S. 4700

S. 4700: A bill 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 Richard Blumenthal (D) SENATE_BILL — 119th Congress
Plain English Summary

S. 4700 is a bill that proposes changes to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, specifically to provide a tax credit for individuals or entities that make qualified conservation contributions. This includes contributions related to National Scenic Trails, which are designated areas that preserve the natural beauty and recreational opportunities of these trails.

Positive Media Summary

Supporters of S. 4700 have praised the bill for encouraging conservation efforts and promoting the preservation of National Scenic Trails. They argue that the tax credit will incentivize landowners and organizations to contribute to environmental protection, benefiting both wildlife and outdoor recreation.

Negative Media Summary

Critics of S. 4700 have raised concerns about the potential loss of tax revenue due to the new credits, arguing that it could divert funds from essential public services. Some also question the effectiveness of tax incentives in achieving meaningful conservation outcomes, suggesting that more direct funding or policy measures might be necessary.

Conflict of Interest Analysis Deep Analysis
2/10
Risk Level
Low
Total Donations
$1,207,500,000
PAC Percentage
0%
Policy Area
Taxation

The analysis of bill S. 4700, which aims to amend the Internal Revenue Code to allow tax credits for qualified conservation contributions, reveals no direct industry overlaps with the sponsor Richard Blumenthal's top donor industries. His primary donors are from the health professionals sector, contributing a substantial $920 million, and the retired sector, contributing $287.5 million. Since these industries do not directly relate to conservation or tax credits for scenic trails, the potential for conflicts of interest appears minimal. The lobbying activity associated with the bill is also undisclosed, making it difficult to ascertain any indirect influences. Overall, the lack of financial ties between the bill's subject matter and the sponsor's donor base suggests a low risk of conflicts of interest.

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
DISABILITY RIGHTS EDUCATION & DEFENSE INC DISABILITY RIGHTS EDUCATION & DEFENSE, INC. $10,000
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 Richard Blumenthal, ranked by total contributions.

Health Professionals $920,000,000
Individuals: $920,000,000 PACs: $0
Retired $287,500,000
Individuals: $287,500,000 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