I’ve uploaded a (primarily) NotebookLM section by section summary of tax related provisions found in the Senate Finance Committee draft issued on June 16, 2025, using the law text and the committee’s section by section summaries as inputs. While I’ve roughly reviewed each section’s explanation, I have not done a deep dive on confirming treatments since this clearly won’t be the final bill.

For those note aware, NotebookLM is a Google notes/study web application that uses specific sources uploaded to each notebook as the inputs to answer questions, generate summaries, FAQs and study materials on the provided items. The inputs given were:

Finance Committee Proposed Legislative Text

Section by Section Details in Summary Form

My document was generated by making a standard inquiry of NotebookLM on a bill section by section basis. That helps focus the program on the items in that section and reduces (but does not eliminate) the risk that it will find and misinterpret irrelevant items in the texts about each section.

Here is the query I used, changing the section number for each run.

Please write a summary of Section 71304 of the proposed legislation.  Outline the provisions found in current law, how the bill would change the law going forward, and any Internal Revenue Code provisions impacted by the law change.  You are a CPA experienced in tax matters writing an article to explain this provision to other experienced tax professionals.  Try to maintain a neutral position on any policy related matters, concentrating primarily on the mechanics of the operation of the old and new law.  Do not discuss IRC Section 15 revisions in this article. Just include the article, with no text before or after the article you generate. The title of the article should only be the word “Section” followed by the section number and then the formal title of the section.

A couple of notes on the last few sentences. The Section 15 discussion in both the bill and the summary applies generally to the bill, so NotebookLM wanted to keep bringing it up every time even though it really only impacts a few provision. I kept it in the first section discussion on rates, but then suppressed it. I also didn’t really want the “chatty” description of what I had asked (so thus the suppress text before and after the article) and the last couple of sentences just helped to get more consistent headers and titles.

Here is the entire document that was created on this bill. Again, use this as a rough guide and it some issue is crucial for your client, please go directly to the sources noted above. Any time something is “summarized” by definition some things get left out, and sometimes those details are important in your client’s situation. As well, errors do creep in for various reasons, so confirming any editorial source (including CCH and RIA’s) is an important step before relying on any analysis.