Taxation: farmland and open space; certain references in the farmland and open space preservation statute; make gender neutral. Amends sec. 36109 of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.36109). TIE BAR WITH: HJR F'25
HB4607 amends section 36109 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, which provides a state tax credit for owners of farmland subject to development rights agreements, agricultural conservation easements, or purchases of development rights. The bill largely restates and updates the existing credit provisions, including how the credit is calculated when property taxes on protected farmland exceed 3.5% of household income resources or, for certain business taxpayers, 3.5% of adjusted business income or business income tax base. It also preserves the detailed rules for determining who counts as an owner for purposes of the credit, including partners, S corporation shareholders, life estate holders, trust beneficiaries, and LLC members.
The bill also clarifies how the credit is apportioned among multiple owners, how refunds are issued when the credit exceeds tax liability, and how the Department of Treasury administers, audits, and pays claims. It retains provisions allowing the credit to be used against state income tax or certain business taxes, with excess amounts paid out as refunds subject to statutory limits. The bill includes special rules for older S corporation claims and amended returns, and it continues to require documentation such as partnership agreements or trust records when ownership is indirect.
In practical terms, the bill affects Michigan farmers and landowners who have enrolled property in farmland preservation programs and pay property taxes on restricted land and structures. It does not create a new program so much as amend and reorganize the existing credit framework, while also making the statutory language more gender neutral, as reflected in the bill caption. The bill is tied to a proposed constitutional change, and the amendatory act would not take effect unless the related joint resolution becomes part of the state constitution.
The general sentiment reflected by the available context is neutral and procedural rather than contentious. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, so there is no evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the materials supplied. The bill appears to be a technical and conforming update to an existing tax credit statute, with the main policy purpose being clarification and modernization of language rather than a substantive expansion of benefits.
Notable points of contention, based on the text itself, would likely center on the complexity of the credit rules, the administrative burden of proving eligibility and ownership shares, and the fiscal effect of continuing a refundable tax credit for preserved farmland. However, no specific objections or competing viewpoints are included in the record provided. The tie-bar to HJR F'25 is also significant because the bill’s effectiveness depends on a separate constitutional amendment, making the measure contingent rather than standalone.
HB4607 would amend Michigan’s farmland and open space preservation tax credit statute in MCL 324.36109. It preserves the existing credit structure for owners of farmland under development rights agreements, agricultural conservation easements, or purchases of development rights, while updating ownership, apportionment, refund, and administration rules. The bill affects the Department of Treasury’s handling of claims and payments and continues to interact with the state income tax act, the former single business tax act, and the Michigan business tax act. Its practical impact is on qualifying farmland owners, including individuals, partnerships, S corporations, trusts, estates, and LLC members, but the bill would not take effect unless the related constitutional resolution is adopted.
The available record suggests a generally neutral and technical sentiment around the bill. There are no committee transcripts or votes showing active support or opposition, and the caption indicates the measure is primarily a conforming amendment to make references in the farmland and open space preservation statute gender neutral. Because the bill is tied to a separate constitutional resolution, discussion would likely have focused more on legal consistency and implementation than on broad policy disagreement.
No specific contention is documented in the provided materials. Based on the bill text, the most likely areas of debate would be the refundable nature of the credit, the complexity of eligibility rules for different ownership structures, and the administrative requirements for documentation and apportionment. Another possible point of concern is the bill’s tie-bar to HJR F'25, since the amendment would not become effective unless the related constitutional change is approved. However, the record supplied does not include any expressed objections, amendments, or recorded opposition.