HB2599, the POWER Act of 2025, would create a new federal income tax credit for individuals who buy an emergency generator for use at their principal residence. The credit would equal the cost paid or incurred for the generator, up to $500, and would be available only to a “qualified individual.” To qualify, a taxpayer must live in an area that experienced at least two federally declared major disasters in the prior five years and must have received individual disaster assistance under the Stafford Act for one of those disasters.
The bill also phases the credit down for higher-income taxpayers. The credit would be reduced by $100 for every $25,000 of modified adjusted gross income above $300,000 for joint filers or $150,000 for other filers. The bill defines a covered major disaster as one declared under the Stafford Act that was not declared for public health reasons, and it limits the credit to generators purchased within two years after enactment. The amendments would apply to generators purchased after enactment, and the bill would add a new section 25F to the Internal Revenue Code.
Impact
If enacted, HB2599 would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to add a new residential energy-disaster tax incentive, creating section 25F and conforming the Code’s table of sections accordingly. It would affect taxpayers in disaster-prone areas who have already received federal individual assistance, while excluding purchases made before enactment and phasing out benefits for higher-income households. The bill would not directly change disaster relief law, but it would use Stafford Act disaster declarations and assistance eligibility as the trigger for tax relief.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be framed positively as a disaster preparedness and resilience policy, with sponsors emphasizing protection against outages and support for affected homeowners. There is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided materials, so there is no evidence of formal opposition or support beyond the introduction by multiple House members and referral to the Ways and Means Committee. Overall, the available record suggests a straightforward, targeted tax-relief proposal rather than a controversial measure.
Contention
The main policy questions likely concern whether a tax credit is the best way to help households in disaster-prone areas, whether the $500 cap is sufficient to meaningfully offset generator costs, and whether the eligibility rules are too narrow because they require both repeated major disasters and prior receipt of individual assistance. Another possible point of contention is the income-based phaseout, which limits benefits for higher earners and may draw differing views on equity and targeting. No specific objections or amendments are included in the provided discussion materials.