The bill adds a new section 45BB to the Internal Revenue Code that provides a nonrefundable credit equal to 25% of qualifying translational research expenses for neurodegenerative diseases and psychiatric conditions. The credit is subject to an annual national aggregate cap allocated by the Treasury Secretary (in consultation with HHS, FDA, and NIH) and can be transferred by tax‑exempt entities to identified project partners.
This is a targeted fiscal incentive to accelerate late‑stage, clinical‑oriented research and commercialization in central nervous system fields. It changes the subsidy landscape by permitting monetization of credits for nonprofit and governmental research players, creating an administratively complex allocation process and new compliance interactions with the existing R&D credit (section 41) and deduction rules (section 280C).
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates a translational research tax credit equal to 25% of qualifying expenses for work on neurodegenerative diseases and psychiatric conditions; Treasury allocates a fixed pool of credits each year and will issue implementing regulations with scientific criteria. The credit cannot be double‑counted under the section 41 R&D credit, and taxpayers lose a corresponding deduction under section 280C for amounts claimed.
Who It Affects
Research universities, 501(c)(3) medical nonprofits, state and local public research entities, biotechnology and medical device firms that partner with those entities, and tax advisors structuring credit transfers and compliance. Federal agencies (Treasury, HHS, FDA, NIH) must coordinate to run the allocation and rulemaking process.
Why It Matters
It channels federal tax relief toward translational (bench‑to‑clinic) projects and encourages public‑private collaboration by allowing nonprofits and governments to transfer credits to private partners — a structural shift in how tax policy can directly finance clinical development for CNS disorders.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The new section creates a 25% tax credit for amounts a taxpayer pays or incurs that are “necessary for translational research” focused on neurodegenerative diseases and psychiatric conditions. The statute places an aggregate, year‑by‑year dollar cap on available credits and directs the Secretary — acting under Treasury tax authority but required to consult HHS, FDA, and NIH — to allocate that pool among applicants using criteria established in regulation.
Regulations must prioritize scientific merit, cover all phases of the research continuum, emphasize CNS therapeutics and devices, set standards for repurposing existing drugs and devices, and set rules for public‑private partnerships and shared intellectual property when tax‑exempt entities are involved.
Tax‑exempt entities (federal/state/tribal/local governments and section 501(c)(3) organizations) may elect to treat an identified “eligible project partner” as the taxpayer for the credit, effectively transferring the tax benefit to private or other partners who performed or funded the work. For partnership structures, special rules treat partners’ distributive shares as the tax‑exempt entity’s share for the election, and the credit is taken into account in the first taxable year of the partner ending with or after the tax‑exempt entity’s taxable year.To avoid double subsidies, expenses claimed under this new credit generally cannot be used to claim the section 41 credit for the same year, although those expenses can count when computing the section 41 base period for future R&D credit calculations.
The bill also amends section 280C so taxpayers must reduce deductions by the portion of expenses equal to the credit claimed. The statutory credit schedule enumerates aggregate limits for 2026–2031; the provision authorizes credits through taxable years beginning on or before December 31, 2035, and the bill’s effective date is enactment.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The credit equals 25% of qualifying translational research expenses for neurodegenerative and psychiatric conditions (new IRC section 45BB).
Congress sets a national pool with annual caps: $1 billion (2026), $2 billion (2027–2030) and $1 billion (2031); Treasury must allocate those amounts to selected applicants.
Tax‑exempt entities (governments and 501(c)(3) organizations) can elect to have an identified eligible project partner treated as the taxpayer, letting nonprofits monetize credits via partners.
Expenses used to claim this credit may not be used simultaneously to claim the section 41 R&D credit for the same taxable year, but they may be included when computing section 41 base‑period research for later years.
The bill disallows a deduction equal to the amount of the credit under section 280C and sets an overall termination such that no credit is allowed for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2035.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Names the statute the Mental Health Research Accelerator Act of 2025. This is purely stylistic but signals congressional intent that the measure target acceleration of translational work in mental health and neurodegeneration.
25% translational research credit
Adds a nonrefundable credit equal to 25% of amounts paid or incurred that are “necessary for translational research” addressing neurodegenerative diseases and psychiatric conditions. Practically, taxpayers will need to document how expenses meet the statute’s 'necessary for' translational research standard once Treasury issues guidance; absent regulatory definition, taxpayers face interpretive risk in qualifying activities and cost allocation.
Per‑taxpayer and national aggregate caps with Treasury allocation
Imposes a per‑taxpayer ceiling tied to an allocation from an annual national pool. The statute lists dollar pools for calendar years 2026–2031 and directs the Secretary to allocate funds among selected applicants 'as expeditiously as possible' based on criteria in regulation. The Secretary must consult HHS, FDA, and NIH when crafting rules; the provision thereby creates a cross‑agency selection process and a competitive application regime rather than an open‑eligibility tax credit.
Elective transfer of credits by tax‑exempt entities to project partners
Allows qualifying tax‑exempt entities to elect to have an identified 'eligible project partner' treated as the taxpayer for all or part of the credit. The provision defines eligible partners as those listed on the allocation application and participating in or funding the research. For partnerships, partners' distributive shares can be treated as the tax‑exempt entity’s share. This creates a mechanism for nonprofits and public entities to monetize tax benefits by routing them to private developers, but it also requires administrative tracking of elections and timing rules for when the partner may take the credit.
No double‑dipping with the R&D credit; base‑period treatment
Prohibits using the same expenses to claim the section 41 credit for the same taxable year, preventing double subsidization. However, expenses claimed here that are qualifying section 41 expenses may be used when determining base period research expenses for later application of section 41, which affects future R&D credit calculations — a subtle interaction that can influence multiyear R&D planning.
Deduction disallowance, general business credit inclusion, termination, and effective date
Amends section 280C to disallow deductions equal to the claimed credit amount, requires the new credit to be part of the general business credit (section 38), sets a statutory termination so credits are unavailable for taxable years beginning after Dec 31, 2035, and makes the changes effective on enactment. These provisions integrate the new credit into the current tax framework and reduce the net subsidy by eliminating an associated deduction for claimed amounts.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Finance across all five countries.
Explore Finance in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- 501(c)(3) research hospitals and universities — can monetize credits by electing eligible partners, lowering the after‑tax cost of late‑stage translational work or attracting private development partners.
- Biotechnology and medical device firms focused on CNS disorders — receive subsidized development when partnering with eligible tax‑exempt entities and may obtain credits via transfer elections to reduce project costs.
- Public research entities and state programs — gains a new vehicle to incentivize local translational projects without direct appropriations, via credit allocation and partnerships.
- Patients and clinical investigators — stand to benefit from an accelerated pipeline for therapeutics and devices targeting neurodegenerative and psychiatric conditions if the credit shifts projects into late‑stage trials.
Who Bears the Cost
- U.S. Treasury (tax expenditure) and federal budget — bears the fiscal cost of the credit within the annual aggregate caps and must build administrative processes to allocate, monitor, and audit awards.
- Tax advisors and compliance teams — face new administrative burdens and documentation requirements to support qualification, allocation applications, transfer elections, and section 41 interactions.
- Private companies partnering with nonprofits — must negotiate IP and revenue arrangements that account for transferred credits and possible IP‑sharing priorities in the allocation criteria, which could constrain deal terms.
- Smaller nonprofits and smaller biotech firms — may face competitive disadvantage if allocation processes favor established institutions with grant‑writing and regulatory sophistication, raising distributional concerns.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill tries to do two things at once: accelerate high‑cost, late‑stage translational work by subsidizing private development through a tax mechanism, while steering public benefit via regulatory criteria and IP‑sharing priorities; those aims conflict because maximizing private incentives to commercialize often requires exclusive IP and predictable returns, whereas maximizing public benefit favors openness and shared rights — the statute gives regulators the hard job of balancing those opposing incentives.
The statute leaves several operationally significant choices to Treasury rulemaking and interagency consultation, creating room for delay or uneven implementation. The allocation regime converts a tax credit into a quasi‑competitive grant: Treasury must define application procedures, merit‑review standards, allowable expense documentation, and how to weight collaboration and IP‑sharing.
That design pushes much of the program’s substance into administrative guidance, which will determine whether the credit reaches small investigators or concentrates with large institutions able to navigate the application process.
The bill’s transferability feature helps nonprofits monetize credits but raises practical and policy tensions: private partners will seek favorable IP and revenue terms, while the statute’s preference for IP sharing could reduce private investment incentives if not carefully calibrated. The interplay with section 41 (no double‑claiming but base‑period inclusion) affects long‑range R&D planning and may produce winners and losers depending on timing of expenditures.
Finally, the statute enumerates aggregate caps through 2031 but terminates credits after 2035, leaving 2032–2035 uncapped by the statutory language — a drafting gap that creates uncertainty about funding availability for those years unless regulations or later amendments close it.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.