Mental Health Research Accelerator Act of 2025
HB2085, titled the Mental Health Research Accelerator Act of 2025, would create a new federal tax credit for certain translational research expenses related to neurodegenerative diseases and psychiatric conditions. The credit would equal 25% of qualifying expenses and would be available through a new Internal Revenue Code section, with annual national caps set at $1 billion for 2026, $2 billion for each year from 2027 through 2030, and $1 billion for 2031. The bill would terminate the credit for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2035.
The measure is designed to encourage research that moves scientific discoveries toward practical treatments, with the Treasury Department directed to issue regulations in consultation with HHS, FDA, and NIH. Those regulations would prioritize scientific merit, projects spanning the full research continuum, new therapeutics and devices for central nervous system disorders, repurposing existing drugs and devices, and public-private partnerships. The bill also allows certain tax-exempt entities, including governments and 501(c)(3) organizations, to transfer the credit to an eligible project partner, which could broaden participation in funded research collaborations.
The bill would amend the Internal Revenue Code by adding a new section 45BB, making the translational research credit part of the general business credit under section 38. It would also deny a deduction under section 280C for expenses used to claim the credit, preventing a double tax benefit, and it would coordinate the new credit with the existing research credit under section 41. In practical terms, the bill would change federal tax treatment for businesses, nonprofits, and public entities engaged in qualifying research on neurodegenerative and psychiatric conditions, while creating a capped, temporary incentive structure administered by the Treasury Department.
Based on the bill text and available context, the overall sentiment appears supportive and policy-driven, with the bill introduced by bipartisan sponsors and no recorded committee opposition, amendments, or votes in the provided materials. The framing of the measure as a research accelerator suggests an emphasis on expanding medical innovation and attracting private-sector participation through tax incentives. Because the bill has only been referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means and has no recorded vote history in the provided context, there is no evidence here of broader legislative support or opposition beyond the introduction stage.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be fiscal cost, the size and structure of the annual credit caps, and how the Treasury allocates credits among applicants. The bill requires allocation based on scientific merit and includes preferences for public-private partnerships and intellectual property sharing, which could raise questions among stakeholders about fairness, administrative discretion, and which projects or institutions benefit most. Another possible issue is the transferability of the credit for tax-exempt entities, which may be welcomed by nonprofits and governments but could draw scrutiny from those concerned about complexity or revenue loss.