Spirit Airlines was the budget-friendly carrier America loved to hate. But now that it’s out of business, a viral crowdfunding campaign is attempting to resurrect the bankrupt airline.

Subscribe to read this story ad-free

Get unlimited access to ad-free articles and exclusive content.

Once Hunter Peterson heard Spirit would close on May 2 — after attempts to merge with other airlines or get a lifeline from the federal government — the 22-year-old voice actor and content creator posted on social media that day with an idea to revive the airline.

If a fifth of Americans each pitched in $45, (the equivalent of a cheap Spirit flight) “we could buy Spirit Airlines,” he said.

His initial pitch was to run the airline like the Green Bay Packers, the only publicly owned team in the NFL. It has more than 5 million shares split among more than 530,000 owners. His joke, however, became a call to action. Peterson is not taking actual cash, but he has rallied $337 million in pledges from more than 370,000 verified people, his website says.

Peterson did not respond to a request for comment and said he’s not talking to media until his plans are firmer. But he said on social media that he is actively consulting lawyers as he learns the regulatory limits to his idea.

Public interest in this crowdfunding effort shows a collective desire to disrupt the airline industry. While spirits are high about the idea, experts say the regulatory hurdles alone could slow momentum to a screeching halt.

“An airline is a very complicated financial enterprise. There’s a lot of players,” said Charles Elson, a retired professor of finance at the University of Delaware.

Elson said that crowdfunding can work for small operations without much regulatory involvement, but an airline just has too many moving parts.

“You’ve got the lenders, the planes, the governmental entities that lease the space to the airline and the different facilities, the aircraft itself, liens on the aircraft,” Elson said. “Obviously union contracts with your pilots, stewardesses, your flight attendants, ground personnel, maintenance personnel.”

“It’s a nice idea,” he added. “I would be shocked if it ever became a reality. I think it’s like going to Mars.”

Columbia University law professor John Coffee Jr. also cited the time-consuming and expensive process of registering an airline as a publicly traded entity with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

There are exemptions to SEC regulations for crowdfunded companies, but that maxes out at $5 million per year, according to the SEC, which Coffee pointed out isn’t nearly enough to buy an airline.

Another option to avoid SEC registration complications is a “private placement” offering. The most common versions of this allow for an unlimited amount of money to be raised within a year. But Coffee said these are exclusive to individuals with a net worth of at least $1 million. “If you’re talking about reaching the average citizen,” he added, “they don’t have a million-dollar net worth.”

Coffee said Spirit’s bankruptcy adds another layer of complications.

“This is not a simple, clean offering,” he said. “You’re dealing with a very risky company that has essentially failed, and all those risks have to be explained.”

Spirit Airlines had been bleeding money for years, according to its 2025 bankruptcy filings. The airline had two failed merger attempts, with Frontier in 2022 and JetBlue in 2024, and filed for bankruptcy twice, in 2024 and 2025. By August 2025, Spirit had accumulated around $8.1 billion in debt.

Rising oil prices with no end in sight due to the war with Iran didn’t help either. Marshall Huebner, an attorney for Spirit during a last-minute bankruptcy hearing on Tuesday, said the price “megaspike” would have drained hundreds of millions of dollars of the airline’s liquidity.

“We just kind of ran out of runway,” CEO Dave Davis, told CNBC on Monday.

Most airlines aren’t making a profit solely from flight ticket sales — branded credit cards and frequent-flyer programs are what put them over the top. Delta, American, United and Southwest generated $200 billion in revenue in 2024. Even though all four airlines were profitable that year, they lost money flying passengers.

Spirit 2.0 would need more than ticket sales alone to be profitable. But participation in the Spirit 2.0 campaign may be about more than investing. Since the campaign started, the website has crashed multiple times due to high traffic.

“I pledged. Why not?” said Abigail Hartman, a radiologic technologist from Indiana. “I just want to be part of something from the start, you know?”

“If this works, doesn’t that prove we can do anything?” Hartman said in social media video titled “Get in loser, we’re buying Spirit.”

“We can make a difference,” she added.

On Monday, Peterson said one firm that specializes in aviation mergers and acquisitions told him his plan was “doable.” “We don’t have a ton of time,” Peterson said on social media. He added that he has heard from angel investors who would help get this plan off the ground through a legal fund, but the clock is ticking: An auction for some of the company’s assets is coming in days.

“I can’t take any money from anyone but I can take on angel investment from high-net-worth individuals,” he added. “So Mark Cuban? What’s up, man? Get in my DMs right now.”

So what does the future look like for Peterson? In a way, his quest began last year when he traveled with Spirit for 24 hours straight for a YouTube video. Now he’s trying to buy the company.

On Friday, he said on social media that he secured a legal fund to put together a bid for Spirit Airlines. He also has the backing of Spirit’s 5,500-member flight attendant union.

Should the Spirit 2.0 collective succeed in buying the airline, decisions on routes, leadership and strategic direction would be made by members, according to Peterson’s website.

Still, Peterson said he’s unsure of what’s to come. “There’s no guarantee that any of this is going to work,” Peterson said.

“We’re giving it our very best shot. But we are now one step closer to all of us owning Spirit 2.0.”

After last week’s launch of TrumpRx, President Trump described the discounted drug platform as “one of the most transformative health care initiatives of all time.” But experts and health care advocates said that limitations with the new service could undermine its value to consumers.

“The prices are absolutely cheaper than list prices, but only for cash patients or patients whose insurance does not sufficiently cover these drugs,” Yunan Ji, a health policy expert at Georgetown’s McDonough School of Business, told CBS News. “For a small share of the market, it will deliver meaningful savings, but it is not going to change the whole drug pricing landscape for most Americans.”

Anthony Wright, executive director of Families USA, an advocacy group for health care consumers, applauded the Trump administration’s effort to lower drug prices for Americans. But he said TrumpRx doesn’t serve as a “one-stop shop” for consumers who want to compare drug prices and secure the lowest costs, describing the system as more of a “catalog of coupons from existing programs from drug companies.”

Wright also said he’d like to see TrumpRx offer a broader range of drugs, including those used to treat cancer and other diseases (see below for a list of all drug discounts available through TrumpRx.) 

The White House told CBS News that such discounts only exist because the Trump administration negotiated so-called “most-favored-nation” agreements with pharmaceutical firms to lower prices. Under that policy, drugmakers must sell meds to U.S. customers at the same prices available in other countries, including those with lower drug costs. 

TrumpRx is also focused on offering the lowest prices on branded products, the White House noted, acknowledging that more affordable generic versions of the drugs may be available elsewhere. 

Who is TrumpRx for?

A drawback of TrumpRx is that discounts are available only to patients who buy drugs in cash, Wright said. That means people must pay for prescriptions out of pocket and can’t use their health insurance, while those expenses will not count toward meeting a consumer’s health plan deductible. 

“It is focused pretty narrowly on people who are uninsured and are buying prescription drugs with cash rather than through a health plan,” Wright told CBS News.

When TrumpRx launched on Feb. 5, the site listed more than 40 brand-name drugs, with the Trump administration saying that more discounted medications will be added over time. 

Merith Basey, CEO of Patients For Affordable Drugs Now (P4ADNow), a national patient organization that works to lower drug prices, said the coupons TrumpRx offers are not unique to the platform, noting that similar discounts are already available in the marketplace.

To assess the savings available through TrumpRx, the group compared the service with what consumers can find for the same drugs via GoodRx, a Santa Monica, Calif., company that offers discounted meds. TrumpRx’s pricing was superior for only eight drugs, P4ADNow found, as follows:

• Bevespi (chronic bronchitis) — 89% discount through TrumpRx
• Cetrotide (fertility)  — 93% discount through TrumpRx
• Farxiga (Type 2 Diabetes) — 52% discount through TrumpRx
• Genotropin (human growth hormone) — 60% discount through TrumpRx
• Insulin Lispro (blood sugar control) — 65% discount through TrumpRx
• Ovidrel (fertility) — 67% discount through TrumpRx
• Xigduo XR (Type 2 Diabetes) — 70% discount through TrumpRx
• Zepbound (weight loss) — 72% discount through TrumpRx

GoodRx offered equally steep discounts on 33 of the drugs listed on TrumpRx, while cheaper generic alternatives were available for 15 TrumpRx medications, according to the group’s analysis. 

For example, Colestid, a drug that lowers cholesterol for people at risk of heart disease, costs $67.20 if purchased through TrumpRx, while a generic version of the drug costs $21.70.

Most insurers don’t cover weight-loss drugs like Ozempic and Wegovy. TrumpRx and GoodRx both offer Ozempic for $199 for a 0.25 milligram pen, which has a list price of over $1,000. 

The same is typically true of fertility drugs, including Gonal-F, which costs $252 with a TrumpRx or GoodRx coupon and which has a list price of nearly $1,200.

Drug discounts available through TrumpRx

For now, TrumpRx offers discounts on a total of 43 drugs, as follows:

• Abrilada pen (autoimmune) — TrumpRx price: $207.60
• Airsupra (respiratory) — TrumpRx price: $201
• Azulfidine Tabs (rheumatology) — TrumpRx price: $99.60
• Azulfidine En Tabs (rheumatology) — TrumpRx price: $130.80
• Bevespi (respiratory) — TrumpRx price: $51
• Cetrotide (IVF) — TrumpRx price: $22.50
• Chantix (smoking cessation) — TrumpRx price: $106.20
• Cleocin (antibiotic) — TrumpRx price: $94.35
• Colestid (cholesterol) — TrumpRx price: $127.91
• Cortef (inflammation) — TrumpRx price: $45
• Cytomel (thyroid) — TrumpRx price: $6
• Diflucan (antifungal) — TrumpRx price: $14.06
• Duavee (women’s health) — TrumpRx price: $30.30
• Estring (women’s health) — TrumpRx price: $249
• Eucrisa (dermatologic) — TrumpRx price: $158.48
• Farxiga (diabetes, cardiovascular) — TrumpRx price: $181.59
• Genotropin (human growth hormone) — TrumpRx price: $89.67
• Gonal F (fertility) — TrumpRx price: $168
• Insulin Lispro (high blood sugar) — TrumpRx price: $25
• Levoxyl (hypothyroidism) — TrumpRx price: $35.10
• Lopid (cholesterol) —TrumpRx price: $39.60
• Medrol (inflammation) —TrumpRx price: $3.15
• Ngenla (human growth hormone) — TrumpRx price: $2,217
• Nicotrol (smoking cessation) — TrumpRx price: $271.16
• Ovidrel (fertility) —TrumpRx price: $84
• Ozempic Pen (diabetes, weight loss) — TrumpRx price: $199
• Premarin (women’s health) — TrumpRx price: $99
• Premarin Vaginal Cream (women’s health) — TrumpRx price: $236.65
• Prempro (women’s health) — TrumpRx price: $98.84
• Pristiq (antidepressant) — TrumpRx price: $200.10 
• Protonix (heartburn) — TrumpRx price: $200.10
• Tikosyn (cardiovascular) — TrumpRx price: $336
• Toviaz (bladder control) — TrumpRx price: $43.50
• Vfend (antifungal) — TrumpRx price: $306.98
• Viracept (antiviral) — TrumpRx price: $607.20
• Wegovy (weight loss) — Pen TrumpRx price: $199
• Wegovy Pill (weight loss) — TrumpRx price: $149
• Xeljanz (rheumatology) — TrumpRx price: $1,518
• Xigduo Xr (diabetes) — TrumpRx price: $181.59
• Zarontin (anticonvulsant) — TrumpRx price: $71.10
• Zavzpret (migraine treatment) — TrumpRx price: $594.84
• Zepbound (weight loss, sleep apnea) — TrumpRx price $299
• Zyvox (antibiotic) — TrumpRx price: $122.74

In a conversation in Davos, Switzerland, with BlackRock CEO and World Economic Forum interim chair Larry Fink, Musk said this belief is the framework of his technology ventures and  $600 billion of wealth. Because there’s a small likelihood of life outside of Earth, Musk said the project of preserving humanity becomes more urgent.

I’m often asked, ‘Are there aliens among us?’ And I’ll say that I am one. They don’t believe me,” Musk said, unclear if he was joking or what particular point he was trying to make by asserting his alienness. 

“Or you’re from the future,” Fink responded, alluding to previous times Musk has called himself a 3,000-year-old time-travelling vampire.

“The bottom line is, I think we need to assume that life and consciousness is extremely rare and it might only be us,” Musk added. “And if that’s the case, then we need to do everything possible to ensure that the light of consciousness is not extinguished.”

Musk’s vision of protecting humanity manifested more than a decade ago, when he founded OpenAI alongside Sam Altman in 2015 with the hopes of addressing the existential risks and safety concerns associated with the budding technology. He told Fink that Tesla and SpaceX, worth $1.4 trillion and $800 billion, respectively, were an extension of this belief, with the purpose not only to create sustainable technology, but “sustainable abundance.”

Musk’s vision for the future of humanity

Musk reiterated his vision of an abundance of humanoid robotics that would make work optional, claiming technology would ease the burden of humans to have jobs or even have money.

“With robotics and AI, this is really the path to abundance for all,” Musk said. “People often talk about solving global poverty, or essentially, how do we make everyone have a very high standard of living? I think the only way to do this is AI and robotics.”

The billionaire describes a world with billions of robots—which would outnumber humans—and would serve to complete tasks including caring for children and elderly parents. He predicted that there would be functional humanoid robot technology by the end of the year, and said he expected those robots to be retail available in the next couple of years. 

To be sure, Tesla’s own Optimus robots have hit snags, continuously falling behind production schedule, with Musk saying as recently as Tuesday that manufacturing for the bots, as well as the Tesla Cybercab, would be “agonizingly slow” before production eventually ramped up.

Musk has previously said humans would be able to sustain themselves without work through a universal basic income, but did not provide details on the political steps needed to provide that income to humans.

These missions to preserve humanity extend beyond earth. Musk has described his goals as “Mars-shot,” alluding to his hopes to put human life on Mars, efforts he has even touched on in Tesla’s financial filings. The CEO has previously said he envisions Mars as an insurance policy for the future of humanity, wanting to use it as a jumping off point to expand resources to explore human consciousness.

“I’ve been asked a few times like, ‘Do I want to die on Mars?’” Musk said on Thursday. “And I’m like, ‘Yes, but just not on impact.’”

The Fermi Paradox, according to Musk

Musk’s philosophy regarding extraterrestrial life has previously engaged with the Fermi Paradox, a theory positing that there’s both a high change of intelligent life outside of earth—and scant evidence to prove it.

In 1950, Italian-American physicist Enrico Fermi, an architect of the atom bomb, asked a question in a conversation with colleagues at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico: “Where is everybody?”

The three-word inquiry launched a 1963 paper by American astronomer Carl Sagan and proliferated in the scientific community, and the popularized Fermi Paradox soon emerged.

Musk said in an X post in 2023 that humans “are the only tiny candle of consciousness in an abyss of darkness.”

“The scariest answer to the Fermi Paradox is that there are no aliens at all,” he said.

In 2022, Musk even commissioned a sculpture depicting the “Fermi Great Filter,” a potential resolution to the Fermi Paradox hypothesizing that intelligent life must face and overcome a series of challenges, including the Great Filter which only few evolved species are able to overcome. The statue shows a giant fork with two diverging paths, indicating the choices a civilization must make to survive: a fork in the road, a motive Musk has oft drawn on. 

Critiques of Musk’s philosophy

The high-stakes nature associated with Musk’s philosophy has drawn concern, with some arguing this effort to preserve humanity is actually threatening it. Rebecca Charbonneau, a historian at the American Institute of Physics, had a different interpretation of Musk’s philosophy as it pertained to work. In a piece published in Scientific American in February 2025, Charbonneau said Musk’s beliefs around preserving humanity reflected a bigger ideology in the world of tech. 

Roots in vestiges of Cold War anxieties (the same time period in which the Fermi Paradox emerged), tech leaders often saw a false binary of either limitless prosperity or complete societal collapse, Charbonneau argued. As a result, many in the field, including Musk, are willing to go to extreme measures in the name of avoiding what they perceive as humanity’s demise. 

“Proponents of this survivalist mindset see it as justifying particular programs of technological escalation at any cost, framing the future as a desperate race against catastrophe rather than a space for multiple thriving possibilities,” Charbonneau wrote.

She noted that Musk’s “Fork in the Road,” a strategy he employed both in culling staff at X and in the federal government as de facto leader of DOGE, was reflective of this. Musk called DOGE the “chainsaw of bureaucracy,” promising to shave $2 trillion in federal spending. Instead, the advisory eliminated about $150 billion in spending through headcount reductions and contract cancellations. Federal workers said the cuts made their jobs harder, eliminating valuable resources that resulted in their jobs taking longer, with the quality of the government’s work suffering.

Charbonneau argued Musk’s philosophy eliminates opportunities for nuance, making institutions—and humanity—vulnerable to often extreme responses to delicate situations.

“By framing humanity’s challenges as simple engineering problems rather than complex systemic ones, technologists position themselves as decisive architects of our future, crafting grand visions that sidestep the messier, necessary work of social, political and collaborative change,” she said.

The Trump administration has negotiated lower prices for 15 widely used medications covered by Medicare, with the federal government saying the effort will cut spending on those drugs by 44%, or about $12 billion. So will the initiative help save money for seniors?

That’s less clear, given that Medicare enrollees are already protected by a cap on drug costs. But the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) said Monday the new prices will save the 55 million people enrolled in the Part D pharmaceutical plan a total of about $685 million.

Individuals’ out-of-pocket reductions are likely to vary based on whether they use one or more of the drugs covered under the new agreement and if they’ve reached their annual spending cap. On average, however, with 5.3 million people using the newly discounted drugs, that equates to savings of roughly $129 per Medicare enrollee.

CMS didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment about the projected individual savings under the new Medicare pricing plan. 

The lower drug prices were arranged through the Inflation Reduction Act, which included a measure to negotiate prices for some of Medicare’s most expensive drugs. Before the 2022 law, Medicare was prohibited from negotiating with pharmaceutical firms to secure more favorable drug prices for participants in the government health program. 

Under the new agreement, lower prices for the 15 drugs will take effect in 2027 for medications bought through Medicare’s Part D prescription plan, CMS said. The discounts will range from 38% to 85% off the medications’ list prices, according to the agency. 

The best-known drugs covered by the agreement include Novo Nordisk’s Ozempic and Wegovy, popular medications used for diabetes treatment and weight loss, while other drugs on the list are used to treat common diseases such as asthma and prostate cancer. 

The cost of prescription drugs ranks among the top concerns of seniors, according to AARP. 

Starting in 2025, the Inflation Reduction Act also introduced a $2,000 out-of-pocket spending cap for seniors. Because that spending limit is adjusted annually for inflation, it could reach about $2,200 in 2027 based on current trends. Medicare enrollees pay nothing for covered prescriptions above that amount. In other words, the negotiated prices for the 15 drugs could help seniors lower their costs until they hit that threshold.

About 5.3 million people with Medicare Part D coverage used the 15 drugs to treat diseases such as diabetes and asthma, CMS said. The medications account for $40.7 billion in spending in Medicare Part D.

Aside from savings that individuals might see on their prescriptions, the lower drug pricing will benefit Medicare itself, Merith Basey, executive director of Patients For Affordable Drugs, an advocacy group for lowering prescription costs, told CBS News. 

“Medicare is using its bargaining power to lower prices on the most expensive drugs covered by the program,” Basey said. “The savings gained from the new, lower negotiated prices are what allow the program to pay for the out-of-pocket cap.”

The program’s ability to negotiate drug costs also represents “the most powerful tool we currently have in place to rein in drug prices and hold the pharmaceutical industry accountable,” she added.

Medicare’s negotiations are separate from deals negotiated by President Trump to lower prices for Zepbound, Ozempic and Wegovy, announced earlier this month. Under that agreement — which covers eligible patients on Medicare, Medicaid and the planned TrumpRX pharmaceutical website — the monthly cost of the GLP-1 drugs will range from $245 to $350, down from as high as $1,350 per month.

However, the price for Medicare enrollees for Wegovy and Ozempic under the earlier deal will be $245, less than the $274 negotiated by CMS. In Monday’s announcement, CMS didn’t specify how the two programs might work together, and the agency didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), the nonpartisan budget watchdog that regularly crunches numbers on policy impacts on the $38 trillion national debt, included this as one estimate in a series of projections published in early November.

An extension could cost roughly $50 billion over the first two years, according to a CRFB statement issued to Fortune, although details continue to trickle in from various reports. It could be roughly cost-neutral over a decade if cost-sharing reductions (CSR) and other reforms being considered are made permanent. Costs could differ significantly depending on how the details play out. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated that extending the enhanced subsidies in full would cost $350 billion over a decade.

The political pressure stems from the scheduled end of temporary, generous subsidies that were established by the American Rescue Plan Act and the Inflation Reduction Act. These enhanced subsidies are set to expire at the end of 2025, which will cause the system to revert to the original, less generous ACA subsidy structure.

Doubling of health insurance costs projected

The ACA, established in 2014, created exchanges for individuals without employer-based coverage and instituted income-based subsidies pegged to the cost of the second lowest-cost “silver” plan. Subsidies are generally paid on a sliding-scale basis for those making between 100% and 400% of Federal Poverty Level (FPL). This schedule caps premiums for the benchmark plan at 2% of income for those at 100% FPL, rising to 9.96% of income for those approaching 400% FPL.

The temporary enhanced subsidies were significantly more generous, covering the full benchmark premium cost for those between 100% and 150% of FPL, and limiting premiums to 8.5% of income for all beneficiaries at 400% of FPL or more, theoretically extending availability to very high-income enrollees.

If the enhanced subsidies don’t get extended, the average premium enrollees would pay is projected to more than double. For a family of four at 250% of the FPL, premiums would grow from $268 to $565 a month. Those above 400% of the FPL, they could pay $2,000 per month.

Ultimately, the choice facing lawmakers is primarily about who pays. Extending subsidies shifts the burden from enrollees to taxpayers and, if deficit-financed, future generations.

As CRFB President Maya MacGuineas advises, given the nation’s “unsustainable fiscal situation,” any extension should be accompanied by reforms and offsets.

For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. 

Clean fuel production credit

Extend credit for biofuels an additional four years through 2031 and make changes

$26 bil.

Carbon oxide sequestration credit

Restrict access for foreign entities

$14 bil.

Partnership rules for companies involved in energy extraction and storage

Allow publicly traded companies substantially involved in hydrogen storage, carbon capture, advanced nuclear, hydropower and geothermal energy to be taxed as partnerships

$3.2 bil.

Methane emissions and waste reduction rescissions

Postpone for 10 years the implementation of a fee on methane leaks from oil and gas operations and rescind funding for other programs to reduce leaks

$1.4 bil.

Intangible drilling and development costs

Change the tax treatment for certain costs for corporations involved in energy drilling

$0.4 bil.

Refunds for dyed fuels

Allow refunds of federal fuel excise taxes paid on fuel that was indelibly dyed for off-road or agricultural purposes

—

Expedited environmental reviews

Allow project sponsors to expedite environmental reviews for a fee

—

Endangered Species Act recovery plans rescission

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds

—

Diesel emissions reductions rescission

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds

–$0.1 bil.

“Climate Change Action Plans” for state, local and tribal governments

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds

–$0.1 bil.

Carbon footprint labeling for construction materials rescission

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds

–$0.1 bil.

Air pollution rescission

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds, including for schools

–$0.1 bil.

Energy efficient commercial buildings deduction

Terminate a tax deduction for energy efficient HVAC, lighting systems, and other improvements for construction 12 months after enactment

–$0.1 bil.

Green and Resilient Retrofit Program rescission

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds for green housing program

–$0.1 bil.

Other Inflation Reduction Act rescissions

Related to greenhouse gases, environmental reviews, low-emissions electricity, data collection and hydrofluorocarbons

–$0.2 bil.

Declarations advertising the environmental impact of products rescission

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds

–$0.2 bil.

Sustainable aviation rescission

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds

–$0.2 bil.

Environmental and climate justice block grants

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds

–$0.3 bil.

Clean heavy-duty vehicles rescission

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds that help states and localities adopt zero-emission vehicles

–$0.4 bil.

Cost recovery for energy property and clean energy facilities

Eliminates special tax treatment for certain clean energy projects begun after enactment

–$0.4 bil.

Green federal buildings rescissions

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds

–$0.7 bil.

Low-carbon transportation material grants rescission

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds

–$1.3 bil.

Neighborhood Access and Equity Grant Program rescission

Rescind Inflation Reduction Act funds for a grant program to improve walkability, safety and affordable transportation

–$1.7 bil.

Alternative fuel vehicle refueling property credit

Terminate 12 months after enactment

–$2.0 bil.

Automaker fuel economy penalties

–$2.8 bil.

Energy efficient credit for new homes

Terminate a tax credit for the construction of new homes that meet energy star standards 12 months after enactment

–$5.4 bil.

Clean hydrogen production credit

Terminate at the end of 2025

–$5.9 bil.

Previously owned clean vehicle credit

Terminate a tax credit for clean energy used car purchases 180 days after enactment

–$7.4 bil.

Energy efficient home improvement credit

Terminate a tax credit for energy audits and renovations to improve efficiency 180 days after enactment

–$21 bil.

Clean electricity production and investment credit

Phase down tax credits for low-emissions electricity sources like wind, solar, nuclear and geothermal power. New restrictions on transferability and the use of components from China.

–$29 bil.

Advanced manufacturing production credit

Phase out in 2031, one year earlier than current law, and disqualify facilities that use certain components from China and other “foreign entities of concern”

–$50 bil.

Residential clean energy credit

Terminate the tax credit for rooftop solar, geothermal heat pumps and other home devices 180 days after enactment

–$77 bil.

Clean vehicle credit

Terminate the $7,500 consumer rebate for electric vehicles 180 days after enactment

–$78 bil.

Qualified commercial clean vehicles credit

Terminate the credit for companies that buy electric cars or trucks, including businesses that lease the vehicles to consumers, 180 days after enactment

–$105 bil.

Clean energy electricity investment credit

Phase down tax credits for investments in zero emissions electricty sources, starting in 2026.

–$179 bil.