Transcript Highlights:

• So we will be happy to take their sales tax.
• And we’re giving you dealer plates so you don’t pay sales tax.
• I think the tax credit's a 20% tax credit on investments over $5 million, less than $15 million.
• And so— ...is worthy of getting some kind of tax incentive.
• So if you make this tax credit non-transferable and they have to, and it's all basically— Tax credit

Committees: House Commerce , House Commerce, Consumer Protection, Energy and the Environment

Transcript Highlights:

• you like to move House File 3727 before the division with a recommendation that it be re-referred to Taxes
• </c> qualify for the for the tax exemption. qualify for the for the tax exemption.
• I stood on the House floor with a unanimous vote for an amendment to add this to the tax bill.
• Motion carries, and House File 3727 is referred to taxes. fighting for it in the future."
• </c> taxes committee. All in favor say I. taxes committee. All in favor say I. &gt;&gt; I.

Transcript Highlights:

• One county, San Francisco, will be a full-cent sales tax.
• My constituents pay sales tax and property tax into BART.
• That's the reality here. pay sales tax and property tax into BART.
• Does that say you stop the people from being taxed, or you just continue taxing them?
• Because to me, we've seen this... ...people from being taxed, or do you just continue taxing them?

Committee: House Transportation

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee heard SB 63 by Senator Wiener, as amended, a Bay Area transit funding measure intended to avert major service cuts at BART, Muni, Caltrain, and AC Transit. The authors said the region faces a fiscal cliff and that the bill would place a sales tax measure before voters to provide long-term operating support, paired with a third-party efficiency review and new accountability provisions. Supporters, including SPUR, Caltrain, BART, MTC, transit agencies, local governments, labor, and environmental groups, argued the measure is urgently needed to prevent collapse of transit service and broader economic harm. A major focus of the hearing was accountability and governance. The bill’s amended structure would create operator-specific ad hoc adjudication committees made up of commissioners from the counties that fund each operator, with the ability to withhold a portion of funding if problems are not corrected. Senator Wiener and Senator Arreguín said the amendments strengthened oversight and reflected extensive negotiations among the counties. Assemblymember Papan opposed the bill, arguing it still lacked fair representation and proactive oversight for San Mateo County and that the county was being asked to pay without sufficient control. Assemblymember Lackey also opposed the measure, calling it a bailout and criticizing the tax structure. Committee members questioned how complaints would be filed, how the adjudication process would work, whether MTC could override committee decisions, and how often counties could bring complaints. The authors explained that counties may file one complaint per operator per year, that MTC must follow the ad hoc committee’s recommendation, and that withheld funds would be returned if issues are resolved. After debate, Assemblymember Ahrens moved the bill and Assemblymember Harabedian seconded. The committee voted 11-5 to pass SB 63 as amended and send it to the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• are made after tax but you pay no tax when you eventually withdraw it.
• Okay, so that concludes plan qualification and tax law.
• These are written statements from the IRS that your plan is tax exempt.
• I'm just wondering how the tax law will apply to this.
• And I guess what I'm trying to figure out is, does the tax law...

Committee: Joint Select Committee on Pension Policy

Summary: The Select Committee on Pension Policy approved the June minutes by roll call vote, with 11 ayes and 6 excused. The chair then outlined meeting procedures and public comment rules before educational briefings began. Lisa Wan of the Office of the State Actuary gave the agency’s annual update, describing its staffing, clients, strategic plan, and performance measures. She noted the office is a small nonpartisan legislative agency that provides actuarial valuations, fiscal notes, policy analysis, and support for multiple retirement systems and boards, and said the office faces a heavy workload in 2025 because of the demographic experience study and other recurring projects. Jacob White provided the annual LEOFF 2 Board update, covering the board’s structure, plan demographics, funded status, contribution rates, and several policy topics under review. Those topics included a Seattle overtime/pension spiking review, catastrophic disability survivor benefits, retiree return-to-work employer contributions, and the change in interest credited to member accounts. He said the board would continue coordinating with DRS and report back through interim updates. Erin Gutierrez presented background for the LEOFF 1 study, explaining plan benefits, medical and death benefits, historic funding, and federal tax qualification issues. She compared Substitute House Bill 2034 and Substitute Senate Bill 5085, describing 2034 as a restatement/termination approach and 5085 as a merger into a Legacy Retirement Plan, both requiring IRS determination letters. Committee members asked questions about LEOFF 1 medical costs, funding sources, and tax implications, and public commenters urged the committee to protect tax qualification, consider a recurring COLA for PERS and TERS 1, and address pension policy concerns. The meeting ended with adjournment and notice of a 30-minute break before executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• taxes and there's provider taxes and there's intergovernmental<00:22:05.440><c> transfers.
• </c> provider taxes? provider taxes?
• and or increased provider taxes.
• Um, so presumably we could collect the tax, we could rebate the tax.
• and or increased new provider taxes and or increased provider<00:27:33.919><c> taxes.

Summary: The committee approved the previous meeting minutes and then reviewed a draft preliminary report on long-term managed care. The chair explained the report is intended to frame issues and outline legislative options, not make a final recommendation, especially given unresolved questions about the federal One Big Beautiful Bill (OB3). The report’s key issues included the current financing of county and private nursing homes through Medicaid rates, ProShare, MQUIP, and related funding mechanisms, and the concern that those payments could be affected or eliminated under a managed care model. Members also discussed managed care organizations’ role in Medicaid and cited other states’ experiences, noting examples of savings in Florida and Tennessee but higher costs in California. One member raised Indiana as another important comparison, and the committee agreed to add it to the report’s state examples. The committee also reviewed sections on dual eligibility, D-SNP, PACE, and CFI waivers. The chair raised concerns about whether OB3 creates incentives for states to move toward D-SNP and whether federal changes could affect provider taxes, state-directed payments, and intergovernmental transfers. Henry Litman, the state Medicaid director, said he would confirm details on D-SNP incentives and explained that ProShare is based on certified public expenditure rather than an IGT, while county cap financing is the relevant intergovernmental transfer issue. He said IGTs are not going away and that the main risk is whether current financing mechanisms could be preserved if the state later changed course. Members discussed the possibility of a waiver not being granted or renewed and the high fiscal impact that could have on counties and property taxes. The committee then discussed the population that any long-term managed care model should cover. Members agreed that there is no appetite to move developmental disability or acquired brain disorder populations into long-term managed care at this time, and the chair changed the report’s terminology from “elderly” to “aging population.” The chair also noted that the status quo option should reflect the recent shift toward home and community-based services and reduced nursing home utilization since earlier county reports. The report’s four policy options were summarized as: maintain the status quo; pursue D-SNP for dual eligibles, with DHHS potentially submitting an application as early as 2027; adopt an HCBS carveout; or move fully to managed care for the aging population. No final policy recommendation was made, and the committee discussed making edits to the draft before circulation, including adding Indiana, clarifying OB3-related issues, and changing the report title from “final” to “preliminary” or “interim.”

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, income tax and corporate income tax wasn't coming in as strong as projected either.
• And the reason I'm talking about sales tax is because sales tax growth is highly correlated to population
• And so sales tax has always been our tax category that helps pay for those population adjustments in
• And so sales tax has always been our tax category that helps pay for those population adjustments in
• But all told, sales tax projections are getting about 64% of total sales tax.

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• HB 143 would create a tax credit for resilient buildings in Florida to protect future property tax revenue
• The tax credit is either state corporate income tax or franchise tax liability.
• The tax credit can be transferred to a taxpayer subject to the aforementioned tax if the business owner
• The tax credit is either state, corporate income tax, or franchise tax liability.
• The tax credit, the tax can be transferred to a taxpayer subject to the aforementioned tax if the business

Summary: The Natural Resources and Disaster Subcommittee met for its first meeting of session and heard four bills. HB 209, the State Parks Preservation Act, would limit development in state parks and require stronger public notice and participation for land management plan changes. Members discussed protections for cabins and existing lodging, and an amendment aligned the bill with the Senate and clarified conservation-based recreational uses. Support came from Audubon Florida, Nature Conservancy, and others, and the bill was reported favorably with committee substitute after a unanimous roll call. HB 143 would create a Florida Resilient Buildings Tax Credit for new construction and retrofits that meet LEED-based resiliency standards, with a new advisory committee under DBPR to help administer the program. An amendment moved the process under DBPR, added UCF and FIU to the advisory council, and made technical conforming changes. The bill drew supportive testimony from a Boca Raton city council member and was reported favorably with committee substitute, with one no vote. HB 295 would direct DEP to develop a comprehensive waste reduction and recycling plan based on its 2020 recycling report, including education, market development, and recommendations for statutory changes. Testimony emphasized that the plan would be voluntary and would not impose costs or mandates on homeowners or businesses. The bill passed without amendments and was reported favorably. HB 585 would let owners of former phosphate mining lands record notice and obtain a Department of Health radiation survey to support a narrow defense against strict liability claims; an amendment clarified the notice content and limited the definition to mined lands, not gyp stacks. The bill drew extensive questions about notice, radiation thresholds, disclosure to buyers, and liability scope, but supporters from Mosaic, the Florida Chamber, and a health physicist argued it would improve transparency and help redevelop lands. It was reported favorably with committee substitute, with one soft yes and one no vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the increased amounts of conveyance tax the increased amounts of conveyance tax revenue<00:14:39.040
• </c> Tax Foundation of Hawaii with comments. Tax Foundation of Hawaii with comments.
• </c><00:16:26.560><c> Tax</c> Chica who's in another hearing. Tax Chica who's in another hearing.
• </c> tax revenue to rental housing revolving. tax revenue to rental housing revolving.
• </c> Tax Foundation of Hawaii with comments. Tax Foundation of Hawaii with comments.

Bills: HB1719 , HB1742 , HB1737 , HB2049 , HB1725 , HB1726 , HB1738 , HB1799 , HB1700

Committee: House Housing

Summary: The joint public hearing covered several housing-related bills and one building-code measure. HB 1719 would make manufactured homes a permitted use by right on residentially zoned lots in the urban district, HB 1742 would authorize self-contained relocatable housing units with restrictions, and HB 1737 would clarify that a farm dwelling in an agricultural district may include an accessory employee housing structure. Testimony on these bills was overwhelmingly supportive from groups including Hawaii Realtors, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, Housing Hawaii’s Future, the Modular Building Institute, the Hawaii Farmers Union, and others, with a few agencies offering comments. No one testified in opposition on HB 1719 or HB 1742, while HB 1737 drew one opposition and one comment in addition to broad support. No votes were taken during the hearing segment provided. A major portion of the hearing focused on HB 2049, which restructures the conveyance tax into a marginal-rate system and changes how the revenue is allocated, including funding for the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and the rental housing revolving fund, while also affecting the legacy land conservation fund. Supporters, including DHHL, Hawaii Appleseed, Aahu Youth Action Board, Hawaii YIMBY, and others, argued the bill would help Native Hawaiian housing and, for most transactions, function as a tax cut. Opponents, including NAP Hawaii, Hawaii Realtors, Hawaii Land Trust, Mhai Land Trust, and the Tax Foundation of Hawaii, objected to using conveyance tax as a revenue-generating tool and raised concerns about higher upfront costs and reduced funding for other housing uses. Committee members and staff discussed the bill’s revenue estimates, the reduced percentage but higher cap for the land conservation fund, the effect on rental housing funding, and the bill’s cost-of-living adjustment language; staff said a line-by-line comparison of the current and proposed tax structure would be provided before decision-making. The hearing also took up HB 1725, which would extend the state building code adoption cycle from two years to six years, apply the IRC to triplexes and fourplexes, allow counties to adopt more or less stringent amendments, and appropriate funds for code adoption work. Most testimony supported the bill, with advocates saying the current process is unmanageable, too resource-intensive, and creates confusion because state and county codes can diverge; supporters said a longer cycle would improve clarity and allow more focused review. The International Code Council and the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers opposed the measure, warning that delaying adoption could have negative consequences and urging the committee to let an existing statewide code-adoption strategy proceed first. Members asked about sequencing, county implementation, and whether the longer cycle would create catch-up problems, but no action was taken in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• What does that mean for taxes? $157 million in tax revenue.
• What does that mean for taxes? $157 million in tax revenue.
• What does that mean for taxes? $157 million in tax revenue.
• Mahalo. million is well you look at tax revenue million is well you look at tax revenue immigrants<00
• tax revenue.

Committee: House Economic Development & Technology

Summary: The committee on Economic Development and Technology met on March 12, 2025, and heard testimony on several measures. On SB 9, the Hawaii Food Industry Association, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Hawaii Technology Development Corporation testified in support, and there were no questions or objections. On SB 148, the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs offered comments, and a member of the public testified in support of combining boxing and MMA oversight into a single combat sports commission, with amendments to preserve safety standards and separate or distinct treatment for the two sports. Committee discussion focused on whether proposed requirements were primarily safety-related or cost-related, how to handle smaller events, and whether a one-year implementation delay was necessary; the department said many safety provisions already exist in the MMA program, that it was open to continued discussion on costs, and that it needed time to combine rules and appoint new commissioners. The chair suggested possible amendments to account for event size and to reduce burdens on smaller events. The committee then heard SB 816, which drew extensive testimony on providing legal representation for immigrants in immigration proceedings. Supporters included the Hawaii State LGBTQ+ Commission, ACU Hawaii, the Refugee and Immigration Law Clinic, the Legal Clinic, Hawaii Friends of Civil Rights, the Hawaiʻi Coalition for Immigrant Rights, Pride at Work Hawaii, and others. Supporters argued that immigration cases can be as serious as criminal cases, that counsel is essential for due process, and that representation improves outcomes; several also emphasized the economic importance of immigrants to Hawaii. One supporter noted a suggested amendment to include training for attorneys and partners doing deportation defense and asylum work. Opposition came from a Navy veteran who argued the bill would use state resources for a federal issue, create inequities, and impose fiscal burdens. The chair noted 69 testimonies in support and 44 in opposition, and later an additional supporter brought the total to 70 in support. No vote was taken in the portion of the meeting provided. The committee also heard SB 125, with the Department of Economic Development, the Agreed Business Development Corporation, and the Hawaii Food Industry Association in support, and the Tax Foundation of Hawaii offering technical comments about complicated nested definitions in the bill. Testimony on SB 125 focused on updating the Enterprise Zone Program so local manufacturers selling directly to retail could qualify, along with value-added products and certain health-related sectors. Finally, on SB 732, the State of Hawaii Creative Industries testified with comments, raising concerns about county permit-fee waivers, implementation timing, and the bill’s lack of a carry-forward provision for the film tax credit. The witness said uncertainty in the credit was already causing productions to delay coming to Hawaii and urged stability to support the industry and local workers. The committee then moved on to additional testimony on the measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:08:47.080><c> So,</c> family tax credit or child credit.
• So, family tax credit or child credit.
• tax code benefits those who have more money versus those who have less money.
• tax code benefits those who have more money versus those who have less money.
• tax code benefits those who have more money versus those who have less money.

Summary: The committee heard presentation on HF 495, a bill intended to help families with rising child care costs by allowing a subtraction from taxable income for licensed child care expenses. The author said the measure would provide immediate relief to families while broader child care supply and affordability problems are addressed, citing a revenue analysis estimating about 81,700 returns affected and an average tax decrease of $639. The bill was described as applying only to licensed child care centers, family child care, or group family child care under chapter 142B. A virtual testifier, Annel Velasco of St. Paul, opposed the bill. She said child care is indeed expensive but argued the proposal is only a small patch that does not address structural problems such as provider closures, low teacher pay, and lack of available slots. She also said the subtraction would disproportionately benefit higher-income families and would not help providers or teachers. Members debated whether the bill should be more targeted. Representative Smith and Representative Lee argued the proposal is uncapped, expensive, and structured as a subtraction rather than a refundable credit, meaning it would mainly help higher-income households and could divert resources from other credits such as the working family tax credit or child tax credit. Representative Swedzinski supported the bill as allowing families to keep their own money and said child care costs are high across income levels. Chair Gomez and others emphasized that the child care system has broader structural failures, including low pay and lack of slots, and said this bill would address only one part of the problem. No vote or final action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The federal tax package we're being asked to conform to is paired with massive federal tax cuts and significant
• Taxpayers are filing their tax returns today, and those tax returns are on forms that will only comply
• This is a $440 million tax cut package for Arizona taxpayers. $440 million tax cut package for Arizona
• This includes no tax on tips. It includes no tax on overtime.
• They pay taxes in our community. They are working.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several guest introductions and proclamations, including International Mother Language Day, Arizona Nurses’ Day, Environmental Day, Teamsters Local 104, and Arizona Aerospace Day. Attendance was recorded at 57 present, zero absent, and three excused. The chamber also announced committee meetings, bill referrals, and later adjourned until Thursday, February 12, 2026. The main floor action centered on House Bill 2785, a taxation measure tied to federal tax conformity. Members debated whether Arizona should conform to federal tax changes, with supporters arguing it would validate current tax forms and provide tax relief, and opponents warning it would mainly benefit wealthy taxpayers and corporations while reducing state revenue. The bill passed 32-26 with two not voting. The House then resolved into Committee of the Whole for two calendars of bills. In Committee of the Whole, the House advanced HB 2190, HB 2206, HB 2396, HB 2442, and HB 2448, all on health and human services topics, with amendments adopted on the first three. HB 2206 drew extended debate over SNAP payment error rates and whether the bill would impose an unfunded mandate and make benefits harder to access; supporters said it would reduce waste and save money, while opponents said it would set DES up for failure. HB 2396, which would restrict certain SNAP purchases, drew testimony over whether it would improve nutrition or unfairly limit low-income families and create a “food police” system. HB 2442 and HB 2448 also drew criticism over added SNAP work requirements and limits on agency waiver authority during recessions. The Committee later advanced HB 2688, HB 2689, HB 2690, HB 2796, and HB 2797, including bills on government staffing, hospital immigration-status data collection, unemployment benefits, SNAP eligibility/redeterminations, and fraud reporting. HB 2689 prompted sharp opposition over fears it would deter immigrants and mixed-status families from seeking medical care, while HB 2796 and HB 2797 were criticized as adding administrative burdens and duplicative SNAP checks. The House adopted the Committee of the Whole report, and a motion to amend the report to show HB 2689 failed was rejected 24-32.

Transcript Highlights:

• pay the tax that's on the books, the tax that their smaller peers, smaller technology companies, are
• Those people spend money, sales taxes that contribute back to the – to the – ...spend money, sales taxes
• ...would be uncapped, to say that you'd be paying the tax as written in the tax code, as other businesses
• pay taxes as written in the tax code?
• We are already a high-tax state, and last year's tax package made it worse.

Summary: The committee held its first meeting and heard four bills. HB 2286 would create an alternative route to social worker licensure by removing the exam requirement for advanced social workers and allowing enhanced supervision with supervisor attestation in place of the exam for independent clinical social workers. The sponsor and several social workers testified that the exam is a poor measure of clinical competence and can be a barrier to licensure, while opponents warned that removing the exam could affect public protection and Washington’s participation in the social work compact. Members asked follow-up questions about the compact, the exam format, and accreditation requirements, but no action was taken. HB 2363 would allow music therapy license applicants to practice under supervision for up to six months while waiting for exam verification. The sponsor described it as a technical fix to the new licensure system, and testimony from music therapists, educators, and a patient supported the bill as a way to avoid delays in hiring newly trained therapists while maintaining supervision and patient safety. The bill drew strong support in written testimony and no opposition in the hearing. HB 2324 would change tuition waiver rules for children of eligible veterans and National Guard members by giving eligible children eight years from the date of a parent’s disability determination to use the waiver when that determination occurs after the child turns 18. The sponsor said the bill is meant to align state law with federal dependency education benefits and prevent families from losing access because disability determinations can take years. The committee asked for clarification on how the new timing would work, and the hearing closed without a vote. HB 2098 would eliminate the cap on the advanced computing surcharge, expand Washington College Grant eligibility up to 100% of state median family income, and reduce resident undergraduate tuition by 10% for three years starting in 2027-28. Supporters, including students, labor, and advocacy groups, said the bill would improve affordability and access to higher education by asking large tech companies to pay more. Opponents from business and university groups argued the surcharge would be economically harmful, that the state already has substantial WEA funding, and that the bill would reduce tuition revenue without adequately backfilling institutional budgets. The committee heard extensive testimony and members raised questions about the surcharge cap, WEA spending, and the compacted funding structure, but no final action was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• that the taxing districts got not only their share of the taxes due, but also the fees and interest that
• Chairman, I'm Alan Dornfest, Property Tax Policy Bureau Chief, with the Property Tax Division of the
• Idaho State Tax Commission.
• Chairman, I'm Alan Dornfest, Property Tax Policy Bureau Chief, with the Property Tax Division of the
• Idaho State Tax Commission.

Committee: House Revenue and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• To equate that to a gas tax increase, a six-cent would be an 87-cent increase in the gas tax per gallon
• A nine-cent mileage tax per mile would be a $1.15 increase in the gas tax. mileage tax per mile would
• When you add up the car tax, the gas tax, and this new mileage tax, for a family with two cars, a working
• What you're about to do, and many of you oppose the billionaire's tax, to your credit, you oppose a tax
• lost cannabis excise tax revenue.

Transcript Highlights:

• The chair explained that it is a reduction to the individual income tax rate and described it as the
• The goal, the chair said, is first and foremost to reduce the income tax rate, but also to put before
• The chair explained that the goal is to reduce the income tax rate, but also to force a choice about
• spending: whether to spend money or work harder toward reducing taxes.
• in this state um those income taxes in this state um those taxes<00:03:15.959><c> are</c><00:03:16.280

Summary: The Appropriations and Revenue Committee met with a quorum and welcomed several new members. The main item of business was House Bill 1, which would reduce the individual income tax rate from 4% to 3.5% beginning January 1, 2026. The chair described the bill as the final step in a deliberate, multi-year process to lower income taxes while forcing regular legislative choices about whether to increase spending, hold it steady, or reduce it further. In explaining support for the bill, the chair emphasized that tax reductions should only occur when the Commonwealth can reasonably cover its expenses, pointing to major state priorities such as foster and adoptive services, Kentucky State Police, Medicaid, and the justice system. The chair argued that cutting revenues without corresponding spending reductions is not serious policy and urged members to demand specific spending cuts from anyone proposing faster tax reductions. The committee voted on the bill and approved it unanimously, 11-0. House Bill 1 was reported favorably to the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, this is the tax bill, and I urge support.
• Hennepin County, their property tax would be shifted by 0.068%.
• their property taxes at a certain<00:03:14.880><c> level."
• </c> property taxes. property taxes.
• Senator Bill years in the tax area.

Transcript Highlights:

• to impose a tax if it gets the votes necessary to pass.
• clearly imposes... ...tax increase, but this clearly imposes district tax their ability to raise half
• And you are insisting that's not a tax.
• It is not a tax, but you are authorizing the ability to tax that amount, half a percent above the cap
• In fact, this is not directly increasing the tax, but however, this bill is authorizing to tax more.

Committee: Senate Local Government

Summary: The Senate Committee on Local Government met and first adopted a consent calendar covering SB 1005, SB 1080, SB 935, and S.J.R. 11 by a 4-0 vote, with those items remaining on call until later in the hearing. SB 992 was pulled at the author’s request. The committee then heard SB 922, which would clarify that local governments may recover street maintenance and repair costs caused by public service operations, such as waste hauling, through rates, fees, or franchise agreements. Supporters included the League of California Cities, county groups, cities, waste haulers, and legal counsel who argued the bill restores a long-standing practice and reduces litigation risk after a recent court decision; the California Building Industry Association opposed unless amended, warning the bill could affect construction impact fees. The bill passed the committee 7-0 to the Senate floor. The committee also heard SB 1078, which would allow Santa Cruz County voters to consider raising the county’s local tax cap to help fund health care, food assistance, and other safety-net services in response to federal cuts. The County of Santa Cruz and the Central California Alliance for Health supported the measure, emphasizing Medi-Cal enrollment, CalFresh needs, and potential impacts on hospitals and clinics. Senator Choi raised concerns that the bill effectively authorizes a tax increase and questioned the fairness of county-by-county exceptions, while other members supported giving local voters the choice. The bill passed 5-2 and was sent to the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee. After those actions, the committee returned to and approved the consent calendar items 7-0. The meeting concluded with thanks to the public and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• We can move it forward when we go to taxes.
• or asking for um that are cutting taxes or asking for tax<00:21:42.799><c> exemptions</c><00:21:43.240
• We also made some really tremendous tax property tax breaks for particularly seniors and renters and
• The tax is gone. Okay.
• </c> goes on the income part where the tax goes on the income part where the tax bill<00:56:21.520><c

Bills: HF656 , HF655 , HF633

Committee: House Children and Families Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Uh, tax bill to vote for property tax relief.
• tax states in the country.
• </c> Meanwhile, property taxes are going up. Meanwhile, property taxes are going up.
• </c> their property taxes. their property taxes.
• </c> property tax relief. property tax relief.

Transcript Highlights:

• of her employment taxes and her enterprise taxes.
• Yeah, it’s any state tax, which includes all of the excise taxes... ...sales tax.
• the local sales taxes in Illinois and the regional sales taxes.
• We've got the state sales tax and we've got a local option sales tax on meals.
• We've got the state sales tax and we've got a local option sales tax on meals.

Summary: The Special Commission on the future of credit card payments and their impacts on small businesses heard testimony from credit union, retail, banking, and payments industry representatives. Much of the discussion focused on proposals to exclude sales tax and tips from interchange fees, the Illinois Interchange Fee Prohibition Act and related litigation, and whether similar state action in Massachusetts would help small businesses or instead create a patchwork that burdens state-chartered institutions. Witnesses from defense and community credit unions argued interchange helps fund fraud prevention, cybersecurity, member services, and low-fee products, while retail and NRF representatives said merchants are paying significant swipe fees and that state laws like Illinois’s are aimed at reducing costs that are not being passed on to consumers. Several witnesses emphasized that the current payment system provides security, fraud protection, rewards, and access to credit, and that many of the costs merchants complain about are actually bundled processor or acquirer fees rather than interchange itself. Others countered that small businesses are struggling with rising overall costs and that Massachusetts should consider reforms such as allowing surcharging, improving transparency in merchant contracts, and studying collection costs. There was also discussion of the recent Visa/Mastercard antitrust settlement, with industry witnesses describing it as meaningful relief for merchants and opponents saying it is temporary and incomplete. No formal votes were taken on legislation. The commission accepted oral testimony, noted that written testimony would be accepted through July 31, and concluded the meeting by unanimously voting to adjourn. The chair and members said they would continue gathering testimony and work toward recommendations, with the chair stressing the need to find a fair middle ground that supports both small businesses and the broader payments ecosystem.