means and 20 minutes 
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on Financial Services.
  The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Curbelo) and the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) each will control 20 minutes. The gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Maxine Waters) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.


                             General Leave

  Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days within 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, Hurricane Irma's direct hit to the lower and middle Keys 
was devastating to my district. Many lost everything to the storm's 
130-mile-an-hour winds and significant storm surge. Some lost their 
lives.
  But fortunately, the Keys' recovery is well underway, and the 
resiliency and generosity of Conchs and other south Florida residents 
have been on display before, during, and after the storm.
  While facing the prospects of receiving the full force of the storm, 
Key West police and fire departments decided to remain on the ground, 
risking their personal safety. They wanted to be there for their 
neighbors when the storm had passed.
  Navy personnel, under the leadership of Captain Bobby Baker, who 
sacrifice for our country every day, once again answered the call to 
serve and stayed behind to ensure they would be there to get the 
runways open and ready to receive aid. Coast Guard Captain Jeff Janszen 
also stayed to make sure the Port of Key West could open.
  Two days after the storm had passed, I visited with both of these 
leaders. They were working tirelessly to stand up their bases and had 
not yet checked on the interior of their own homes.
  Monroe County Sheriff Rick Ramsay rode out the storm at the Marathon 
shelter because he felt it was his responsibility to be there to 
protect his community. Officials from local municipalities from the 
city of Key West to Ocean Reef have been working around the clock with 
their teams to get utilities up and running, roads cleared, and 
government offices operational.
  I am grateful to our first responders and all the public officials 
and employees who have been working hard to serve the people of the 
Florida Keys.
  I also want to thank my office's Florida Keys director, Nicole 
Rapanos, who has dedicated long hours to assist our constituents and 
our neighbors in the Keys so that they can get the resources they need. 
I am grateful for her dedication to her neighbors and proud to have her 
on my staff.
  Community organizations are also playing an instrumental role in the 
Keys' recovery. Nonprofit groups like Star of the Sea Outreach, Rotary 
Club of Key West, and the Florida Keys Outreach Coalition, just to name 
a few, have been volunteering their time, coordinating donations, and 
serving direct relief to the community.
  Private companies and small businesses have also stepped up to help. 
Robert Spottswood, whose family owns the Marriott Beachside, opened up 
the hotel to first responders, Navy personnel, and others who chose to 
ride out the storm.
  Baby's Coffee, which was left with its own damage from the storm, was 
providing their entire stock to residents of Key West, along with hot 
meals and coffee.
  Ikon Builders and UDT have brought supplies to the food banks and 
donation distribution centers. The Marathon EOC, which has been 
operating 24/7 and where approximately one-third of employees had lost 
their homes, these people continued working to help in recovery and 
rebuilding, and the list goes on.
  On the individual level, people have gone above and beyond to show 
their true Conch spirit. They have shared their own supplies and taken 
time to go help neighbors. The outpouring of support from local heroes 
in the Florida Keys has been so extraordinary, I could be here all day 
telling the stories of thousands upon thousands of acts of kindness. 
This powerful sense of community and humanity is one of the many 
reasons I am proud to represent these local heroes.
  Mr. Speaker, clearly the Keys' recovery is well underway. Tourism 
will be opening up again next week, nearly 3 weeks earlier than 
anticipated. I have no doubt continued recovery efforts will make the 
Florida Keys an even

[[Page 15140]]

greater one-of-its-kind paradise Americans from across the country and 
people from all over the world have come to love.
  But the truth is, the Keys' tourism-based economy has been stalled, 
and perhaps the greatest devastation is the financial strain on 
individuals, families, and small entrepreneurs. Many of those facing 
hardship are themselves working to assist their fellow survivors, 
putting their personal interests aside. This community is doing its 
part to help their own, Mr. Speaker.
  Now it is time for Congress to do our part to help our fellow 
Americans in my district and in similar communities throughout my home 
State of Florida, in Texas, Louisiana, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin 
Islands.
  When we debated this bill on Monday, I told my colleagues about how 
the tax credit for wages would allow small business owners like Owen, a 
crab and lobster fisherman whose traps were destroyed in the storm, to 
claim a tax credit for 40 percent of employee wages, up to $6,000 per 
employee, helping him get his team back to work as soon as possible.
  This legislation would also allow up to 415,000 hurricane survivors 
in Miami-Dade and nearly 7,500 in Monroe County keep more of their 
paycheck by referring to earned income from the immediately preceding 
year for purposes of determining the earned income tax credit.
  We are also making it easier for taxpayers to deduct more of the 
costs from the extensive property damage these storms left behind and 
allowing anyone struggling with initial recovery efforts to have 
immediate access to their retirement savings without penalty.
  Lastly, this legislation will encourage more American businesses and 
individuals to continue generously supporting qualified hurricane 
relief organizations by lifting caps on charitable giving to these 
groups.
  Mr. Speaker, hardworking Americans in Texas, Florida, Louisiana, the 
U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico need Congress to act. On Monday, 
this bill was derailed by political games, posturing, and name calling. 
I hope that will not be the case today because my constituents and 
those in other communities like my district don't have time to wait. 
This tax relief package deserves bipartisan support from my colleagues.
  I want to thank Chairman Brady and the Ways and Means Committee staff 
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 want to thank Chairman Sessions and the Rules 
Committee for making in order my amendment that will provide additional 
benefits that are critical for our fellow Americans in Puerto Rico and 
the people of the U.S. Virgin Islands. In the aftermath of Hurricane 
Maria, they are facing a terribly difficult uphill battle to rebuild 
their communities. I stand in complete solidarity with my friends 
Stacey Plaskett of the U.S. Virgin Islands and Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon 
of Puerto Rico, and will work to get them everything they need to 
rebuild their communities. I hope for their sake we can finally 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, first I want to acknowledge those individuals that Mr. 
Curbelo pointed out and congratulate them for their courage and their 
kindness as they attempt to get southern Florida back on its feet.
  But the key phrase here that my friend from Florida mentioned was the 
following: Now it is time for us to do our part.
  ``Our part'' calls for a much more vigorous effort, a much more 
robust investment, and it could, it should, be done now. We don't have 
to wait to get this done. We don't have to parcel this out in the small 
amounts that are being suggested.
  Now, earlier this week, I rose in opposition to H.R. 3823, the 
Disaster Tax Relief and Airport and Airway Extension Act, as well. 
Today, I am disappointed to say that I am not going to support today's 
updated version of the legislation either, based on the word ``more.''
  I take no issue with a clean 6-month extension of the FAA expenditure 
authority, but today's bill includes an extensive list of extraneous 
provisions.
  If we are to include extraneous measures on this must-pass 
legislation, then the process of compiling the bill should have been 
done in a bipartisan manner. Instead, our Republican friends assembled 
their near-term priorities barely, if at all, consulting the Democratic 
minority, even though many of these issues are indeed bipartisan.
  Worse, rather than work together to solve what is rapidly becoming an 
American humanitarian crisis, they chose to take most of the day off to 
unveil the tax cut for the wealthiest people in America.
  The priorities at this moment are misguided. As I noted earlier this 
week, while I support the disaster tax relief in this bill, the package 
is plainly insufficient. I had hoped that we might work together in a 
manner on these provisions, but that has not occurred.
  Traditionally, in this body, we honored and used to respect what is 
known as the national principle. It was a code of honor that bound us 
together when one part of the Nation was beset by disaster. Whether it 
was an earthquake in California, a hurricane in North Carolina, a 
tornado in Massachusetts, floods in Missouri, or forest fires in 
Alabama, we did not ask about gender, race, geography. We simply said 
the national principle prevails and the Federal Government will offer a 
robust response.

                              {time}  1745

  We are failing in that respect to set the precedent today. Instead, 
unfortunately, this disaster relief package that we will consider does 
not provide the comprehensive package of incentives and relief that 
will drive investment and speed up recovery in American communities in 
Texas, Florida, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the devastation across 
Puerto Rico.
  These hurricanes left massive devastation in their wake, and the 
ongoing situation in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico are dire. 
The situation not only justifies but demands a comprehensive package of 
incentives and relief to help these communities and their residents get 
back to their feet.
  Republicans will hide behind an amendment they added to the Rules 
Committee last night. It is really a fig leaf, amounting to $68 per 
person in tax relief. We can do much more for our American brothers and 
sisters in the Caribbean, especially given that the administration 
continues to drag its feet in terms of sending an emergency 
supplemental request. That should be done forthwith. We can do better, 
and we must do better.
  They are making vague assurances that we will get around to 
considering a more extensive package later, but delay and uncertainty 
will make the situation worse, not better.
  Today's package should have included other powerful and proven tax 
incentives that we have extended in the past disaster recovery efforts 
consistently. I consider this a missed opportunity.
  We need to do more to help our fellow Americans recover from these 
tragedies. Therefore, I intend to oppose this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady), the distinguished chairman of the 
Ways and Means Committee.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I first want to thank Mr. Curbelo 
for his leadership in crafting this disaster relief package for our 
communities, and Chairman Shuster for his leadership on this bill as 
well.
  I rise today not only on behalf of the people in my district in Texas 
who have been just hammered, but on behalf of everyone in Texas, Puerto 
Rico, Florida, and the Virgin Islands, who have been devastated by this 
fall's destructive hurricanes.

[[Page 15141]]

  These are people who desperately need the support of our bill, the 
Disaster Tax Relief and Airport and Airway Extension Act. Hundreds of 
thousands of families have lost everything, even loved ones. This bill 
will help them begin to recover through meaningful, targeted tax relief 
they need now.
  Earlier this week, as communities continued to be decimated by 
record-high wind gusts, flooding, and storm surges, regrettably, my 
House Democratic friends opposed this critical bill, putting politics 
above the very people they represent.
  I stand here today to say we all have to do better. We have to show 
the Nation we can stand together in times of great tragedy to help each 
other and our neighbors, just as our people did in our district in the 
aftermath of Hurricane Harvey.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge support for this bill.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, my heart goes out, as all of us, to those 
impacted by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria. I am committed to 
providing the resources necessary for Federal response and recovery.
  We all voted for the money a week and a half ago. That took 3 days. 
Other storms in the past took 3 months, so let's set the record 
straight.
  I am pleased to support aid to those affected by Harvey, Irma, Maria, 
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 
and many are without water.
  I can't support a bill before us today which is not even close to 
providing the robust relief that Puerto Rico needs. You know it, and we 
know it. The Congress and this administration need to step up, help 
Puerto Rico recover.
  I plan to reintroduce legislation to extend the earned income tax 
credit to residents of Puerto Rico, and I hope my colleagues will 
support it.
  The bill before us today completely circumvented the committee 
process. I am not a process person, but this bill did not have any 
hearing, despite the fact that myself and my Republican colleague from 
New York, Mr. Reed, have had legislation on comprehensive disaster 
relief for the last 5 years.
  I want to address something my good friend from Texas, the chairman 
of the Ways and Means Committee, put out yesterday in response to my 
position and others. He said that Democrats were using hurricane relief 
as a ``bargaining chip'' and ``playing politics'' to enact our own 
agenda. He also tweeted that we were ``sick,'' which I can only hope 
was tweeted by an overzealous staffer.
  This is where I usually fly off the handle, but I am going to keep 
cool, I am going to keep calm, and I am going to make sure that I am a 
real American, not judging people on where they live. I promised myself 
I would stay calm for the rest of what I have to say.
  My only agenda, Mr. Speaker, is to help those who have been hurt by 
disasters, regardless of where in the United States they live, 
regardless of what they look like, regardless of how they cook their 
food. If that is a political agenda, I don't know what world we are 
living in.
  As for ``playing politics,'' as I mentioned, the gentleman from New 
York and I introduced the National Disaster Tax Relief Act to take 
politics out of the process, to avoid having to have debates like 
these.
  Congress shouldn't pick and choose who gets disaster relief and who 
doesn't based on political whims. Tax relief should not be reserved 
only for victims of a storm that happened to impact the home district--
--
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, this bill needlessly pits residents of 
Texas and Florida against residents of New York, New Jersey, 
Connecticut, Louisiana, West Virginia, Utah, and other States. We 
should treat everyone fairly, and the Reed-Pascrell bill would do that.
  Tax relief provisions would kick in automatically for federally 
declared disaster situations, even in Montana, even in Alaska. We 
should not play favorites when it comes to helping those in need.
  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.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, so let's be clear about who is playing 
politics here. New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut continue to feel 
the effects of Hurricane Sandy, just as Carolinians, Utahns, people 
from West Virginia and Louisiana still feel the effects of the major 
floods of 2015 and 2016. This is true in many other States.
  So while this bill takes a few provisions from our bill, it does not 
get into the real meat and potatoes as to how we can help everybody. 
This bill doesn't do enough in the first place, and it doesn't include 
victims of other disasters.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to demand robust and fair disaster 
tax relief. And if that is politics, so be it. I plead guilty. I want 
fairness.
  Mr. CURBELO of Florida. 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 rise in support of H.R. 3823.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to be very clear what is at stake if Congress 
fails to pass the FAA extension. Starting on October 1, no aviation 
taxes will be collected. Approximately $40 million of revenue will be 
lost each day; the revenue that would have been used for airport 
infrastructure funding and the FAA's important safety, operational, and 
research functions.
  No new Airport Improvement Program grants will be issued to airports 
in the communities across the country.
  All FAA accounts funded out of the aviation trust fund--the 
Facilities and Equipment; AIP; Research, Engineering, and Development 
accounts--will be impacted.
  Thousands of employees will be furloughed and some will be required 
to show up to work for no pay.
  We must also be clear on the impact to hurricane recovery efforts 
currently underway by the FAA and funded from the Facilities and 
Equipment account, including those in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin 
Islands.
  The FAA is currently trying to restore radars, navigational aids, and 
other equipment damaged during Hurricane Maria. This is happening while 
stranded passengers in the San Juan airport wait without air-
conditioning and electricity for flights off the island.
  The FAA technicians are working around the clock to restore services, 
but because of the extent of the damage and the challenges of the 
terrain where equipment is located, it is difficult to determine when 
full restoration will happen.
  For instance, as we debate this bill, technicians are making their 
way to a long-range radar site on a mountain in Puerto Rico. The last 
two miles to the site through the rainforest are impassable, so the 
technicians are using chainsaws to clear a path for themselves and 
their replacement equipment. The radar and navigation equipment are 
critical for the safe operation of flights.
  We will have plenty of time to debate aviation policy in the coming 
weeks, and I look forward to it. But the FAA extension we are 
considering this week is not a pawn in a Washington game of political 
brinksmanship.
  It is time for Congress to ensure the FAA's authorities, funding, and 
disaster recovery efforts continue uninterrupted in order to help those 
impacted by the hurricanes that are desperately needed.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this critical 
legislation.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon 
(Mr. DeFazio), who is the ranking

[[Page 15142]]

member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, this would be the fourth FAA extension in 2 
years. It didn't have to be this way. We had a bill come out of the 
committee in the last Congress and this Congress that was bipartisan 
except for one provision; that is the privatization of the Air Traffic 
Organization.
  Now, there is a citizen group out there called Citizens for On Time 
Flights--actually, Airlines for America funds this--who are saying that 
we have to fly these old zigzag routes with 1950s' radar, and if only 
we, the airlines--the same airlines, by the way, that have had their 
dispatch and reservation systems go down 39 times in the last 2 years. 
The national air traffic system hasn't gone down in the last 2 years.
  But, anyway, they could do better, they say--or Citizens for On Time 
Flights say. But, unfortunately, it is based on lies.
  We have deployed a system where we could fly planes closer together. 
It is operational, actually, but the airlines haven't purchased the 
equipment to use it, and they are not going to purchase that equipment 
until 2020 or after.
  So they are saying the FAA is dragging its feet; the FAA is over 
budget; the FAA is this, the FAA is that. No. Actually, it is the 
airlines that haven't purchased the equipment to use that system.
  Now, the other most egregious part of this privatization proposal is 
the Ways and Means Committee, Chairman Brady, has decided to give 
taxing authority to the private corporation. Now, they are not going to 
call it taxes. It is fees. Okay.
  But right now we finance our Air Traffic Organization with a 7\1/2\ 
percent tax, a progressive tax; the more expensive your ticket, the 
more you pay. That is how we finance, predominantly, our Air Traffic 
Organization.
  Well, this bill repeals that ticket tax. First thing that happens is 
the airlines raise their tickets by 7\1/2\ percent. They already did 
that once 5 years ago when there was a temporary lapse. Only two 
airlines didn't, Spirit and Alaska. Everybody else grabbed the money 
and ran, $400 billion.
  So Congress repeals the ticket tax. They raise prices 7\1/2\ percent, 
and then they would get three seats on the board. Three seats will go 
to direct airlines interests to decide what passengers and how people 
will pay to use the national airspace. So they, in all probability, 
will come up with a head tax.
  So, in addition to paying $7 billion a year for baggage fees, now we 
are going to start charging people to use the national airspace with a 
flat tax. So, hey, that is a big, great win for the people with first 
class tickets. The people, of course, who have got a $100 coach seat 
are now going to be paying more like 20 percent or 25 percent. And the 
person with a $2,000 ticket is going to pay, basically, 3-point-
something percent.
  So this is all really unfortunate because we could have passed 
already out of this House a bipartisan bill, sent it to the Senate. 
Instead of trying to jam them with this bill that is loaded down with 
riders, we would be jamming them with good, long-term policy for the 
FAA and the traveling public and the aviation industry in America.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr Speaker, we have already heard from the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Graves), who is a member of the committee, who is 
going to oppose the bill because of provisions regarding private flood 
insurance. He thinks it will cause Federal flood insurance to collapse. 
And the two Senators from Louisiana who they are attempting to jam with 
this bill are saying they are going to oppose the bill and block it in 
the Senate. So we may end up with no continuing authorization for the 
FAA because they wanted to put these flood insurance provisions and 
other riders on this bill instead of passing them as separate 
legislation.

                              {time}  1800

  Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Washington (Mrs. McMorris Rodgers), the distinguished 
chairman of the House Republican Conference.
  Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding and for his tremendous leadership on this important 
legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Disaster Tax Relief and Airport 
and Airway Extension Act of 2017. It also includes a 3-month extension 
for the Special Diabetes Program for Indians. This is an important 
program for many of the Tribes that I represent in my district.
  It is also a 3-month extension of the Teaching Health Center Graduate 
Medical Education program that is set to expire at the end of this 
week.
  It is estimated that we could have a national doctor shortage of 
23,000 by 2025, and when you look at the rural areas like mine in 
eastern Washington, it is especially stark. We know primary care saves 
lives, and that is why it is so important to include these provisions 
in the long-term reauthorization of the THCGME program.
  This program specially trains residents in some of the larger 
shortage areas; and when you compare it to the traditional Medicare 
program, the Teaching Health Center residents are 3\1/2\ times more 
likely to practice primary care, twice as likely to work in rural 
areas, and 2\1/2\ times more likely to work in the underserved areas.
  It is a part of the solution in solving our primary care crisis, but 
it must be funded. That is why it is so important to continue this 
funding and this legislation. Without the funding, the program will 
unravel. The centers could be forced to ramp down. Residents could be 
terminated, and some centers may be shut down and their programs 
eliminated altogether.
  I encourage my colleagues to recognize the importance of this program 
and encourage them to continue working with me on a long-term solution 
that ensures the future success of this vital program.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from 
Massachusetts for his leadership. He has been particularly helpful in 
thinking through how we can work together on the multiple crises that 
Texas, Florida, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico are facing.
  Let me thank the manager of the bill for working on these issues as 
well.
  Let me first of all indicate, as I have done earlier today, that I 
understand that the FAA extension is a clean extension which I will 
support, recognizing the international airport that is in my district. 
But again, I will seek the important leadership on the Transportation 
and Infrastructure Committee, and particularly, the ranking member, 
when it comes to dealing with not supporting privatization of air 
traffic controllers.
  I want to speak specifically to the hurricane tax relief. As I do so, 
let me particularly make mention that I had hoped this bill would have 
an extension of the CHIP program and the community health centers. 
Maybe we can work on that, because I know in many of our communities 
impacted by the hurricanes, those elements are important, community 
health centers, and, certainly, the Children's Health Insurance 
Program.
  I do want to make a point to say that I wish we could have gone 
further. I know that there were at least 21 different tax credits or 
exemptions that we could have had to help those who are impacted by the 
hurricanes, but these, I want to cite and say that I appreciate them 
being utilized for my constituents now.
  The bill would provide tax credit deductions and other relief to 
taxpayers in disaster areas affected by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and 
Maria. Most measures would apply to taxpayers in parts of Florida, 
Puerto Rico, Texas, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
  In particular, access to one's retirement funds, the bill would waive 
the 10 percent penalty on each distribution from retirement accounts 
for taxpayers

[[Page 15143]]

in affected areas. Individuals will be eligible to make the withdrawal 
if their primary residence was in one of the disaster areas as of the 
date of the storm and they sustained an economic loss.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, the bill would increase the size of a 
loan an individual can take from their employee retirement fund under 
the retirement plan loans. It would also provide a credit for 
businesses that were rendered inoperable by the hurricanes but that 
retained employees, and on the charitable deduction for those who are 
giving dollars between the 23rd and December 31.
  What I would like to do, Mr. Speaker, is to look at some form of a 
disaster relief tax scheme, if you will, to enhance what we are doing 
now and to listen, where we can do this in a bipartisan way, working 
with Mr. Neal, working with the chairman of the committee, and really 
making sure we have a long-term response to the journey that my 
constituents and others will have to take.
  I close by saying that now we are up to 185,000 homes that have been 
severely damaged or damaged. We have got problems with mortgage 
deductions and a number of other issues, and, therefore, I am hoping we 
can work together.
  Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman).
  Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3823, the Disaster 
Tax Relief and Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2017, which provides 
additional time to debate the future of our Nation's air traffic 
control system.
  Earlier this week, I visited Charlotte Douglas' air traffic control 
tower and learned firsthand from the controllers about the importance 
of modernizing our traffic control system. Fortunately, Chairman Bill 
Shuster exercised leadership through spearheading H.R. 2997, the 21st 
Century AIRR Act, that does just that, by shifting the current 
bureaucratic and broken air traffic control to a stakeholder-managed, 
not-for-profit corporation. With NextGen projected to ultimately cost 
$120 billion, it is imperative that we fix our air traffic control in 
this Congress.
  Importantly, the 21st Century AIRR Act also strengthens air service 
in rural communities through ensuring that general aviation will have 
full access to U.S. airspace. It advances the remote air traffic 
control tower program, which means that rural communities are fully 
integrated into our Nation's air traffic control system.
  Mr. Speaker, I look forward to working with my colleagues on this 
critical issue facing the Fifth District of South Carolina.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New 
York (Ms. Velazquez), and I must tell you that anybody who has 
witnessed her heartfelt advocacy on behalf of the people of Puerto Rico 
in the last 24 hours would be moved. I also would say that nobody in 
this Chamber knows more about what has happened in Puerto Rico right 
now than the gentlewoman from New York, Nydia Velazquez.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and I really 
appreciate those kind words.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the bill. As we all know, many 
people are hurting in the areas affected by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, 
and Maria. Sadly, the response by the administration has been bumbling, 
inexcusably weak, and inadequate.
  While some of the proposals in the bill are needed, these measures 
are necessary, but far from sufficient to help Puerto Rico recover. If 
anything, these half steps are an insult to the American citizens 
living in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
  Puerto Rico is hurting. They do not need legislative lip service 
passed just so that the majority can claim they are helping. Instead of 
taking real and meaningful steps to provide much-needed relief for 
Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, this bill ignores the challenges 
they face.
  Providing personal casualty assistance and penalty-free withdrawals 
from retirement accounts is commendable, but not for Puerto Rico. Just 
under half the island is living in poverty, and the average median 
income is under $20,000. In fact, 67 percent of workers have no money 
left to save for retirement after paying bills, and only one in five 
workers is contributing to retirement savings.
  So I ask you, what savings will they pull from, and how and when will 
this happen? American citizens in Puerto Rico cannot even get cash out 
of an ATM without waiting hours in line. Providing funds based on the 
assessed value of those provisions for Puerto Rico is insufficient. It 
is a fig leaf offered by Republicans so that they can check it off 
their list.
  In order to truly help the many victims affected by the hurricanes, 
Congress needs to start by providing the economic support required to 
recover.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from New York.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, this bill is unworkable for Puerto Rico 
as it stands now. I applaud the effort and speed with which this was 
drafted, but it must be strengthened to truly address the needs of 
Americans in these disaster areas.
  Even today, I got a call from the most important medical institution, 
and they are running out of antibiotics. The veterans hospital that 
treats 200,000 soldiers who have participated in every war, they do not 
have access to healthcare. This is how we honor their service? No, Mr. 
Speaker.
  Vote down this legislation.
  Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, you just heard the eloquent testimony from Ms. Velazquez 
about what the people of Puerto Rico are facing right now.
  I wish that the majority would have approached this process 
differently. The reauthorization of the FAA could have been a simple, 
straightforward exercise. It could have and should have been a 
bipartisan effort. They saddled the FAA with unrelated partisan 
priorities, incorporated with little input from Democrats, and 
presented a weak tax package to address the recent major national 
disasters.
  As I said when a version of this bill came up earlier this week, I 
wish the disaster tax relief section were better designed and more 
extensive. This updated bill still doesn't provide adequate relief to 
the affected families and communities who desperately need it. You just 
heard from Ms. Velazquez on that basis.
  While waiving penalties on the withdrawal of retirement savings and 
expanding EITC and child tax credit provisions are helpful, the 
majority inexplicably left out some of the most economically powerful 
tax incentives on the shelf, including those that would be helpful to 
rebuild devastated infrastructure.
  Given this damage and the needs of hard-hit areas, especially the 
Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, I cannot understand why we are not 
including proven assistance contained in previous disaster tax packages 
as we did to our family and friends in places like Texas and Louisiana.
  Therefore, I 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 the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I truly deplore the way some colleagues have decided to 
politicize such a sensitive, urgent, and important issue.
  There are people in my community who are suffering, who lost their 
homes, yet they are still working hard to help their neighbors rebuild. 
For them to find out that this institution would oppose a measure to 
help them because some colleagues think it is just not good enough--
now, you heard them. They recognize there is a lot of good in this 
package, but it is not enough.

[[Page 15144]]

  I am the Representative of the district that was hit the hardest by 
Hurricane Irma. Chairman Brady was here. He has been working hard back 
home to help his community recover while managing his responsibilities 
here as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. He is calling for 
passage of this legislation that he sponsored.
  Also putting their names on this legislation, Jenniffer Gonzalez-
Colon, the Resident Commissioner elected by Puerto Ricans on the island 
to this Chamber, she has added her name to this legislation.
  Also, Stacey Plaskett, a member of the minority who represents the 
Virgin Islands, she has added her name to the amendment we filed to 
make this legislation even stronger.
  So the Members representing the districts that were hit the hardest, 
where people are suffering--and the gentlewoman from New York is 
absolutely correct; the suffering in Puerto Rico cannot be compared to 
anything else that we are seeing here on the mainland--their 
representatives want to see this legislation pass, but some of our 
colleagues say it is just not good enough. So because this is not good 
enough for them, people should get nothing.
  We wonder. We wonder why so many Americans don't trust this 
institution, why so many Americans are frustrated with the politics in 
this country: because if it isn't perfect, if it isn't exactly what I 
want, then I am against it.

                              {time}  1815

  Now, fortunately, not all of the Members of the minority agree with 
this. When we first had this vote on Monday, 26 Democrats voted in 
favor of the legislation. And I thank them--not just for me, but on 
behalf of all of my constituents, the people of the Florida Keys, south 
Florida, and, of course, the people of Texas, Louisiana, Puerto Rico, 
and U.S. Virgin Islands. I thank my Democratic colleagues and all of my 
Republican colleagues that supported this package. I invite more 
Members from both parties to support this package today because this is 
not the time to play political games.
  Now, I understand some people here are frustrated about what may have 
happened in the past. I wasn't here, and I belong to a new generation 
of Members of this institution. Quite frankly, I think none of us on 
either side is interested in relitigating the old fights and the old 
debates. We want to see the solutions for today and tomorrow.
  The people of Florida--Monroe County, the Florida Keys, and Miami-
Dade--the people of Texas, Louisiana, U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto 
Rico, they need us now. They need this solution now.
  Can we do more later?
  Absolutely. Everyone knows that this Chamber and the other will soon 
consider additional funding for FEMA--much-needed funding. I will 
support a robust package for FEMA because the agency is strained and it 
is working hard to help people all over this country and out in the 
Atlantic.
  But to say that this is not good enough, so instead we will do 
nothing is just unacceptable.
  I urge my colleagues to reconsider because I think it is important 
that we send a message of national unity to help those who are hurting. 
If we can do more in the future, we will and we should.
  So, Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would just thank all of my colleagues 
that understand how urgent this situation is, how much pain and 
suffering are being experienced in these communities, and I ask them 
respectfully to please support this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for the Committee on Ways and Means 
has expired.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we have all seen the terrible tragedy and suffering from 
Harvey, Irma, and Maria. We have seen the shattered homes, and we have 
seen the shattered lives. I have been to Houston and my native Texas to 
visit with a number of the victims.
  There are many tragedies, Mr. Speaker, out of these hurricanes and 
flooding, but one of the tragedies--one of the tragedies--is that in 
Harris County, where Houston is, 80 percent of the homes that were 
flooded didn't have flood insurance.
  Now, why didn't they have flood insurance, Mr. Speaker?
  I believe one of the reasons is because we have a government monopoly 
called the National Flood Insurance Program. Many people don't even 
know of its existence. Many people think they were safe because they 
were 3 feet outside of the government designated 100-year floodplain. 
Many thought that somehow this was simply rolled into their homeowners' 
insurance policy, but it wasn't.
  So, Mr. Speaker, we have an opportunity to make sure that people have 
more affordable options for flood insurance.
  Wouldn't it be wonderful that for every time you saw a life insurance 
commercial or an auto insurance commercial, you saw something about 
flood insurance to help educate the American people about the need for 
this basic insurance policy?
  We could see the savings occur as people rolled this into their 
homeowners' policy.
  In the very small portion of the market, Mr. Speaker, where there is 
competition, people are saving not just hundreds of dollars, but 
thousands of dollars.
  We have heard from the Megoulas family in Pennsylvania: ``NFIP 
insurance would have cost me $2,700 a year, but I was able to find 
private coverage for only $718. . . .''
  We heard from the Cyr family, also of Pennsylvania: ``I have 
benefited from switching to private market flood insurance from FEMA. I 
save about $1,000 per year.''
  So, Mr. Speaker, there is a piece of legislation known as the Flood 
Insurance Market Parity and Modernization Act, also known as Ross-
Castor. I want to thank my colleague from Florida (Mr. Ross) for his 
leadership on this issue. It is very simple. It simply clarifies 
congressional intent that people ought to have more options.
  In particular, Mr. Speaker, as people begin to rebuild after these 
hurricanes, they need better options for flood insurance, particularly 
with the NFIP $30 billion in debt, facing another bailout, and facing 
an uncertain future. Now we need to take care of that.
  That is why I have proposed, along with Chairman Duffy, a 5-year, 
long-term reauthorization. We are currently operating under a temporary 
90-day authorization. But as we do, let's work on something that we can 
all agree on. The last time this bill came up in the House, Mr. 
Speaker, 419-0. It has recently come out of the Financial Services 
Committee 58-0.
  I am not sure you can get that kind of vote tally for a Mother's Day 
resolution. It is bipartisan. It is the very definition of bipartisan.
  So let's take one important step today to help the victims of Harvey, 
Irma, and Maria as they begin to rebuild their homes, to have more 
flood insurance options, more affordable insurance options. As we work 
through what we might disagree on in the NFIP authorization, let's pass 
today what we can agree on and help the victims today.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this bill, which began as 
a must-pass reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration but 
has now become a Christmas tree for unrelated Republican priorities.
  Puerto Rico is on the brink of a humanitarian crisis following 
Hurricane Maria that is being exacerbated by Trump's and Congress' 
failure to adequately respond. Tens of thousands in Texas and Florida 
are just beginning to pick up the pieces following Hurricanes Harvey 
and Irma. Yet, other than the small initial down payment of disaster 
aid we passed--which I might add Chairman Hensarling voted against--
Congress has yet to pass a single policy reform that will actually 
improve the lives of any of those who found themselves in harm's way.

[[Page 15145]]

  This is the first time in this Congress that we are debating a flood 
insurance policy change on the House floor. However, this is not a 
policy change that would address the resilience of the Flood Insurance 
Program, help families to recover, or improve our country's response to 
natural disasters. No. The Republican response to the catastrophic 
storms of these last 2 months is to muscle through the expansion of 
private flood insurance, which has long been sought by the insurance 
industry.
  Now, let me be clear. I don't oppose this policy. I voted for it last 
Congress and I voted for it when we marked it up in committee this 
year. But moving this bill at this time, while ignoring all the other 
policy responses needed but the Flood Insurance Program and the ongoing 
natural disasters in our country, is simply irresponsible.
  The NFIP will expire on December 8 of this year, and we still lack a 
credible plan to ensure that it is reauthorized for the long term. 
Therefore, I will oppose any and all efforts to break apart the debate 
on substantive reforms to the NFIP from the reauthorization debate we 
should so desperately be having.
  The bill before us today does absolutely nothing to address the 
stability of the NFIP, which is in jeopardy following a devastating 
series of catastrophic hurricanes across several States and U.S. 
territories. We know that we will need to increase the NFIP's borrowing 
authority so that policyholders from Harvey, Irma, and Maria can be 
made whole, but the chairman has no plan to deal with the debt, 
frequently telling those of us who have urged him to consider debt 
forgiveness to just forget about that idea.
  I have long called for Congress to forgive NFIP's debt, particularly 
because of the unsustainable burden placed on policyholders paying 
hundreds of millions of dollars a year just on the interest for the 
government to pay itself back. Flood insurance is already unaffordable.
  So why are we continuing to make it worse by saddling policyholders 
with interest on a debt that will never be repaid?
  We need thoughtful, comprehensive solutions to a long-term 
reauthorization that addresses the debt, affordability, mapping, and 
mitigation. That is not what we have before us today.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Ross), who is the author of the bipartisan Flood Insurance 
Market Parity and Modernization Act, which passed this body in the last 
Congress 419-0. He is the vice chairman of the Housing and Insurance 
Subcommittee and the real leader for affordable private flood 
insurance.
  Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his leadership.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Disaster Tax Relief and Airport 
and Airway Extension Act of 2017, and I urge my colleagues to vote in 
favor of this desperately needed legislation.
  Included in this bill are two provisions that are particularly 
important to my constituents in central Florida. One is tax relief for 
families and small businesses recovering from the destruction of 
Hurricanes Harvey, Maria, and Irma. The other is language taken from my 
legislation, the Private Flood Insurance Market Development Act, which 
will allow private sector insurers to compete with the National Flood 
Insurance Program.
  The catastrophic impact of the three major hurricanes is 
heartbreaking and tragic. However, it has been inspiring to witness the 
outpouring of charity and goodwill from our communities in response.
  Now it is time for this Congress to rise to the occasion. The tax 
relief for disaster victims in this legislation is a great first step.
  This bill will help individuals in the disaster areas keep their 
jobs, support retirement savers paying for recovery, encourage 
charitable contributions to help victims, and put more money in the 
pockets of families trying to get their lives back on track after 
having lost everything.
  To deny our constituents this relief because it is not enough is 
simply irresponsible. To be sure, I agree that more aid will likely be 
needed.
  But is that really a good excuse to do nothing?
  I certainly don't think so.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill isn't just about providing immediate relief. 
Thankfully, it also provides some measure of long-term relief to 
communities vulnerable to floods--the most costly of all natural 
disasters.
  Thanks to the inclusion of my legislation, H.R. 1422, this bill will 
provide consumers with more options and lower costs in the flood 
insurance marketplace as well as help to reduce the unacceptable number 
of homes not insured for flood losses.
  Last Congress, this House passed nearly identical legislation by a 
vote of 419-0. That is why I was so disheartened to hear some 
characterize this reform as a long-time Republican priority. This isn't 
a Republican priority, and it is not a Democratic priority. This is a 
national priority.
  The NFIP is more than $25 billion in debt and runs an annual deficit 
of $1.4 billion. Folks, this is an insurance company on the brink of 
being unable to pay out claims to policyholders without another 
taxpayer bailout.
  The NFIP desperately needs to off-load some of its risk, and we can 
help by allowing the private sector to do what it does best: compete 
for customers by offering better service, lower prices, and more 
comprehensive coverage.
  I understand some of my colleagues think competition will destabilize 
the NFIP. First, we need to be clear that the NFIP in its current state 
is beleaguered, it is not stable, and it is not sustainable. Reforms 
must be made.
  Second, I would urge my colleagues to recognize that by forcing 
nearly all of the flood risk in this Nation into a single, government-
run insurance program, we contribute to the NFIP's bloated and unstable 
risk portfolio.

                              {time}  1830

  So the NFIP needs some help, and consumers need competition. More 
coverage options will help make flood insurance an attractive 
investment for everyone, thereby reducing the number of uninsured 
homes.
  With the NFIP alone, our constituents are severely limited. For 
example, an NFIP policy only covers up to $250,000 of damages.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 15 
seconds.
  Mr. ROSS. In addition, NFIP policies do not cover homeowners 
displaced by living expenses.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation has an untold number of supporters. I 
include in the Record a letter from 15 major insurance, housing, 
banking, and trade associations in support of the private flood 
insurance provisions in H.R. 3823.

                                               September 26, 2017.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker, House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Democratic Leader, House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Leader Pelosi: The undersigned trades 
     and organizations strongly support the ``Development of a 
     Private Flood Insurance Market'' title of H.R. 3823, the 
     Disaster Tax Relief and Airport and Airway Extension Act of 
     2017. This package includes bipartisan, clarifying language, 
     introduced by Representative Dennis A. Ross (FL-15) and 
     Representative Kathy Castor (FL-14), to increase acceptance 
     of private flood insurance products. This will increase flood 
     insurance options for consumers, thereby providing more 
     competition and coverage options to families and businesses.
       The Ross-Castor language passed the House last year by a 
     vote of 419-0, and it was ordered reported out of the House 
     Financial Services Committee in June by a vote of 58-0. The 
     bipartisan fix clarifies what is already in federal law 
     (following the passage of the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance 
     Reform Act of 2012 and reinforced in the Homeowners Flood 
     Insurance Affordability Act of 2014) intended by Congress to 
     allow lenders to accept private flood insurance in lieu of 
     federal coverage to satisfy the mandatory purchase 
     requirement.
       The undersigned trades and organizations strongly support 
     inclusion of the bipartisan Ross-Castor language in the 
     Disaster Tax Relief and Airport and Airway Extension Act of 
     2017 that allows consumers the choice of government or 
     private flood insurance coverage. We ask for you to vote in 
     favor of this

[[Page 15146]]

     important legislative package when it is considered by the 
     House of Representatives.
           Sincerely,
       Property Casualty Insurers Association of America (PCI)
       Reinsurance Association of America (RAA)
       National Multifamily Housing Council (NMHC)
       National Apartment Association (NAA)
       American Bankers Association (ABA)
       Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers (CIAB)
       American Insurance Association (AIA)
       National Association of REALTORS (NAR)
       National Association of Professional Insurance Agents (PIA)
       Financial Services Roundtable (FSR)
       Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America (Big 
     ``I'')
       Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA)
       National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC)
       Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA)
       National Association of Federally-Insured Credit Unions 
     (NAFCU).

  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. David Scott), a senior member of the 
Financial Services Committee.
  Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, let me start off by letting 
the America people know fully why we Democrats on this side of the 
aisle are opposed to this bill.
  Nobody has worked as hard as Democrats on this bill, Mr. Speaker, but 
the reason we object to it is that the flood insurance part of this 
bill was a result of cherry-picking items that they wanted. The 
American people deserve better than that. Then they attach it to an FAA 
bill with a 6-month extension. That is no way to treat the issues that 
we have today.
  All you have got to do is click on the television and look at what is 
happening to American citizens in Puerto Rico, Florida, Texas. And you 
are going to put something where they cherry-picked this together to 
solve this particular problem?
  There is no sense of urgency here, Mr. Speaker.
  Another reason is that, unlike all of our other disaster tax credit 
relief packages, every time we have had an expansion added to the bill, 
we expanded these tax credits for low-income people, expanded the tax 
credits for the new markets area for people to immediately come in and 
invest. Not in this bill. There is no expansion in this bill.
  My friends over there talk about bipartisanship. My middle name is 
bipartisanship. There is nobody on that committee who works harder for 
bipartisanship than David Scott.
  But the one piece of bipartisanship--our amendment that I worked 
feverishly on with the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy), in which 
we were able to address the issue of the penalties of expense on those 
poor people who chose to have their monthly installments there and not 
be punished for it.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman 
an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia. We worked together on that and cut that 
cost in half. That one bipartisan piece of endeavor in our Financial 
Services Committee is not even included in this bill. That is why we 
are opposed to it.
  Let's treat the American people the way they deserve. There is no 
better time. You are talking about expanding the help. Our people, 
American citizens in Puerto Rico, Florida, and Texas, deserve for us to 
have a complete flood insurance program, not piecemeal.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the ranking member of the 
Energy and Commerce Committee.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose H.R. 3823.
  First, I would like to mention I have deep concerns over Republicans' 
failure to extend vital healthcare programs that expire this Saturday, 
including important bipartisan programs like CHIP, Community Health 
Centers, and the National Health Service Corps. If we fail to act, 
access to affordable and quality care for children and vulnerable 
populations nationwide will be jeopardized.
  However, I want to focus on another issue that is extremely important 
to my constituents: flood insurance.
  This bill would undermine efforts to comprehensively reform the 
National Flood Insurance Program by allowing the development of a 
private flood insurance market while not confronting challenges to 
NFIP, like increasing affordability, investing in mitigation, and 
ensuring transparency and accountability. It would not even reauthorize 
the flood insurance program, which is due to expire on December 8; or 
raise its borrowing authority, which is due to run out in the coming 
weeks and could impact claims from Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria.
  When Superstorm Sandy devastated New Jersey 5 years ago, some of the 
hardest hit communities were in my district, and the NFIP did not help 
them the way it should have. Too many of my constituents are still 
dealing with high premiums, inaccurate flood maps, or still waiting for 
their Sandy claims appeals to be decided.
  That is why I helped introduce the bipartisan SAFE NFIP 
Reauthorization Act, which would reauthorize the program, cap premium 
rate increases, authorize funding for more flood mapping, reform the 
appeals process, and cap the compensation of flood insurance companies. 
These are changes that we must pursue. The legislation we consider does 
none of this.
  Mr. Speaker, we should be working together to comprehensively improve 
the NFIP. Doing anything less is an abdication of our responsibility. I 
encourage all of my colleagues to oppose this legislation and work 
towards meaningful flood insurance reform.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of 
my time to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves), a true expert on 
flood insurance issues.
  Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot of talk during this discussion 
about the flood insurance program, about making sure we are providing 
for the hurricane victims. There is talk about the FAA.
  Let me be clear: we support the FAA. We support making sure that we 
provide all the resources necessary for the hurricane victims, from 
Hurricanes Irma, Harvey, and Maria. Where things are getting distorted 
is that this bill includes extraneous provisions that will actually 
undermine these very objectives.
  I want to explain.
  Under the legislation that has been attached--the flood insurance 
legislation--it does allow private insurers to come in, which all of us 
support, but not in a vacuum. What is going to happen when you do this 
in a vacuum is that you are going to cause premiums to be diverted from 
the program.
  This is the program where these people have been paying premiums for 
years, and the program is not going to have the resources to pay their 
claims, which means it is going to have to borrow more money, which is 
going to make the premiums go up even greater.
  You are going to see the private insurers come in and cherry-pick 
low- and moderate-risk policies, which is only going to leave the high-
risk policies in the program trying to pay a debt and not having a 
diverse portfolio of low-, moderate-, and high-risk policies.
  This is a flawed approach. It needs to be addressed on December 9, 
when this current program expires. We should be addressing this 
holistically.
  I want to say it again. Those of you who have hurricane victims are 
undermining their very recovery by supporting this legislation.
  One of the other major flaws is this, Mr. Speaker. This shows 
flooding in Louisiana last year, flooding in Texas this year.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the

[[Page 15147]]

gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy), chairman of the Housing and 
Insurance Subcommittee and a leader on flood insurance in the House 
today.
  Mr. DUFFY. Mr. Speaker, I want to take a moment and thank Ms. Castor 
and Mr. Ross for their hard work on this legislation.
  There are some here in this body who have said: if we let free 
markets into the National Flood Insurance Program that is run by the 
Federal Government, you are going to undermine the premiums that come 
into the national flood insurance pool.
  It is $25 billion in debt and is structured in a way where premiums 
can't rise. This doesn't undermine the program.
  What we are doing is saying: Listen, if you are in the National Flood 
Insurance Program right now, the way it is structured, there is only 
one place you can buy insurance. But this is a provision that will open 
up the market and let private companies come in and offer families 
better policies at better prices. If they don't, you can stay in the 
NFIP. You don't have to go private. You can stay government. But you 
give people a choice.
  It is like saying: Listen, you have to keep the United States Postal 
Service as your one carrier. You can't have FedEx or UPS. You don't get 
those choices.
  People want a choice. In Houston, instead of having only 20 percent 
of the people who had coverage, you might have had 40, 50, or 60 
percent of the people who would have had coverage. More people would 
have had protection.
  I have got to tell you, I am disappointed in the partisanship.
  I am going to quote a person I rarely quote, but a person I truly 
like. She once said in the process of this bill: ``This is an example 
of real compromise.''
  Then, on the substance of the bill, this fine woman from California 
said: ``We can have the opportunity for our constituents to have some 
choice. I think that is real compromise, that is substantive 
compromise, that is meaningful compromise, and that is the kind of 
compromise that reasonable people can engage in.''
  Mr. Speaker, that was the gentlewoman from California, who is now in 
opposition to this bill.
  When this came up by itself--the same bill--last Congress, everyone 
voted for it. When it came up in committee, everyone voted for it. 
Democrats and Republicans voted for this bill because they knew that it 
was going to offer more choice and better prices to American families. 
That is why it was bipartisan.
  I think this is a moment where our Congress can stand together on 
behalf of the American people who don't have flood insurance, who don't 
have a reasonably priced policy. Let's stand with them today and pass 
the Ross-Castor bill. By the way, Ross and Castor are both from 
Florida. Two Florida Members, Republican and Democrat, came together.
  Let's get it done, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in support of H.R. 
3823, the Disaster Tax and Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2017.
  Hurricane Harvey flooded the Houston region with 21 trillion gallons 
of water causing tragic and catastrophic results in my district.
  Hurricane Harvey destroyed 185 thousand homes in the Houston region, 
displacing my constituents and harming their livelihoods.
  Hurricane Harvey has created an incredible need for enhanced 
assistance in rebuilding efforts.
  My principal focus is to do what is best for my constituents and that 
is why I support the underlying bill.
  H.R. 3823 grants individuals and businesses in areas affected by 
hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria a tax relief in addition to 
extending the authorization for the Federal Aviation Administration 
(FAA) through March 31, 2018, without privatization of air-traffic 
control.
  Although I support clean reauthorization of the FAA, which is long 
overdue as a result of the inability of those responsible to craft 
legislation that obtains bipartisan majority support, I do not support 
the attached partisan package of extraneous provisions added to the 
reauthorization.
  I also do not support a reauthorization of the FAA that would 
privatize air-traffic control.
  My Democratic colleagues had 21 tax relief provisions to add to the 
reauthorization.
  H.R. 3823 only contains 7 of those provisions; however, they are very 
important hurricane relief provisions.
  On health care, H.R. 3823 extends just three of the many programs set 
to expire at the end of the month, leaving out bipartisan priorities 
like CHIP and Community Health Centers extenders.
  Additionally, the tax provisions concerning disaster victims were 
assembled without bipartisan input and leave out important items that 
were included for victims of prior disasters like Hurricane Katrina.
  And finally, this bill blocks the path for any DREAMers legislation 
to be considered.
  Going forward, I would like to see the items just mentioned to be 
added to the reauthorization bill.
  H.R. 3823 would provide tax credits, deductions, and other relief to 
taxpayers in disaster areas affected by hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and 
Maria.
  Most measures would apply to taxpayers in parts of Florida, Puerto 
Rico, Texas, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, where the president declared 
a major disaster zone warranting federal assistance as of Sept. 21.
  The budget effects of the tax provisions would be considered 
emergency spending for budgetary purposes and not count against the 
spending caps.
  The provisions are similar to relief provided after hurricanes 
Katrina, Rita, and Wilma.
  The measure specifically helps hurricane victims keep more of their 
paycheck, deduct more of the cost of their expensive property damage, 
and have more affordable and immediate access to money they have saved 
for their retirement.
  The legislation will also encourage even more Americans to donate 
generously to help those in need.
  The bill would waive the 10 percent penalty on early distributions 
from retirement accounts for taxpayers in affected areas.
  Individuals would be eligible to make the withdrawal if their primary 
residence was in one of the disaster areas as of the date of the storm 
and they sustained an economic loss.
  The withdrawn amount would be included in the taxpayer's gross 
income, and would be spread over three years unless the taxpayer opted 
to claim it in a single year.
  If the taxpayer repaid the distribution within three years, it would 
be considered a rollover for tax purposes and they could claim a refund 
for their previous income tax payments.
  The withdrawal would have to occur by Jan. 1, 2019, and wouldn't be 
subject to withholding.
  An individual could withdraw as much as $100,000 as hurricane 
distributions over their lifetime.
  Plan sponsors would not be in violation of the Internal Revenue 
Service's retirement plan rules unless they distributed more than 
$100,000 to an individual.
  Individuals could return withdrawals they had made for a home 
purchase in a disaster area between Feb. 28 and Sept. 21 if the home 
wasn't purchased or constructed because of the hurricanes.
  The bill would increase the size of a loan an individual can take 
from their employer retirement fund. Loans could be for as much as 
$100,000--less other outstanding loans--or half the present value of 
the vested balance of the plan.
  The bill would delay repayment deadlines for individuals with 
outstanding loans as of the date of the disaster.
  The repayment date for loans due on or before Dec. 31, 2018, would be 
delayed for one year.
  Individuals who took out loans after the hurricanes would not receive 
the extension.
  The bill would create a credit for businesses that were rendered 
inoperable by the hurricanes but that retained their employees.
  Employers could receive a credit for 40 percent of each employee's 
wages.
  The credit amount couldn't exceed $6,000 per employee.
  The employee's principal place of employment would have to be in one 
of the disaster zones.
  Businesses would receive credits for wages on each day they were 
inoperable after the date of the hurricane and before Jan. 1, 2018.
  The credit would be for wages paid each day until significant 
operations resumed, even if the employee returned to work or worked at 
a different location.
  The limit on the deduction for contributions to charitable 
organizations would be suspended for donations made between Aug. 23 and 
Dec. 31 to relief efforts in the hurricane disaster areas.
  Taxpayers wouldn't have to itemize their tax return to claim the 
deduction.

[[Page 15148]]

  The deduction is normally limited to 50 percent of adjusted gross 
income (AGI) for individuals and 10 percent of taxable income for 
corporations.
  The bill would allow individuals to contribute as much as their AGI, 
less any other charitable contributions.
  Amounts greater than AGI could be carried over to other tax years.
  I would allow corporations to contribute as much as their taxable 
income, less any other charitable contributions.
  Donations in excess of taxable income could be carried over.
  The charitable organization would have to provide written 
confirmation that the funds would be used for relief efforts.
  Partnerships and S corporations would each have to elect the 
deduction.
  The bill would allow taxpayers to deduct uncompensated casualty 
losses related to the hurricane even if their losses didn't meet the 
minimum threshold for the deduction, currently 10 percent of AGI. The 
deduction would be net of any personal casualty gains.
  Taxpayers wouldn't have to itemize their return to claim the 
deduction.
  The taxpayer's standard deduction would be increased by the net 
disaster loss, including for purposes of calculating whether they are 
liable for the alternative minimum tax.
  The bill would establish a special rule for determination of the 
Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit.
  If a taxpayer had received one or both of the credits in the previous 
tax year but their earned income was too high to qualify in 2017, they 
could substitute their 2016 income to claim them.
  Individuals would qualify if their principal residence was in the 
hurricane disaster zone, or in the surrounding disaster area and they 
had been displaced by the hurricane.
  Puerto Rican taxpayers' eligibility for the child tax credit would be 
based on their Social Security earnings.
  The child tax credit is only available to Puerto Rican families with 
three or more children.
  The EITC is not typically available to residents of Puerto Rico, 
according to a report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
  The bill would direct the Treasury Department to provide funding to 
the government of Puerto Rico for the estimated amount of tax relief 
for residents who would be eligible under the bill.
  The Puerto Rican government would have to promptly distribute the 
funds.
  Puerto Rico would have to have a plan for disbursing the funds 
approved by the Treasury before the money would be provided.
  The Treasury Department would reimburse the U.S. Virgin Islands, 
which has a ``mirror'' tax system, for any reduction in tax revenue 
caused by the bill.
  Residents of the U.S. Virgin Islands are also generally ineligible 
for the EITC but can claim the child tax credit, according to CRS.
  For the reasons mentioned above I support H.R. 3823.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 538, the previous question is ordered on 
the bill, as amended.
  Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further consideration of H.R. 
3823 is postponed.

                          ____________________