H.R.5827 combines a new federal price on greenhouse‑gas emissions (the MARKET CHOICE Act) with a large, dedicated trust fund for infrastructure and climate programs (the RISE Trust Fund). The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to tax emissions from combusted fossil fuels, certain industrial processes, and some product uses; it creates a border tax adjustment system; and it channels proceeds into a set of specified accounts and State grants.
Beyond the climate‑and‑infrastructure core, the measure is an omnibus: it increases National Cancer Institute funding, requires a CISA rulemaking on reinforced school doors with grant funding, restricts certain financial instruments for House members, directs new financial‑sector work on human‑trafficking money flows, expands survivor benefits tied to ALS, and includes voting and intelligence review provisions. The package reshapes how revenue is raised, where it flows, and how federal agencies may regulate greenhouse‑gas emissions tied to taxed fuels and products.
At a Glance
What It Does
Imposes an economy‑wide tax on greenhouse‑gas emissions through a new subtitle of the Internal Revenue Code, establishes border tax adjustments for emissions‑intensive imported goods, and deposits most proceeds into a newly created RISE Trust Fund earmarked for highways, airports, climate resilience, research, and State assistance. It also amends the Clean Air Act to limit certain EPA regulatory actions tied to emissions that are subject to the tax, and includes many unrelated titles (health, veterans, schools, voting, and financial safeguards).
Who It Affects
Fuel producers, refiners, natural‑gas processors, industrial facilities with significant process emissions, importers and exporters of emissions‑intensive goods, state transportation agencies and grant recipients, EPA and IRS operational staff, the financial sector (via AML expectations), House Members (trading rules), schools (security standards), and veteran and health beneficiaries.
Why It Matters
This bill moves the federal strategy for reducing emissions from rulemaking toward explicit pricing and revenue recycling, reshaping federal infrastructure funding and regulatory reach. It creates major compliance, reporting, and customs administration obligations and reallocates large revenue streams toward transportation and listed climate programs—an important shift for regulated industries, state governments, and agencies that will implement it.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill adds a new greenhouse‑gas taxation framework to the Internal Revenue Code and a second part creating border tax adjustments for trade‑exposed, emissions‑intensive sectors. Rather than creating emissions caps, it taxes emissions at specified points (domestic production or first entry into the United States) and uses the tax signal plus customs adjustments to try to prevent ‘carbon leakage’—the movement of emissions abroad because of higher domestic costs.
Revenue is routed into a new Rebuilding Infrastructure and Solutions for the Environment (RISE) Trust Fund and then distributed according to statutory percentages to existing trust funds (for example, transportation trust funds), climate and energy R&D, carbon‑removal research and infrastructure, reclamation and remediation programs, and a dedicated slot of funding for State grants targeted at low‑income households. The law also establishes administrative processes: EPA and Treasury rule‑writing authority for emission calculation methods, lists of sectors and products subject to border adjustments, and refund mechanisms for noncombustive uses and sequestration that meet regulatory criteria.The bill also changes how agencies may regulate emissions: it contains a moratorium-style limitation in the Clean Air Act on issuing or enforcing rules that limit emissions 'on the basis of the emission’s greenhouse gas effects' after the taxed point of the fuel or product—while preserving other authorities (for non‑GHG impacts, monitoring, reporting, and certain exceptions).
The moratorium includes trigger provisions tied to multi‑year emissions reports, so statutory exceptions may lift the limitation earlier if emissions targets are missed.Outside the climate pieces, the bill is a multi‑topic vehicle. It directs sizable supplemental appropriations to the National Cancer Institute for cancer research, creates a CISA‑led rulemaking and grant stream to strengthen classroom doors and funds those upgrades via Homeland Security grant authorities, requires steps to increase financial‑sector engagement against human trafficking, imposes new restrictions on some financial instruments owned by House Members, expands a VA dependency benefit related to ALS, and creates short timelines for task forces, commissions, and reports required across several agencies.
Implementation will involve IRS, EPA, Customs and Border Protection, the Department of Transportation, Department of Energy, Department of Veterans Affairs, CISA, and other agencies—and requires coordinated rulemaking and data exchanges between them.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill sets the initial explicit carbon tax at $35 per metric ton of CO2‑equivalent for calendar year 2027 and prescribes an annual escalation formula thereafter tied to a 5‑percentage‑point add and Consumer Price Index increases, with an additional $4/ton increase if biennial emissions tests show targets were exceeded.
It makes Customs and Border Protection responsible for collecting border tax adjustments on imports of covered goods and authorizes rebates to exporters for greenhouse‑gas costs paid in the United States, with exemptions for least‑developed countries and small global emitters.
Seventy‑five percent of amounts collected under the new greenhouse‑gas subtitle are transferred into a RISE Trust Fund; of RISE receipts, 70 percent is statutorily allocated to the Highway Trust Fund for FY2027–FY2036 and 10 percent to State grants.
The KO Cancer title directs annual appropriations to the National Cancer Institute equal to 25 percent of the Institute’s FY2024 appropriation for each fiscal year 2026–2030, on top of existing funding.
The SAFER Schools title requires CISA to convene a rulemaking committee on interior and exterior reinforced doors and authorizes an additional $100 million per year—beginning when the final rule is issued and continuing for nine years—through the State Homeland Security Grant Program for installation.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Taxation of greenhouse‑gas emissions (domestic fuels, processes, product uses)
This section creates a new subtitle in the Internal Revenue Code that taxes greenhouse‑gas emissions from three buckets: combusted fossil fuels, emissions from certain industrial processes, and emissions from specific product uses. It specifies points of taxation (mine mouth, refinery exit, gas processing plant, or point of entry for imports) and delegates to EPA and Treasury the development of methods to calculate taxable emissions and rules for subcategories. Practical implication: companies that produce, refine, process, or import fuels or specified products will have direct tax liabilities at upstream points and must prepare for new reporting, payment, and refund processes administered by Treasury with technical support from EPA.
Border greenhouse‑gas adjustments
The bill establishes a border tax adjustment program to levy equivalent charges on covered imports and rebate taxes for exports from eligible domestic industrial sectors. The Secretary—working with Customs—must publish lists of covered goods and industrial sectors (using NAICS/Harmonized Tariff Schedule concordances) and set administrative rules to measure sector emission intensity, trade intensity, and to address circumvention. For importers and customs brokers this creates a new customs declaration element and potential cash flows at entry.
RISE Trust Fund and revenue distribution
The statute creates the RISE Trust Fund and directs 75 percent of the new tax receipts into it, then prescribes a schedule of appropriations from RISE for programs such as the Highway Trust Fund, Airport and Airway Trust Fund, weatherization, displaced energy worker assistance, carbon removal research, reclamation funds, State grants, and conservation/agriculture programs. The allocations are fixed percentages and create predictable, earmarked flows that will change how Congress and agencies prioritize infrastructure and climate programs.
Clean Air Act amendments and moratorium on certain GHG regulation
The bill adds a Clean Air Act provision that prevents EPA from issuing or enforcing rules to limit emissions 'on the basis of the emission’s greenhouse gas effects' for fuels or emissions that are subject to the new tax—while preserving the agency’s authority to regulate non‑GHG harms, to monitor and require reporting, and to regulate certain named categories. The provision includes deadlines and emission‑based triggers that can terminate the moratorium earlier. Practically, this narrows a regulatory lever EPA has long used and pushes emissions policy toward the tax-and-border framework.
KO Cancer Act (NCI funding and drug‑shortage reporting)
This title provides supplemental, recurring appropriations to the National Cancer Institute for a defined multi‑year period and requires a study and report to Congress on cancer drug shortages. For research administrators and hospital procurement officers, the legislation means a near‑term increase in discretionary funding for cancer research and an expectation of federal analysis about supply‑chain vulnerabilities for oncology drugs.
SAFER Schools Act (door standards and grants)
CISA must convene a rules advisory committee to develop performance and installation standards for reinforced doors in primary/secondary schools that receive federal funds, and then issue a final rule. The law ties an additional, dedicated stream of State Homeland Security grant funding to implement the standards once finalized. For school districts, this becomes both a design/specification obligation and a grant opportunity; for manufacturers, a test/certification market.
Voting changes: unaffiliated voters in primaries and noncitizen voting prohibition
The bill requires States (as a condition of receiving certain federal election grants) to permit unaffiliated voters to vote in party primaries (but not to vote in more than one party’s primary) and to protect unaffiliated voters’ registration details from party solicitations. Separately, it conditions federal election funds on State certifications that noncitizens are not permitted to vote in State and local elections. The effect: changes to primary‑access rules and grant conditionality for federal election assistance.
House Member trading restrictions and anti‑trafficking banking measures
Title V prohibits Members of the House from owning or trading a defined list of 'covered financial instruments' (securities futures, commodities, derivatives, and synthetic economic interests), with narrow exemptions. Title VI charges interagency and private‑sector bodies to review anti‑money‑laundering practices related to severe forms of trafficking and deliver recommendations and improved examination and referral procedures—strengthening the financial sector’s role in identifying trafficking proceeds.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Environment across all five countries.
Explore Environment 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
- State transportation agencies and contractors — RISE allocates a large, multi‑year share of revenue to the Highway Trust Fund and other transport accounts, creating predictable capital dollars for road, bridge, and airport projects.
- Cancer researchers and the National Cancer Institute — the KO Cancer title directs a recurring top‑up to NCI budgets for a multiyear window, increasing research capacity and grant opportunities.
- Low‑income households — State grants are explicitly targeted to low‑income households to offset energy and fuel impacts from the new price signal, with distribution rules linked to existing nutrition, Medicare, and disability programs.
- Schools and door‑security suppliers — CISA rulemaking plus grant funding creates a defined market for reinforced door products and a federal grant pathway for school districts to pay installation costs.
- Law enforcement and anti‑trafficking advocates — required Financial Institutions Examination Council reviews and task‑force recommendations increase banks’ obligations and create new pathways for referrals to law enforcement.
Who Bears the Cost
- Upstream fossil‑fuel producers, refiners, and importers — they are the point‑of‑taxation payers and will face immediate compliance obligations and likely cost pass‑through.
- Emissions‑intensive manufacturers and downstream users of taxed products — those sectors face higher input costs and customs complexity under the border adjustment rules.
- Consumers — increased upstream costs are likely to feed through to fuel and energy prices, with uneven regional impacts despite the State grant mitigation layer.
- Federal agencies (Treasury/IRS, EPA, CBP, DOE) — implementation requires large new rulemakings, data exchanges, and enforcement capacity with limited appropriations spelled out for administrative scaling.
- House Members and certain financial intermediaries — the ban on owning/trading covered instruments will constrain portfolio options for Members and require new compliance and disclosures.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is intentional: the bill shifts emissions policy from regulatory standards to a priced‑based system that generates revenue for infrastructure and mitigation, but it then curtails certain regulatory backstops—trading the flexibility and direct control of standards for a market mechanism that depends on precise administration, robust enforcement, and complex international rules; doing one well strengthens the other, but doing both imperfectly risks ineffective emission reductions, legal exposure, and regressive economic effects.
The bill folds a market‑based carbon policy into the tax code while simultaneously constraining a major regulatory tool (portions of the Clean Air Act) that agencies previously used to curb greenhouse gases. That design reduces the risk of overlapping or duplicative regulation but transfers heavy dependence to tax collection, EPA/Treasury technical rulemaking, and customs administration.
Each of those agencies must write complex methods for emission calculation and sectoral lists; those rules will determine how, in practice, the tax lands and whether refunds and exemptions swallow or preserve the policy signal.
The border tax adjustment intends to blunt competitiveness effects but creates administrative, legal, and trade risks. Converting NAICS and tariff headings into administrable import categories and measuring foreign emissions intensity requires assumptions and data that vary by country and producer; the statute delegates much of that work to the Secretary’s rulemaking and a petition process, which raises questions about predictability for industry and World Trade Organization exposure.
The RISE allocation schedule also embeds political choices—70 percent to highways, 10 percent to state grants and smaller slices to other programs—that lock in winners and may crowd out alternative climate investments.
Finally, the bill mixes large, durable economic instruments with many one‑off or short‑term policy additions (research top‑ups, rulemaking committees, commissions, reporting timelines). That structure raises coordination challenges: agencies must sequence rulemakings (tax regulations, EPA calculation methods, Customs procedures) in ways the text requires but does not fully fund, and courts may be asked to resolve the interplay between tax law, international trade commitments, and administrative law when disputes arise.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.