Bill Overview
Title: Infectious Disease Therapies Research and Innovation Act of 2022
Description: This bill exempts from the definition of passive activity , for purposes of the passive loss tax rules, any qualified medical research activity of a specified medical research small business pass-thru entity. The bill defines specified medical research small business pass-thru entity as any domestic pass-thru entity if more than 80% of such entity's expenditures on research are paid or incurred in connection with qualified medical research activities and the gross receipts of such entity for the taxable year are less than $1 million.
Sponsors: Rep. Kelly, Mike [R-PA-16]
Target Audience
Population: People with infectious diseases
Estimated Size: 20000000
- The bill affects domestic pass-thru entities engaged in medical research, especially those working on infectious disease therapies.
- To qualify, entities must spend over 80% of their expenditures on qualified medical research and have gross receipts of under $1 million.
- They are exempt from certain restrictions under passive activity loss tax rules, potentially providing a financial benefit by allowing these small businesses to offset losses.
- The potential indirect impact on patients comes from possible accelerated development and availability of new therapies for infectious diseases.
Reasoning
- This policy is mainly applicable to small U.S. based medical research entities, potentially affecting researchers and patients indirectly.
- Researchers and employees of the small entities directly benefit from improved financial conditions, stimulating research activities.
- Patients indirectly benefit through potential advancements in infectious disease therapies developed due to the policy.
- General public may see minimal immediate impact unless directly related to affected diseases.
- Economic incentives can aid many small research companies, creating innovation and jobs in the short to long term.
- Wellbeing estimates are expected to improve more noticeably for those directly involved or affected by infectious diseases.
Simulated Interviews
Research Scientist (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy will significantly improve our ability to conduct sustained research.
- It might not affect my immediate life quality, but knowing our research has more funds and support is uplifting.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Medical Research Investor (Boston, MA)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This law provides a solid cushion against potential losses, encouraging investment.
- I expect an influx of new and innovative projects, improving industry dynamism.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Graduate Student (Houston, TX)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's encouraging to see small companies get a tax break.
- Improved funding may provide better job opportunities after graduation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Patient (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The new therapies that could emerge from this policy give me hope.
- It still might take years before I see any direct benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Physician (Seattle, WA)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies aiding research funding are crucial for medical advancements.
- I hope to see this impact treatment options eventually.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Clinical Trial Manager (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Securing funding is often a bottleneck, and this helps.
- My job security feels more stable with this support.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Biotech Startup CEO (Austin, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We are hopeful about this policy as it aligns with our financial growth strategy.
- This could ease financial pressures and aid in scaling our research efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Pharmaceutical Company Employee (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am supportive of policies that promote research, even if I don't see a direct effect.
- Larger companies might adapt based on small company innovations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Patient Advocate (Chicago, IL)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy leads to more drug developments that help patients sooner.
- I am optimistic but acknowledge change takes time.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Government Policy Analyst (Denver, CO)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a strategic policy for accelerating innovation, though benefits take time to materialize.
- The industry could greatly benefit in terms of new therapeutics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $30000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $40000000)
Year 2: $33000000 (Low: $22000000, High: $44000000)
Year 3: $36300000 (Low: $24200000, High: $48400000)
Year 5: $43636390 (Low: $29181820, High: $58181860)
Year 10: $58697422 (Low: $39131615, High: $78263230)
Year 100: $162889462 (Low: $108592974, High: $217185948)
Key Considerations
- Uncertainty in the number of new pass-thru entities that will qualify for the tax exemption over time.
- Potential for increased innovation and speedier development of infectious disease therapies may provide broader economic and health benefits.
- The bill might stimulate job growth within the research sector, affecting other economic variables.