The Access Technology Affordability Act of 2025 inserts a new section into the Internal Revenue Code to create a federal income tax credit for purchases of “qualified access technology” used by blind individuals. The credit covers amounts paid by the taxpayer (or for the taxpayer’s spouse or dependents) that are not covered by insurance or other reimbursement.
This is a targeted, means-independent subsidy designed to lower the upfront cost barrier to assistive hardware and software. The bill includes a per-individual cap on benefits over multi-year periods, an inflation adjustment, a denial of double benefits with other tax breaks, and a statutory sunset — all mechanics that shape how valuable and administrable the credit will be for taxpayers, vendors, and tax administrators.
At a Glance
What It Does
Adds section 36C to the Internal Revenue Code to allow a tax credit for amounts paid for access technology used by a blind individual who is the taxpayer, spouse, or dependent. The credit applies to purchases not reimbursed by insurance and prevents duplicative tax benefits under the Code.
Who It Affects
Directly affects blind taxpayers and households purchasing assistive hardware or software, assistive-technology manufacturers and retailers, tax preparers, and the IRS (which must administer a new refundable credit). State tax conformity and benefit programs may also feel indirect effects.
Why It Matters
This uses the tax code to reduce access costs rather than relying on grant programs or direct procurement, which changes the economic incentives for buyers and sellers of assistive technology and creates new administrative tasks for tax compliance and verification.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill inserts a new Code section (Sec. 36C) that lets taxpayers claim a credit for amounts they pay out of pocket for “qualified access technology” used by a “qualified blind individual” who is the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or a dependent. The credit covers only expenses that are not reimbursed by insurance or otherwise; the statute explicitly bars a taxpayer from claiming the same expense under another deduction or credit in the Code.
Substantively, the credit equals the amounts paid or incurred during the taxable year (subject to statutory limits). The bill makes the credit refundable, so taxpayers can receive a payment even if their income tax liability is zero.
To limit federal exposure, the statute caps the benefit on a per-individual basis: a total not to exceed $2,000 per qualified blind individual in any rolling three–consecutive–taxable–year period. The bill also sets out a definition of “qualified access technology” as hardware, software, or other IT whose primary function is to convert or adapt visually presented information into formats usable by blind individuals, and it relies on the existing statutory definition of blindness in section 63(f)(4).The statute builds in an inflation adjustment beginning for taxable years after 2026 and instructs the IRS to round any adjusted dollar amount down to the nearest $100.
It also contains a statutory sunset: the section ceases to apply to amounts paid or incurred in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2030. The bill’s effective date language makes the amendments applicable to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025.
Finally, the measure includes minor conforming amendments to existing Code cross-references and to a Treasury Department provision to reflect the insertion of the new section.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The credit covers only expenses not reimbursed by insurance or any other source; expenses that qualify for another Code deduction or credit cannot also be claimed under this provision.
For each qualified blind individual, the aggregate credit is capped at $2,000 in any three–consecutive–taxable–year period.
The statute defines qualified access technology by its primary function: hardware, software, or other information technology that converts or adapts visually presented information into formats usable by blind individuals.
The credit is refundable, so taxpayers can receive payment even if their tax liability is zero, and it becomes effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025.
The provision is temporary: it sunsets for expenses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2030, and the $2,000 cap is indexed for inflation starting after 2026 with rounding to the nearest lower $100.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Provides the Act’s name: the Access Technology Affordability Act of 2025. This is the statutory caption used for references and has no programmatic effect.
Creates new Internal Revenue Code section 36C
Adds a new Sec. 36C to subpart C of part IV of subchapter A (after Sec. 36B). The placement ties the credit into the existing framework of personal tax credits and triggers related cross-reference rules in the Code.
Allowance of credit for qualified access technology
Authorizes a credit equal to amounts paid or incurred during the taxable year (not reimbursed) for qualified access technology used by a qualified blind individual who is the taxpayer, spouse, or dependent. Practically, claimants will need to document purchases and demonstrate non-reimbursement to substantiate the credit.
Per-individual limit and definitions
Imposes an aggregate limit of $2,000 per qualified blind individual across any three–consecutive–taxable–year period and defines the two key terms: 'qualified blind individual' (refers to the statutory blindness definition in Sec. 63(f)(4)) and 'qualified access technology' (hardware, software, or other IT whose primary function is to convert or adapt visually presented information into formats usable by blind individuals). Those definitions will control eligibility and create the primary lines the IRS must draw in administration.
Denial of double benefits, inflation adjustment, and termination
Prohibits claiming the same expense under another Code provision, establishes a cost-of-living adjustment for the $2,000 cap beginning after 2026 with rounding to the nearest lower $100, and sets a termination date for amounts paid in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2030. These choices limit overlap, allow modest indexing, and constrain the program’s long-term budget exposure.
Cross‑reference updates and application date
Makes conforming changes to section 6211(b)(4)(A), 31 U.S.C. section 1324(b)(2), and the subpart C table of sections to insert Sec. 36C, and specifies that the amendments apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025. These changes ensure internal IRS references and Treasury payment provisions align with the new credit.
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
- Blind taxpayers and households with blind dependents — They receive direct financial relief for purchases of assistive hardware and software, reducing upfront cost barriers to accessing information.
- Family members and caregivers who purchase assistive devices — The statute permits the credit when the device is for a spouse or dependent, so households can claim support even if the blind individual does not file their own return.
- Assistive-technology manufacturers and retailers — The credit can stimulate demand for qualifying products, potentially increasing sales and encouraging product development focused on qualifying functionality.
- Tax preparers and disability benefits advisors — New client work will arise to document and claim the credit, including advising on recordkeeping, interactions with insurance reimbursements, and the per-individual multi-year cap.
Who Bears the Cost
- Treasury/IRS — Administering a new refundable credit requires guidance, forms, verification protocols (including proofs of blindness and non-reimbursement), and budget resources to process refunds and audits.
- Federal budget/taxpayers generally — Refundable credits increase outlays and reduce net revenue; although capped per individual and sunsetted, the program will produce incremental federal cost while active.
- Small assistive-technology vendors — Retailers may face new documentation requests, increased customer service burdens, and potential disputes over product eligibility where 'primary function' is ambiguous.
- Tax practitioners and compliance teams — Additional compliance and substantiation work (proofs of non-reimbursement, multi-year cap tracking) will create administrative costs for preparers and taxpayers.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill pits two legitimate policy goals against one another: maximize access to assistive technology for blind individuals by offering a refundable, targeted subsidy, versus limiting federal cost and administrative complexity through a capped, time‑limited credit and eligibility constraints; the chosen mechanisms help contain spending but risk leaving high-cost needs underfunded and raising verification burdens that could limit practical access.
The bill aims to strike a balance between targeted support and fiscal restraint, but that balance produces practical tensions. The $2,000 cap over any three-consecutive-year period limits federal exposure but may undercut the statute’s effectiveness for high-cost assistive devices (for example, full-featured refreshable Braille displays can cost well above the cap).
The 'primary function' test for qualified access technology is concise but will require administrative interpretation when products perform mixed functions (e.g., general-purpose tablets running screen-reader apps).
Refundability increases accessibility for low-income taxpayers who have no tax liability, but it also raises questions about verification and program integrity. The statute requires proof that the expense was not reimbursed by insurance, which places a fact-finding and recordkeeping burden on households and on the IRS.
Administrative costs—both one-time startup and ongoing compliance and audit costs—are not funded in the bill text and could complicate implementation. Finally, the sunset date reduces long-term fiscal exposure but creates uncertainty for purchasers and vendors considering investments tied to sustained demand.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.