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, titled the Property Tax Refund Act, would create a new refundable Ohio income tax credit or rebate for certain homeowners and renters whose housing costs exceed a set share of household resources. For homeowners, the credit would equal the amount by which property taxes due exceed 5% of total household resources; for renters, the bill treats 15% of gross rent as a “rent-equivalent tax” and allows a rebate or credit for the amount above that same 5% threshold. The measure is limited to eligible claimants who occupy a homestead as a primary residence and meet income and property-value or rent caps, with the caps and dollar limits adjusted annually for inflation.
The bill also specifies how the credit would work for taxpayers who file Ohio income tax returns and for those who do not. Tax filers would claim the benefit as part of their annual return, while non-filers could apply for a rebate through a form prescribed by the tax commissioner. The bill sets initial household-resource limits, creates a single-claimant-per-homestead rule, and requires the tax commissioner to publish annual home-value and rent limits based on U.S. Census American Community Survey data. It also includes a reconciliation rule requiring claimants to adjust future claims if the prior year’s credit or rebate was based on an estimated or different amount of property tax due.
In terms of state law, HB365 would add new section 5747.87 to the Revised Code and amend sections 5747.08 and 5747.98 to integrate the new credit into Ohio’s individual income tax filing and credit-ordering framework. It would also place the property-tax/rent benefit in the statutory order of credits so it can be applied against aggregate income tax liability, and it would make the credit refundable, meaning eligible taxpayers could receive a refund if the credit exceeds their tax due. The bill would therefore expand the state income tax code to include a new housing-cost relief mechanism for both owners and renters.
The general sentiment reflected in the bill materials is supportive and policy-driven, though no committee testimony or votes are available in the provided record. The bill has multiple cosponsors, suggesting interest in the proposal among House members, and its title and structure indicate an effort to provide direct relief to households facing high property taxes or rent burdens. Because the measure was only introduced and had not advanced beyond the House Ways and Means Committee, there is no recorded floor debate or vote history to indicate broader legislative consensus or opposition.
The main points of contention likely center on eligibility design and fiscal impact. The bill uses a 5% of income threshold, income caps, and property-value/rent limits, which may raise questions about who qualifies and whether the relief is targeted enough. Potential concerns also include the treatment of renters through a rent-equivalent tax formula, the administrative burden on the Department of Taxation, and the cost to the state treasury from making the credit refundable. Another possible issue is whether the bill’s limits and annual inflation adjustments adequately track housing costs across different regions of Ohio.
HB365 would create a new refundable income tax credit/rebate in Chapter 5747 of the Revised Code for qualifying homeowners and renters, while amending the state income tax credit ordering rules to place the new benefit among refundable credits. It would require the tax commissioner to administer annual limits, forms, and adjustments, and it would affect taxpayers, landlords indirectly through rent payments, and the Department of Taxation through new filing and rebate procedures.
The available context suggests generally favorable sentiment toward the bill, as shown by its introduction with multiple cosponsors and its framing as property-tax relief for homeowners and renters. However, there is no committee testimony or vote record provided, so there is no direct evidence of formal support or opposition from hearings or floor action. The measure appears to be an early-stage proposal with policy interest but no recorded legislative outcome yet.
Likely areas of contention include the bill’s fiscal cost, the fairness and precision of its eligibility thresholds, and the administrative complexity of implementing a refundable credit and rebate system. Critics may question the use of a 5% income benchmark, the rent-equivalent tax assumption for renters, and whether the income and home-value/rent caps exclude too many or too few households. Supporters would likely emphasize targeted relief for households burdened by rising property taxes and housing costs.