Oklahoma Senate Bill SB313

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/3/25
• Refer: 2/4/25

Caption

Collection of delinquent taxes; requiring transfer of excess proceeds to the State Treasurer for deposit in the Unclaimed Property Fund. Effective date.

Summary

SB313 amends Oklahoma law governing county tax resale sales of property with delinquent taxes. Under current law, money collected at resale is treated as tax collections and apportioned to the proper tax accounts, while excess proceeds are held for the property owner. This bill keeps that basic framework but adds a new requirement that, if the county treasurer makes all reasonable efforts and cannot return the excess proceeds to the owner, those funds must be remitted to the State Treasurer for deposit in the Unclaimed Property Fund. The bill specifically revises 68 O.S. 2021, Section 3130, which addresses how proceeds from resale of property are handled, including the treatment of penalties, listing fees, publication costs, and the apportionment of proceeds when property sells for less than the total taxes due. It would not change the underlying tax collection or resale process, but it would create a statutory destination for unclaimed excess proceeds after owner-recovery efforts are exhausted. The effective date is November 1, 2025.

Impact

SB313 would alter the disposition of excess proceeds from county tax resale sales by directing unclaimed funds to the State Treasurer for the Unclaimed Property Fund instead of leaving them indefinitely with the county or otherwise unaddressed. It affects county treasurers, property owners whose land is sold for delinquent taxes, and the state unclaimed property system, while leaving the core delinquent tax resale and apportionment rules intact.

Sentiment

Based on the available context, the bill appears to have a neutral-to-supportive reception, with no recorded committee testimony or floor debate in the provided materials. Its referral to Revenue and Taxation suggests it was treated as a technical tax-administration measure rather than a controversial policy change, and there are no votes or amendments in the record provided to indicate opposition or broad disagreement.

Contention

The main potential point of contention is the handling of excess proceeds from tax resale sales: whether those funds should remain available to the property owner, stay within county administration, or be transferred to the state’s unclaimed property system after reasonable recovery efforts fail. Any concern would likely center on the adequacy of efforts to locate owners and the administrative burden on county treasurers, but no specific objections or supporters are identified in the provided record.