To amend sections 319.202, 319.54, 5747.02, 5747.03, and 5747.07 and to enact section 3345.012 of the Revised Code to provide a state-subsidized, tuition-free public higher education to Ohio students and to increase and levy taxes to fund that subsidy.
HB854 would create a state-subsidized, tuition-free public higher education program for Ohio residents attending state institutions of higher education. Beginning with the academic year after the bill’s effective date, participating institutions could not charge instructional, general, or special fees to eligible Ohio resident students, and each institution would be required to provide up to the equivalent of eight semesters of free higher education. The bill also directs the Chancellor of Higher Education to administer the program, develop a funding distribution method, and adopt rules to implement the new section of law.
To finance the program, the bill creates the Ohio free college fund and adds new revenue streams to it. It imposes a new 1% real property transfer fee on residential property transfers valued above $2 million, with several exemptions for transfers that are already exempt from existing conveyance fees. It also adds a new income tax surcharge on high-income individuals, trusts, and estates with income over $500,000, and a separate withholding-related tax on employers with more than $10 million in annual compensation subject to withholding. Revenue from these taxes would be deposited into the new fund and used to subsidize tuition costs.
The bill also makes conforming changes to existing property transfer and income tax statutes. It amends conveyance and transfer-fee procedures in sections 319.202 and 319.54, including directing county auditors to collect and remit the new residential transfer fee. It amends sections 5747.02, 5747.03, and 5747.07 to add the new tax provisions and to route the resulting revenue to the Ohio free college fund, while preserving the existing structure of Ohio’s income tax administration for the underlying tax code.
The overall sentiment reflected in the available context is limited because the bill was only introduced and had no recorded committee testimony or votes. Based on the bill’s title and structure, it appears to be a policy proposal aimed at expanding college affordability through a dedicated public subsidy, paired with new taxes on higher-value real estate transactions, high-income taxpayers, and large employers. Because there is no recorded debate, no formal support or opposition can be measured from the available legislative history.
The main points of likely contention are the new taxes and fees used to fund the tuition benefit. The bill shifts costs toward owners of high-value residential property, high-income taxpayers, and large employers, which could draw criticism from taxpayers, business groups, and real estate interests. Supporters would likely emphasize the tuition-free public college benefit and the use of targeted revenue sources, while opponents may focus on the size of the tax increases, the impact on housing transactions, and the broader fiscal implications for the state tax system.
HB854 would amend Ohio’s property conveyance and income tax statutes and create a new section establishing the Ohio free college fund and a tuition-free public higher education subsidy for Ohio residents. It would require state institutions of higher education to waive instructional, general, and special fees for eligible students for up to eight semesters, while also adding new state revenue mechanisms: a 1% transfer fee on residential property valued above $2 million, a new high-income tax surcharge, and a withholding-based employer tax. The bill would also direct county auditors and the tax commissioner to administer the new transfer fee and tax collection provisions, and it would redirect the resulting revenue to higher education funding.
The available record shows no committee votes or hearing testimony, so there is no documented legislative debate to gauge support or opposition. The bill’s framing suggests a strongly pro-higher-education, affordability-oriented policy proposal, but the absence of recorded discussion means sentiment must be inferred from the bill’s purpose rather than from legislative reaction. In practical terms, the proposal appears designed to appeal to supporters of tuition-free public college and progressive revenue measures, while likely prompting concern from those wary of new taxes and fees.
The most likely points of contention are the new funding sources: the residential property transfer fee on high-value homes, the additional income tax on high earners, and the employer withholding-related tax. Critics may argue these provisions increase burdens on homeowners, investors, businesses, and high-income taxpayers, and may question whether the revenue stream is stable enough to support a tuition-free program. Supporters are likely to argue that the taxes are targeted and necessary to finance broad access to public higher education. Because there was no recorded committee testimony or vote, the specific positions of legislators or stakeholders are not documented in the available materials.