```

[House Report 111-350]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

111th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    111-350

======================================================================

 
   PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE BILL (H.R. 4154) TO AMEND THE 
 INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986 TO REPEAL THE NEW CARRYOVER BASIS RULES 
  IN ORDER TO PREVENT TAX INCREASES AND THE IMPOSITION OF COMPLIANCE 
BURDENS ON MANY MORE ESTATES THAN WOULD BENEFIT FROM REPEAL, TO RETAIN 
   THE ESTATE TAX WITH A $3,500,000 EXEMPTION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

  December 2, 2009.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

                Mr. Polis, from the Committee on Rules,
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 941]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 941, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 4154, the 
``Permanent Estate Tax Relief for Families, Farmers, and Small 
Businesses Act of 2009,'' under a closed rule. The rule 
provides one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by 
the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways 
and Means.
    The resolution waives all points of order against 
consideration of the bill except those arising under clause 9 
or 10 of rule XXI. The resolution provides that the bill shall 
be considered as read. The resolution waives all points of 
order against the bill. This waiver does not affect the point 
of order available under clause 9 of rule XXI (regarding 
earmark disclosure). The resolution provides one motion to 
recommit with or without instructions.
    Finally, the resolution provides that in the engrossment of 
H.R. 4154, the Clerk shall add the text of H.R. 2920, as passed 
by the House, as new matter at the end of H.R. 4154.

                         EXPLANATION OF WAIVERS

    Although the resolution waives all points of order against 
consideration of the bill (except those arising under clause 9 
or 10 of rule XXI), the Committee is not aware of any points of 
order. The waiver is prophylactic. Although the resolution 
waives all points of order against the bill, the Committee is 
not aware of any points of order against the bill. The waiver 
of all points of order against the bill is prophylactic.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    The results of each record vote on an amendment or motion 
to report, together with the names of those voting for and 
against, are printed below:

Rules Committee record vote No. 283

    Date: December 2, 2009.
    Measure: H.R. 4154.
    Motion by: Mr. Dreier.
    Summary of motion: To make in order and provide appropriate 
waivers for an amendment in the nature of a substitute by Rep. 
Neugebauer (TX), #4, which would repeal the sunset of the 
estate tax provisions of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief 
Reconciliation Act of 2001.
    Results: Defeated 1-7.
    Vote by Members: McGovern--Nay; Hastings (FL)--Nay; 
Matsui--Nay; Arcuri--Nay; Pingree--Nay; Polis--Nay; Dreier--
Yea; Slaughter--Nay.

Rules Committee record vote No. 284

    Date: December 2, 2009.
    Measure: H.R. 4154.
    Motion by: Mr. Dreier.
    Summary of motion: To make in order and provide appropriate 
waivers for an amendment in the nature of a substitute by Rep. 
Berkley (NV) and Rep. Brady (TX), #7, which would phase in a 
higher exemption and a lower tax rate. In year 10, the top tax 
rate is 35 percent and the exemption level would be $5 million 
for an individual or $10 million per couple. The exemption 
level also would be indexed for inflation starting after year 
10.
    Results: Defeated 1-7.
    Vote by Members: McGovern--Nay; Hastings (FL)--Nay; 
Matsui--Nay; Arcuri--Nay; Pingree--Nay; Polis--Nay; Dreier--
Yea; Slaughter--Nay.

                                  

```