HB1791 amends the Illinois Property Tax Code to create a new assessment framework for commercial energy storage systems in counties with fewer than 3,000,000 inhabitants. Beginning with assessment year 2025, the bill sets a specific method for valuing these improvements: the fair cash value would be based on a trended real property cost basis, reduced by an allowance for physical depreciation, with additional reductions allowed for functional or external obsolescence if proven by clear and convincing evidence. The bill also caps total depreciation/obsolescence reductions at 70% of trended cost basis and allows county assessors to adjust the system’s actual age to reflect routine component replacement or upgrades.
The bill further exempts these systems from equalization factors applied by the Department of Revenue, boards of review, assessors, and chief county assessment officers. It requires the owner of a commercial energy storage system to commission, at the owner’s expense, a metes and bounds survey of the site, including access routes under exclusive control, and authorizes the issuance of a separate parcel identification number for assessment purposes. If no survey is provided, the chief county assessment officer may determine the occupied area, and that determination cannot be challenged by the owner on review. The bill also assigns real estate tax liability for the land and improvements to the energy storage system owner, while allowing the landowner to pay delinquent taxes before tax sale proceedings.
HB1791 also addresses how these sites interact with farmland assessment. If land was assessed as farmland before being used for a commercial energy storage system, it would return to farmland assessment after the system is removed, so long as the land is returned to farm use. In addition, taxing districts may, by majority vote, abate some or all real property taxes levied on a commercial energy storage system. The bill applies to assessment years 2025 through 2040 and takes effect immediately.
The overall sentiment in the available record is difficult to gauge because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes included with the bill materials. Based on the text alone, the bill appears designed to provide a clearer and more predictable tax treatment for a growing class of energy infrastructure, which may be viewed favorably by developers and local governments seeking investment. At the same time, the bill’s special valuation rules, exemption from equalization, and limits on review could raise concerns among assessors, taxing districts, and property tax stakeholders who may view it as narrowing local discretion or reducing assessed values.
The main points of contention are likely to center on the preferential assessment methodology, the exclusion from equalization, and the burden placed on system owners to fund surveys and parcel delineation. Local taxing bodies may also be divided over the abatement authority, since it allows districts to voluntarily reduce taxes on these projects. Another possible issue is the bill’s county-size limitation, which applies only in counties under 3,000,000 inhabitants and may create different treatment for similar facilities depending on location.
HB1791 would add a new division to the Property Tax Code governing the assessment and taxation of commercial energy storage systems in Illinois counties with fewer than 3,000,000 residents. It would establish a specialized valuation formula, remove these properties from equalization processes, require separate parcel identification and survey documentation, assign tax liability to the system owner, and create rules for farmland reversion and optional tax abatements. The bill would affect energy storage developers, landowners, county assessors, boards of review, the Department of Revenue, and local taxing districts, and would apply prospectively to assessment years 2025 through 2040.
No committee discussion or vote history is provided, so there is no recorded legislative sentiment to summarize from the available materials. The bill text suggests a policy intent to encourage or standardize development of commercial energy storage by creating a predictable tax regime, which may appeal to industry and some local officials. However, the specialized tax treatment also suggests likely caution or opposition from property tax administrators and taxing districts concerned about valuation, revenue impacts, and reduced review authority.
Likely areas of contention include the bill’s preferential assessment formula for commercial energy storage systems, the prohibition on equalization factors, and the cap on combined depreciation and obsolescence reductions. Assessors and county officials may object to the reduced discretion and the finality of certain determinations, while taxing districts may be concerned about revenue loss and the new abatement authority. Developers and project owners are likely to support the bill because it provides clearer valuation rules, parceling procedures, and a path for farmland restoration after project removal.