Modification of Rules for Postponing Certain Deadlines by Reason of Disaster
Section 2 · Sec. 2 ·
What this chapter is about
This part changes the tax law. It is about deadlines after a disaster. A state leader can ask for more time to file. The head of the tax office can then say yes. The ask must be in writing. Some wait times also get longer. Sixty days becomes 120 days.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“Section 7508A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating subsections (c), (d), and (e) as subsections (d), (e), and (f), respectively, and by inserting after subsection (b) the following new subsection”
The opening instruction of subsection (a). It moves the existing subsections (c), (d) and (e) of section 7508A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 down one letter each, to (d), (e) and (f), and puts a new subsection (c) in the space that leaves. The lettering matters for reading the rest of section 2, which cites the moved text as section 7508A(e), as redesignated by subsection (a). This Act does not state what any of the moved subsections say.
What the document actually says
“Section 7508A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating subsections (c), (d), and (e) as subsections (d), (e), and (f), respectively, and by inserting after subsection (b) the following new subsection”
That sentence, in plain words
This part changes an old tax law. It moves three lettered parts down the list. Then it adds a new part in the gap.
What this is about
Laws are split into lettered parts. To add one in the middle, the rest shift. The new part is now part (c).
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: SecretaryHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“The Secretary (after consultation with the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency) may, upon the written request of the Governor of a State (or the Mayor, in the case of the District of Columbia), apply the rules of subsections (a) and (b) to a qualified State declared disaster in the same manner as a disaster, fire, or action otherwise described in subsection (a).”
Paragraph (1) of the new subsection (c) of section 7508A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The authority is discretionary: the Secretary may act, not shall. Three things attach to it. The request comes in writing from the Governor of a State, or the Mayor in the case of the District of Columbia. The Secretary consults the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency first. What is then applied is the rules of subsections (a) and (b) of section 7508A, treated in the same manner as a disaster, fire, or action otherwise described in subsection (a). This Act does not define Secretary and does not state what subsections (a) and (b) provide.
What the document actually says
“The Secretary (after consultation with the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency) may, upon the written request of the Governor of a State (or the Mayor, in the case of the District of Columbia), apply the rules of subsections (a) and (b) to a qualified State declared disaster in the same manner as a disaster, fire, or action otherwise described in subsection (a).”
That sentence, in plain words
A state leader can send a written ask. The head of the tax office may then act. First that head talks with FEMA. If yes, people in that state get more time.
What this is about
This is a new path in the tax law. It starts with the state, not Washington. The tax office does not have to say yes. It gets to choose.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “means”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“For purposes of this section, the term `qualified State declared disaster' means, with respect to any State, any natural catastrophe”
Paragraph (2) of the new subsection (c), which supplies the term the authority in paragraph (1) turns on. The definition reaches any natural catastrophe, and the section names hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowstorm and drought, and then, regardless of cause, any fire, flood or explosion. One further item in that list is broken across a line in the printed text and is not reproduced here. The definition applies for purposes of section 7508A only.
What the document actually says
“For purposes of this section, the term `qualified State declared disaster' means, with respect to any State, any natural catastrophe”
That sentence, in plain words
The law sets out what the term means. It covers big natural events in a state. Fires, floods, and blasts count too. What caused those does not matter.
What this is about
A defined term is a word with a set meaning. Here it names the events that can start the ask. The list is long. It runs from storms and quakes to drought.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “means”Who acts: Governor of a State, Mayor of the District of ColumbiaHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“or, regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of the State, which in the determination of the Governor of such State (or the Mayor, in the case of the District of Columbia) causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant the application of the rules of this section.”
The closing words of the definition in paragraph (2). The event has to be in any part of the State, and the judgment that it causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant the application of the rules of this section rests with the Governor of that State, or the Mayor in the case of the District of Columbia. The Act sets no threshold of damage, no measure and no review of that determination.
What the document actually says
“or, regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of the State, which in the determination of the Governor of such State (or the Mayor, in the case of the District of Columbia) causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant the application of the rules of this section.”
That sentence, in plain words
The state leader looks at the harm done. The harm must be bad enough. Only then do the tax rules apply.
What this is about
Someone has to judge how bad the damage is. This law gives that job to the state leader. In DC, it is the mayor. The law does not set a dollar test.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “means”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“For purposes of this section, the term `State' includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.”
Paragraph (3) of the new subsection (c). It settles which places the words State and Governor in the preceding paragraphs reach, naming the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. The definition applies for purposes of section 7508A only.
What the document actually says
“For purposes of this section, the term `State' includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.”
That sentence, in plain words
The word State means more than the 50 states here. DC counts. Puerto Rico counts. Guam counts. The Virgin Islands count. American Samoa counts. The Northern Mariana Islands count.
What this is about
Many laws use the word state in a broad way. This one says which places count. Each named place can use the new rule.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“Section 7508A(e) of such Code, as redesignated by subsection (a), is amended-- (1) by striking "60 days" in paragraph (1)(B) thereof and inserting "120 days", (2) by striking "60-day" in paragraph (6) thereof and inserting "120-day", and (3) by striking "60-day" in the heading and inserting "120-day".”
The whole of subsection (b). It works on the subsection that subsection (a) relettered as section 7508A(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and it makes the same change in three places: in paragraph (1)(B), in paragraph (6) and in the heading. Each says 60 and now says 120. This Act does not state what those periods run from or what they require, because that text is in section 7508A and is not reproduced here.
What the document actually says
“Section 7508A(e) of such Code, as redesignated by subsection (a), is amended-- (1) by striking "60 days" in paragraph (1)(B) thereof and inserting "120 days", (2) by striking "60-day" in paragraph (6) thereof and inserting "120-day", and (3) by striking "60-day" in the heading and inserting "120-day".”
That sentence, in plain words
Some wait times in the tax law say 60 days. This part crosses that out. It writes 120 days in its place. The heading changes the same way.
What this is about
This is a word swap in an older law. The number of days doubles. This site does not say what those days are for. That older law is not indexed here.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall apply”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“The amendments made by this section shall apply to declarations made after the date of the enactment of this Act.”
Subsection (c), the last of the section. It ties everything section 2 does to declarations made after the date of enactment. The Act was approved on July 24, 2025. The Act does not say which declarations it means beyond that word.
What the document actually says
“The amendments made by this section shall apply to declarations made after the date of the enactment of this Act.”
That sentence, in plain words
The changes do not cover past cases. They start with new calls made after signing day.
What this is about
The law was signed on July 24, 2025. A call made after that day counts. One made before it does not.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
Each distinct thing the section does: the instruction that reletters part of section 7508A and inserts a new subsection, the authority the new subsection gives, the two terms it defines, the amendments that replace 60 days with 120 days, and the date the amendments start to apply.
Nothing in the section is left out. The redesignation of subsections (c), (d) and (e) is mechanical, but it is recorded because the next subsection cites the moved text by its new letter.
The section works by amending section 7508A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and that statute is not indexed here. So the site does not record what subsections (a), (b) and the redesignated subsection (e) of that section provide, what the 60 day periods being doubled are periods for, or how section 7508A reads once these amendments apply. The section uses the term Secretary without defining it, and this Act does not say who that is. One item in the list of natural catastrophes is broken across a line in the printed text, so it is not reproduced in the quotation or the summary here.
