QuorumCivic. Hidden in plain sight Get the app
Bill intelligence

Congress taxes litigation funders, risking access to justice for ordinary plaintiffs

S. 1821 — Tackling Predatory Litigation Funding Act · Filed by Thom Tillis (R-NC) · 8 cosponsors · Introduced May 20, 2025 · Referred to committee

72%
Transparency
Typical bill: 82%
35/100
Hidden-provision risk
Typical bill: 15/100
High concernLitigation Funder Tax & Regulation

Your members of Congress

Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.

Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.

What it does

This bill imposes a new federal tax on third-party litigation funders—companies or individuals that provide money to plaintiffs or law firms in exchange for a share of settlement or judgment proceeds. The tax rate is the top individual income tax rate plus 3.8 percentage points (roughly 27.8% under current law). The bill also excludes litigation financing agreements from being treated as capital assets and removes the tax burden on the litigation proceeds themselves, shifting it entirely to the funder. Litigation funders—a growing industry financing personal injury, employment, and commercial lawsuits—would bear the full tax cost.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core mechanism is a new excise tax on third-party litigation financing entities, paired with definitional and withholding rules designed to capture and tax the funder's share of proceeds. It is functionally a sector-specific tax on a financial intermediary, not a broad tax reform.

What the text implies

  • The 50% withholding requirement (section 5000E–3) creates a cash-flow burden on law firms and parties, who must remit half the tax immediately from settlement proceeds, even though the funder may not owe the full amount until filing. This may force plaintiffs to advance tax liability.
  • The exclusion of litigation financing agreements from capital-asset treatment (section 1221(9)) may prevent funders from claiming long-term capital gains rates, forcing ordinary income treatment—a secondary tax increase beyond the base rate.

The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.

Who stands to gain

plaintiffs and law firms (reduced tax burden on settlement proceeds); federal government (new tax revenue from litigation funders)

Correlative observation from public records — not evidence of coordination or wrongdoing, and not financial advice.
This page is the record as of today. The app tells you when it changes.
Quorum analysis of the full bill text · 119th Congress · public record