House Bill 6064 would amend Michigan’s Income Tax Act to create a new refundable income tax credit for employers that make payments toward a qualified student loan on behalf of certain employees. The credit equals 25% of the amount paid during the tax year for a qualified employee who moved to Michigan for employment after earning a bachelor’s, master’s, or other graduate degree, and who did not graduate from a Michigan high school or from a Michigan postsecondary institution. The bill is aimed at encouraging employers to help attract and retain out-of-state educated workers who relocate to Michigan.
The credit is capped for each employee and tax year at 20% of the average yearly tuition at a Michigan public university. Employers must provide documentation to the Department of Treasury, including identifying information for the employer and employee, graduation date, and payment details, and the department may require additional eligibility information. If the credit exceeds the taxpayer’s liability, the excess is refundable, making the benefit available even to employers with limited tax liability.
If enacted, the bill would add section 679a to the Michigan Income Tax Act and create a new state tax expenditure for employer-paid student loan assistance tied to recruitment of qualified employees. It would affect employers that hire relocated graduates and would require the Department of Treasury to administer and verify claims. The bill’s effective date is contingent on enactment of several related bills, indicating it is part of a broader legislative package rather than a standalone tax change.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the available record. Based on the bill text, the measure appears pro-business and workforce-oriented, with a policy goal of making Michigan more competitive in attracting educated workers. The refundable nature of the credit suggests the bill is designed to provide a meaningful incentive rather than a narrow tax reduction.
The main likely points of contention are the cost to the state from a refundable tax credit, the fairness of limiting the benefit to employees who did not graduate from Michigan schools or institutions, and the administrative burden of documenting loan payments and eligibility. Critics may question whether the credit subsidizes employer hiring decisions that would have occurred anyway, while supporters are likely to emphasize workforce recruitment, talent retention, and easing student debt for relocated professionals. The bill’s contingent enactment clause may also be notable because it ties this proposal to passage of related legislation.