To amend sections 5747.08 and 5747.98 and to enact section 5747.87 of the Revised Code to authorize a refundable income tax credit or rebate for homeowners and renters whose property taxes or a portion of their rent exceed five per cent of their income and to name this act the Property Tax Refund Act.
HB365, the Property Tax Refund Act, would create a new refundable Ohio income tax credit or rebate for certain homeowners and renters whose housing costs are high relative to income. The bill allows an eligible claimant to receive relief when property taxes, or a rent-equivalent amount for renters, exceed 5% of household resources. For homeowners, the credit equals the amount by which property tax due exceeds that 5% threshold; for renters, the bill treats 15% of gross rent as the rent-equivalent tax paid and provides relief for the amount above the threshold.
The bill sets income-based eligibility rules and caps the benefit by household resources. For the first claim year, households with resources up to $100,000 may qualify, with maximum credits or rebates ranging from $1,000 for households at or below $60,000 to $200 for households between $90,000 and $100,000. The tax commissioner would annually publish home value and rent limits based on county median housing and rent data, and would adjust the income tiers and caps over time using the GDP deflator. The measure also provides a separate rebate application process for claimants who do not file Ohio income tax returns, and it requires only one eligible claimant per homestead.
HB365 would amend the state income tax credit ordering statute so that this new property tax/rent credit is included among Ohio’s refundable credits and claimed in the prescribed order. It also makes conforming changes to the tax return provisions to accommodate the new credit or rebate. In practical terms, the bill would reduce state income tax liability for qualifying taxpayers and could generate direct refunds for some households, while shifting administration to the Department of Taxation.
The bill’s impact would be felt most by lower- and middle-income homeowners and renters with relatively high housing costs, including seniors, fixed-income households, and residents in high-cost counties. Because the credit is refundable, it could benefit taxpayers even when they owe little or no income tax. The bill would not directly change local property tax rates or school funding formulas, but it would provide state-level tax relief tied to housing costs and household income.
There is no recorded committee testimony or vote history in the provided materials, so no formal legislative sentiment is available beyond the bill’s introduction and sponsorship. Based on the text and cosponsorship, the measure appears to have been introduced as a broadly supportive tax-relief proposal. Potential points of contention likely include the cost to the state treasury, whether the income and property-value thresholds are set appropriately, and whether renters should receive relief through a rent-equivalent formula rather than a direct property tax measure.
HB365 would add a new refundable credit/rebate to Ohio’s personal income tax code in Chapter 5747 and amend the credit-ordering statute so the new benefit is treated as a refundable credit. It would create a new section, 5747.87, establishing eligibility, application procedures, annual inflation adjustments, and administrative rules for the Department of Taxation. The bill would primarily affect homeowners and renters with housing costs above 5% of household resources, while also requiring conforming changes to existing return and credit provisions.
No committee transcripts or votes were provided, so there is no documented debate record to gauge formal sentiment. The bill’s introduction with multiple cosponsors suggests interest in property tax relief and housing affordability, and the measure is framed as consumer relief rather than tax expansion. Overall, the available record indicates a favorable or at least supportive posture at introduction, but without recorded testimony the level of consensus or opposition cannot be determined.
The main likely points of contention are fiscal and policy design issues: the cost of a refundable credit, whether the 5% income threshold and household-resource caps are too broad or too narrow, and whether the bill should aid renters through a rent-equivalent calculation. Another possible issue is administrative complexity, since the Department of Taxation would need to publish annual home-value and rent limits, process separate rebate applications, and adjust amounts for inflation. No specific opponents or supporters are identified in the provided materials.