H.R. 9168

H.R. 9168: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a credit against income tax for qualified conservation contributions which include National Scenic Trails.

Introduced James Walkinshaw (D) HOUSE_BILL — 119th Congress
Plain English Summary

H.R. 9168 proposes to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to introduce a tax credit for individuals or organizations that make qualified conservation contributions. This specifically includes contributions related to National Scenic Trails, encouraging the preservation and maintenance of these natural resources.

Positive Media Summary

Supporters of H.R. 9168 praise the bill for promoting environmental conservation and protecting National Scenic Trails, highlighting its potential to incentivize private donations and foster greater public engagement in preserving America's natural landscapes.

Negative Media Summary

Critics of H.R. 9168 argue that while conservation is important, the bill may reduce federal tax revenue without guaranteeing sufficient oversight on how the funds are used. Some also express concern that it could disproportionately benefit wealthier individuals who are more likely to take advantage of tax credits.

Conflict of Interest Analysis Deep Analysis
3/10
Risk Level
Low
Total Donations
$0
PAC Percentage
0%
Policy Area
Taxation

The analysis of H.R. 9168, which aims to amend the Internal Revenue Code to allow tax credits for qualified conservation contributions, reveals no direct industry overlaps between the sponsor James Walkinshaw's top donor industries and the bill's subject matter. This suggests a lower likelihood of conflicts of interest arising from financial contributions. While there is significant lobbying activity in the policy area from various firms, the lack of direct financial ties to the bill's provisions indicates that the sponsor may not be unduly influenced by these interests. Voters should be aware that while lobbying exists, it does not directly connect to the sponsor's funding sources, which mitigates potential conflicts.

Lobbying Activity — Who's Pushing?

Organizations that lobbied on issues related to this bill's policy area.

Client Lobbying Firm Amount
WELLS FARGO & COMPANY RMP STRATEGIES, LLC $10,000
MANAGED FUNDS ASSOCIATION RMP STRATEGIES, LLC $10,000
PUBLIC PRIVATE STRATEGIES VALENTINE STRATEGIES undisclosed
SAMSARA INC. CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, INC. undisclosed
OTG PAUL HASTINGS LLP undisclosed
BLOCKQUAKE HOLDINGS LLC PAUL HASTINGS LLP undisclosed
PAYSAFE MERCHANT SERVICES CORPORATION PAUL HASTINGS LLP undisclosed
PROOF OF STAKE ALLIANCE PAUL HASTINGS LLP undisclosed
INTEGRAL COMMUNITIES PAUL HASTINGS LLP undisclosed
SENTILINK CORP. PAUL HASTINGS LLP undisclosed
TEMPLUM LLC (FORMERLY KNOWN AS OUISA CAPITAL LLC) PAUL HASTINGS LLP undisclosed
GLOBAL PRIMEX LLC PAUL HASTINGS LLP undisclosed
WARRIOR TRADING PAUL HASTINGS LLP undisclosed
SYNIVERSE TECHNOLOGIES LLC PAUL HASTINGS LLP undisclosed
SOUTHERN INSTITUTE OF POLICY RESEARCH SOUTHERN INSTITUTE OF POLICY RESEARCH undisclosed

Source: Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) filings, 2026

Sponsor's Top Donor Industries

Top industries funding James Walkinshaw, ranked by total contributions.

Health Professionals $120,000,000
Individuals: $120,000,000 PACs: $0
Retired $37,500,000
Individuals: $37,500,000 PACs: $0

Source: OpenSecrets.org (Center for Responsive Politics)

TheBillRoom is free and independent. No ads, no subscriptions, no political funding. If this analysis was useful, reader support keeps it running.
Support Us