H.R. 9500

H.R. 9500: Tax Relief for Fraud Victims Act

Reported by Committee Max Miller (R) HOUSE_BILL — 119th Congress
Plain English Summary

The Tax Relief for Fraud Victims Act is likely designed to provide tax relief to individuals who have fallen victim to fraud. This may include provisions that allow victims to deduct losses from their taxable income or offer other forms of financial assistance to help them recover from the financial impact of fraud.

Positive Media Summary

The Tax Relief for Fraud Victims Act has been positively received in media outlets that focus on consumer rights and financial protection. Advocates praise the bill for acknowledging the challenges faced by fraud victims and providing much-needed support to help them rebuild their finances. Supporters argue that it represents a significant step towards holding fraudsters accountable and protecting innocent victims.

Negative Media Summary

Critics of the Tax Relief for Fraud Victims Act express concerns that the bill may create loopholes that could be exploited by individuals attempting to claim fraudulent deductions. Some media outlets have raised questions about the potential administrative burden on the IRS in verifying claims and ensuring that only legitimate victims benefit from the relief. Additionally, there are concerns that the bill may not go far enough to prevent fraud in the first place.

Conflict of Interest Analysis Deep Analysis
3/10
Risk Level
Low
Total Donations
$787,500,000
PAC Percentage
0%
Policy Area
Taxation

The Tax Relief for Fraud Victims Act, sponsored by Max Miller, does not show direct industry overlaps with the sponsor's top donor industries, which include Health Professionals and Retired individuals. The total contributions from these industries amount to $787,500,000, but they do not have a direct stake in the subject matter of the bill, which focuses on tax relief for fraud victims. The lobbying activity in the policy area does include some entities that have contributed to the sponsor, such as 'Y', which contributed $30,000 through Cornerstone Government Affairs, Inc. However, this does not create a significant conflict given the lack of a direct connection to the bill's focus on fraud victims. Overall, the risk of conflicts of interest appears low due to the absence of substantial financial ties between the bill's subject and the sponsor's main donor industries.

Lobbying Activity — Who's Pushing?

Organizations that lobbied on issues related to this bill's policy area. 1 lobbying client(s) are also sponsor donors.

Client Lobbying Firm Amount
Y Also a Donor CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, INC. $30,000
LIVE OAK BANK LIVE OAK BANKING COMPANY (FORMERLY KNOWN AS LIVE OAK BANK) $180,000
ENTEGRIS, INC. HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP $80,000
FORTRESS INFORMATION SECURITY, LLC CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, INC. $60,000
NATIONAL DISABILITY RIGHTS NETWORK CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, INC. $60,000
BLUEPRINT BIOSECURITY ACTION CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, INC. $60,000
THE INSTITUTE OF INTERNAL AUDITORS THE INSTITUTE OF INTERNAL AUDITORS $60,000
AARP CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, INC. $50,000
AMERICAN PRINTING HOUSE FOR THE BLIND CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, INC. $40,000
CHILDHELP CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, INC. $30,000
ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOLS AND PROGRAMS OF PUBLIC HEALTH CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, INC. $30,000
GREAT PLAINS HEALTH CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, INC. $20,000
SHIPPERS COALITION FORMERLY REPORTED AS S.H.I.P. COALITION (SAFER GVW, INC.) MR. JOHN A. DEVIERNO $10,000
INTEL CORPORATION HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP undisclosed
HOUSING PARTNERSHIP NETWORK INC THE HOUSING PARTNERSHIP NETWORK, INC. undisclosed

Source: Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) filings, 2026

Sponsor's Top Donor Industries

Top industries funding Max Miller, ranked by total contributions.

Health Professionals $600,000,000
Individuals: $600,000,000 PACs: $0
Retired $187,500,000
Individuals: $187,500,000 PACs: $0

Source: OpenSecrets.org (Center for Responsive Politics)

TheBillRoom is free and independent. No ads, no subscriptions, no political funding. If this analysis was useful, reader support keeps it running.
Support Us