This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code by changing a single numeric phrase in section 165(d): it strikes “90 percent” and inserts “100 percent.” The operative effect is to expand the portion of wagering losses that the statute treats in the specified way by ten percentage points.
Though narrowly drafted, the revision affects how taxpayers with gambling winnings and losses compute their federal tax positions, how preparers and tax software calculate offsets, and how the IRS will administer and audit wagering-related claims. The change is administratively simple on its face but raises practical questions about substantiation, revenue impact, and classification of gambling activity for tax purposes.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill replaces the phrase “90 percent” with “100 percent” in Internal Revenue Code section 165(d). That numeric substitution increases the statutory share available under the wagering-loss provision by ten percentage points.
Who It Affects
Individual taxpayers who report wagering gains and losses, tax preparers and software vendors that compute gambling-related offsets, and IRS compliance units that audit wagering claims will be directly affected. Professional gamblers whose tax treatment already differs from casual bettors should reassess reporting strategies.
Why It Matters
A small textual change can shift taxable outcomes for a population that files frequent, high-dollar wagering claims and can require immediate updates to tax forms, instructions, and preparation systems. It also changes a narrow fairness and enforcement balance between allowing loss offsets and preserving the integrity of deductions.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill is a surgical amendment: it modifies section 165(d) of the Internal Revenue Code by substituting “100 percent” for “90 percent.” There are no other substantive language changes in the bill text. That single-line edit alters the statutory percentage that governs how a particular wagering-loss rule is applied.
Practically, taxpayers who report gambling activity will see a change in the arithmetic used when computing their wagering-related tax positions. Because the statute’s numeric rule increases by ten percentage points, taxpayers who previously could not count a portion of their losses under the statute will be able to include a larger share.
The text of the bill does not change reporting thresholds, recordkeeping standards, or forms; the underlying documentation and substantiation requirements in the tax code and Treasury regulations therefore remain in force unless separately amended.The bill leaves open implementation tasks for the Treasury and the IRS. They will need to update IRS guidance, instructions, and tax-software specifications to reflect the new percentage, and they may issue interpretive guidance explaining how the change interacts with existing reporting mechanisms (for example, W-2G reporting and the treatment of betting activity that is reported on Schedule C versus as itemized losses).
Because the bill does not include transition language, the agencies will also need to clarify whether the change applies to returns for the year of enactment and how to treat amended returns.Although narrow, the amendment has downstream effects on compliance and tax planning. Tax preparers and software vendors must adjust calculations; taxpayers and advisers may revisit whether to treat wagering activity as business income or as the kind of activity governed by section 165(d); and IRS audit priorities around wagering deductions may shift if the change materially alters aggregate deductions claimed by taxpayers.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill amends only Internal Revenue Code §165(d) by replacing the phrase “90 percent” with “100 percent.”, The statutory change is numeric and singular—no other subsections, recordkeeping, or reporting provisions are altered in the bill text.
The measure contains no explicit effective-date or transition provisions; it does not specify retroactivity or year-by-year application.
Introduced July 7, 2025 by Rep. Dina Titus (with Rep. Ro Khanna listed as a cosponsor in the bill text), the amendment is narrowly targeted.
The change increases the allowable statutory share for wagering-loss treatment by ten percentage points, requiring immediate updates to tax-preparation logic, IRS guidance, and potentially W-2G/tax form instructions.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Provides the Act’s short title: the “Fair Accounting for Income Realized from Betting Earnings Taxation Act” or “FAIR Bet Act.” This is a caption-only provision and carries no substantive tax rule. Titles are useful for reference but do not affect statutory interpretation.
Numeric amendment to Internal Revenue Code §165(d)
Per the bill text, Section 2 instructs a precise amendment to section 165(d) by striking “90 percent” and inserting “100 percent.” Practically that means the statutory percentage referenced in section 165(d) increases; the bill does not change surrounding text, definitions, or cross-references. Because the amendment is isolated, other statutory constraints and requirements cited elsewhere in the Code remain unchanged.
Implementation, forms and guidance consequences
Although the bill contains only a textual substitution, Treasury and IRS staff will need to revise internal guidance, taxpayer publications, and software specifications to reflect the new figure. The absence of transition language places the onus on those agencies to clarify timing for the change, treatment of prior-year returns, and consequences for audits—questions that typically get resolved through administrative guidance rather than statute. Because the bill does not alter substantiation standards, enforcement and documentation rules will remain anchored in existing law and regulation unless separately changed.
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
- Individual taxpayers with substantial wagering losses: They gain a larger statutory share they can use when positioning wagering losses against winnings, which can reduce taxable income for those who itemize and otherwise meet the law’s requirements.
- Tax preparers and advisers specializing in wagering and high-frequency bettors: They can advise clients about potentially larger allowable offsets and will benefit from demand for updated planning and amended-return work.
- Tax-software vendors: Vendors receive a clear, single-line rule change that simplifies a software update (a numeric substitution), giving them an opportunity to capture market share by rapidly delivering compliant tools.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal Treasury (potential revenue exposure): Expanding allowable loss recognition generally reduces taxable income for affected filers and could lower federal receipts in the aggregate, depending on taxpayer behavior.
- IRS compliance and exam units: The agency will need to adjust guidance and may face increased workloads to audit or verify larger wagering-loss claims without new statutory substantiation rules.
- Tax-preparation operations and small preparers: They must update systems, training, and checklists to ensure accurate calculation and to avoid malpractice exposure during the first filing cycles after enactment.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between equitable recognition of actual betting losses and the risk that a more generous statutory allowance—without concurrent stronger substantiation or transition rules—will create openings for overstatement, complicate enforcement, and produce revenue leakage; the bill resolves the fairness side by expanding the allowed share but leaves enforcement and fiscal safeguards to administrative action.
The amendment is narrowly drafted but creates a set of practical trade-offs. First, increasing the allowable percentage without changing substantiation standards may incentivize more aggressive loss claims; taxpayers can only benefit from the change if they can document losses to the IRS’s satisfaction, but higher allowable amounts raise the stakes for audit and enforcement.
Second, the bill’s silence on effective dates or transitions forces administrative agencies to decide retroactivity, amendment filing procedures, and handling of returns in the year of enactment—areas that commonly generate taxpayer confusion and litigation if left unresolved.
A related complication is interaction with the tax treatment of professional gamblers. Some wagering activity is reported as a business on Schedule C and receives different treatment than losses governed by section 165(d).
By enlarging the statutory figure within 165(d), the measure could alter incentives around classification of gambling activity and spur planning to shift reporting method or entity structure. Finally, the fiscal impact is uncertain: while the change likely increases deductions claimed, the extent depends on taxpayer behavior, audit outcomes, and whether the IRS tightens enforcement or issues clarifying rules that limit opportunistic claims.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.