QuorumCivic. Hidden in plain sight Get the app
Bill intelligence

Congress quietly taxes immigrant remittances—but only for non-citizens

S. 2002 — REMIT Act · Filed by Eric Schmitt (R-MO) · Introduced Jun 10, 2025 · Referred to committee

45%
Transparency
Typical bill: 82%
62/100
Hidden-provision risk
Typical bill: 15/100
High concernRegressive Tax on Immigrant Remittances

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 15% federal excise tax on remittance transfers (money sent abroad by individuals), collected by money-transfer providers from the sender. U.S. citizens and nationals are exempt from the tax if they use a 'qualified' provider that verifies their citizenship. Non-citizens and those using non-participating providers pay the tax, but U.S. citizens can claim a refundable tax credit to recover the full amount paid, effectively making the tax voluntary for citizens while permanent for non-citizens and undocumented immigrants.

Why we flagged it

The bill's operative mechanism is a 15% excise tax on outbound money transfers, with a citizenship-based exemption and refundable credit that shields U.S. citizens but leaves non-citizens permanently liable. The tax targets a specific population (non-citizen workers) and their families abroad.

What the text implies

  • The refundable credit for U.S. citizens creates a two-tier system: citizens reclaim the tax via IRS filing, while non-citizens and undocumented immigrants cannot claim the credit and bear the permanent 15% cost. This effectively makes the tax a citizenship-based wealth transfer from non-citizens to the federal government.
  • Remittance transfer providers face secondary liability if the sender does not pay the tax, creating incentive to refuse service to non-citizens or high-risk customers, potentially reducing access to formal remittance channels for undocumented workers and pushing them toward informal (unregulated) money-transfer networks.

The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.

Who stands to gain

U.S. federal government (tax revenue from non-citizen senders); Remittance transfer providers (secondary liability creates compliance/enforcement leverage)

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