Video & Transcript Research : 'refundable exemption'

Page 34 of 394
AZ
Transcript Highlights:
  • And so I’ll just briefly mention these tax exemptions that are being repealed.
  • Line 6, members, this is the TPT exemption for solar energy devices.
  • This These tax exemptions that are being repealed.
  • Line 6 members, this is the TBT exemption for solar energy devices.
  • This refundable credit is only for employers that have under 150 employees.
Summary: The meeting began with a JLBC presentation on the state budget proposal. Staff reviewed revenue changes from the April forecast, which lowered expected growth slightly, and then walked through major tax policy provisions. Those included full conformity with HR1 for the current tax year, a shift to the provisions of SB 1106 for future tax years, new deductions for retirement/pension distributions and Roth IRA contributions, an increase in the dependent credit, and a child and dependent care subtraction. Staff said the tax changes had an overall fiscal impact of about $1.4 billion over four years. They also described offsets from repealing several tax credits and exemptions, including solar-related tax breaks, a renewable energy production credit, a new employment tax credit, a refundable R&D credit for smaller employers, and a pollution-control device credit, totaling about $75 million in added revenue. Another budget item would redirect Arizona Commerce Authority Competes Fund lottery distributions to the general fund. Members asked questions about the budget’s effect on ACCESS eligibility checks, state employee health insurance funding, and cuts to one-time funding for area agencies on aging and Alzheimer’s programs. The committee then moved to caucus items on several bills. HB 2249, as amended by the Senate, would expand the parents’ bill of rights to include access to a child’s complete educational record and notice if school staff facilitate social transitioning, and would require investigation of prior violations; the sponsor concurred with the amendment. HB 2035 would require DCS and courts to identify and consider extended family for kinship foster care placement, with Senate changes shortening a reporting deadline and adding adopted family members to the definition. HB 2170 would bar state contracts for electronic or IT goods with PRC-controlled companies, with a certification requirement added in the Senate. HB 2573 would remove a waiting period for ignition interlock restricted licenses after DUI revocation and adjust psychotherapy language. HB 2415 on kratom would classify synthetic kratom as a narcotic drug and add advertising, packaging, and retail restrictions, but the sponsor intended to refuse the Senate changes. HB 2873 would let local petition sponsors withdraw municipal referendum petitions retroactively, which members noted could affect the Marana data center petition effort. The final bill discussed, SB 1798, would create a Financial Aid Awareness Program in the Department of Education to recognize schools that support FAFSA completion. Members questioned whether the department would need additional staff or resources, but no fiscal note had been provided. The meeting ended with recognition of interns and a brief photo opportunity before the caucus moved into closed session.
AZ

Arizona 2026 Regular Session

04/28/2026 - Joint Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:
  • The Department of Public Safety, Department of Corrections, and Department of Child Safety are exempt
  • Additionally, the bills repeal the transaction privilege and use tax exemptions on the sales of solar
  • The average refund, according to the Treasury Department, is going to increase by over 11%.
  • It means $3,400. $3,400 is the average tax refund.
  • Data Center sales tax exemptions is a good example.
Summary: The joint appropriations committee met on April 28 to review the FY 2027 budget package, including the general appropriations feed bills (HB 4138 and SB 1831) and related budget reconciliation measures. Staff described the budget as including about $17.96 billion in general fund appropriations, a one-time transfer of state monies to increase revenues, a 5% lump-sum reduction to most agencies’ discretionary general fund budgets, and several one-time restorations or continuations for items such as school facilities, child care, child safety, corrections stipends, and public safety operating costs. Members spent much of the meeting debating how the across-the-board cuts would be implemented, which programs might be affected, and how fund sweeps from prior-year appropriations and special funds would work, including questions about universities, public safety, rural hospitals, transportation grants, the Corporation Commission, and health insurance costs for state employees and troopers. A major point of discussion was the impact on universities and higher education. Arizona Board of Regents representatives said the proposed reductions and fund sweeps would affect already obligated dollars, research, staffing, and student aid programs, and could force difficult decisions about programs such as the Promise Program, Teachers Academy, and other pass-through funds. Committee members also raised concerns about whether the cuts could lead to tuition increases or reductions in services, while majority members emphasized that agencies and the executive branch should decide how to absorb the reductions. Another major topic was health care and the state employee health plan: staff explained that the budget includes a $228 million general fund infusion to stabilize the plan, while a separate reconciliation bill would raise employee premiums over three years. Members also discussed whether the budget’s changes to AHCCCS/Access and hospital eligibility rules could increase costs for hospitals and reduce coverage. Public testimony largely opposed the budget. Speakers from Opportunity Arizona, the Arizona Board of Regents, and local governments argued that the proposal would shift costs onto working families, reduce support for education, housing, SNAP, health care, and rural infrastructure, and protect tax benefits for data centers and higher-income taxpayers. A mayor from Globe asked for state help after severe flooding damaged roads, water lines, and homes, while a motorcycle safety advocate asked the committee to review a DPS motorcycle safety fund appropriation. Committee members and staff repeatedly clarified that some items discussed were one-time appropriations not continued into FY 2027, that some fund sweeps were from unspent or unencumbered balances, and that the committee planned to take a mass roll-call vote on the budget bills at the end of the meeting.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • So it ended up resulting in a refund to taxpayers.
  • What was the total amount of that refund that was provided?
  • So it ended up in resulting in a refund to taxpayers.
  • What was the total amount of that refund that was provided?
  • about potentially widening the uses of money that can come out of the BSA, which is currently already exempt
Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held a hearing on proposals to reform California’s Budget Stabilization Account, or rainy day fund, ahead of the May Revision. Members and witnesses reviewed how Proposition 2 (2014) changed reserve rules, including mandatory deposits, a 10% cap on the fund, and limits tied to the Governor’s declaration of a budget emergency. LAO staff explained that California’s revenues are highly volatile, that current reserve rules are complicated by interactions with Proposition 98 and the Gann limit, and that under current law reserves would cover only about one-third of funding shortfalls in a benchmark scenario over 50 years. The LAO presented its report recommending a larger reserve target, including raising the cap to 50% by 2055 and pairing that with either broader, more flexible deposit rules or a simpler approach that deposits all excess capital gains. The Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to raise the cap from 10% to 20% and exempt BSA deposits from the state appropriations limit, while Assembly Member Valencia presented ACA 1, which would make similar changes and was described as an evolving proposal. Testimony generally supported saving more during boom years, but differed on how much to hardwire into the Constitution versus leave flexible, and on whether to broaden the deposit formulas beyond capital gains. Public witnesses and committee members raised additional issues, including whether reserve reforms should also address debt repayment, the treatment of unemployment insurance fund debt, and whether the Gann limit should be adjusted to better allow reserve growth. Supporters argued that stronger reserves would protect Californians from cuts during downturns and help the state weather volatility and federal funding threats. Some advocates warned that reforms should not come at the expense of current public needs, while taxpayer representatives cautioned against turning the BSA into a pass-through account that weakens constitutional spending limits. The hearing ended without a vote, with the committee chair noting the complexity of the issue and adjourning after public comment.
HI
Transcript Highlights:
  • <00:45:30.760> carry year of the non-refundable carry year of the non-refundable carry forwards
  • We need to exempt the G on the supplier side to help our businesses remain competitive.
  • With respect to section 22, it would repeal the G exemption for certain petroleum refiners who purchase
  • Without an exemption, they could pass the cost to their customers.
  • Without an exemption, they could pass the cost to their customers.
Keywords: 910, house, all
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Senate Session (Part I) Apr 30th, 2025

Texas Senate Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • To make spaceports eligible for tax-exempt private activity bonds.
  • The only reason we're exempting, or your bill is exempting, fire and police is because of collective
  • For example, in section 1 of the bill it exempts school district police. Isn't that correct?
  • And so those are the folks that at different. levels of government that would be exempted.
  • So there are a lot. of categories of folks that are not exempted and we're just exempting based on the
Bills: HCR35, SJR59, SJR84, SCR30, SB127, SB317, SB324, SB457, SB506, SB511, SB529, SB547, SB584, SB619, SB636, SB646, SB659, SB715, SB732, SB735, SB771, SB784, SB800, SB801, SB904, SB1026, SB1049, SB1065, SB1181, SB1224, SB1250, SB1383, SB1467, SB1524, SB1528, SB1531, SB1568, SB1585, SB1640, SB1681, SB1754, SB1757, SB1777, SB1972, SB1980, SB2007, SB2041, SB2046, SB2050, SB2055, SB2069, SB2080, SB2119, SB2138, SB2139, SB2154, SB2201, SB2225, SB2268, SB2306, SB2308, SB2310, SB2330, SB2366, SB2375, SB2392, SB2401, SB2422, SB2480, SB2514, SB2530, SB2533, SB2543, SB2544, SB2589, SB2610, SB2615, SB2623, SB2660, SB2662, SB2693, SB2695, SB2707, SB2722, SB2742, SB2753, SB2807, SB2843, SB2844, SB2858, SB2880, SB2885, SB2891, SB2925, SB2938, SB2986, SJR3, SJR18, SB5, SB914, SB963, SB1197, SB1415, SB1437, SB1786, SB326, SB767, SB769, SB783, SB1035, SB1271, SB1619, SB1637, SB1806, SB1, SB260, HB135, HB1109, HCR35, HCR64, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR84, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR48, SCR19, SCR30, SCR3, SB2023, SB619, SB2742, SB646, SB1026, SB2880, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB1502, SB507, SB1434, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB529, SB209, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB584, SB1085, SB2046, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB1524, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB517, SB1200, SB1845, SB1863, SB2681, SB2200, SB2199, SB1757, SB2050, SB2458, SB2201, SB2660, SB2662, SB1065, SB801, SB2533, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB1721, SB2366, SB1013, SB2797, SB2383, SB1754, SB2119, SB2448, SB1777, SB1283, SB2392, SB2076, SB2786, SB2876, SB2284, SB2225, SB1540, SB2929, SB1972, SB2540, SB2595, SB2217, SB715, SB2330, SB1383, SB500, SB1640, SB2001, SB2080, SB506, SB2514, SB2753, SB2398, SB1241, SB2927, SB2173, SB2538, SB898, SB1449, SB2529, SB1531, SB2846, SB2476, SB986, SB1181, SB2075, SB2154, SB2864, SB1359, SB2386, SB771, SB2844, SB2550, SB1351, SB1423, SB1931, SB2245, SB2589, SB2707, SB2807, SB410, SB659, SB2776, SB2693, SB2580, SB1980, SB1886, SB1234, SB739, SB456, SB127, SB1666, SB2843, SB2801, SB800, SB2055, SB784, SB2986, SB735, SB1012, SB324, SB2926, SB2938, SB2007, SB2138, SB1242, SB2615, SB1049, SB2310, SB1224, SB2972, SB1568, SB2841, SB2885, SB3016, SB2858, SB2610, SB2139, SB1856, SB2035, SB2308, SB2306, SB2041, SB1528, SB1681, SB1141, SB2401, SB2530, SB2375, SB547, SB1266, SB1373, SB1467, SB2069, SB2269, SB2480, SB2544, SB672, SB904, SB2695, SB2891, SB2422, SB2543, SB1854, SB317, SB2539, SB2532, SB2925, SB1250, SB2082, SB2203, SB457, SB2357, SB2721, SB243, SB1285, SB2568, SB1959, SB1442, SB1454, SB2520, SB2541, SB1708, SB1237, SB1844, SB1586, HB1392, HB22, SB1551, SB3039, SB2819, SB66, SB629, SB1015, SB2342, SB2903, SB2933, SB1965, SB2477, SB3029, SB2605, SB2419, SB1957, SB375, SB250, SB777, SB628, SB2523, SB2367, SB2703, SB2608, SB2778, SB3044, SB2965, SB2521, SB865
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Committee on Taxes - 03/18/26

Taxes

Transcript Highlights:
  • Senator Nelson. include the sales tax exemptions for the include the sales tax exemptions for the um<
  • um are automatically sales tax exempt um are automatically sales tax exempt for<00:38:56.960>
  • for a refund.
  • eligible for the sales tax exemptions.
  • <00:40:13.599> for there is a sales tax exemption for there is a sales tax exemption for building
Keywords: 1187, senate, all
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • The law also provides an exemption for delivery network companies under the Marketplace Facilitator Act
  • So under this proposal, the delivery fees will still be exempt, right?
  • Those are exempt, and that would remain so under this proposal.
  • Adding refundability would allow more.
  • Making credits refundable would address issues this subcommittee has examined over the past two years
Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on State Administration heard several budget proposals from CDTFA, the Board of Equalization, and the Franchise Tax Board. The first panel focused on cannabis, hemp, flavored tobacco, and related enforcement. CDTFA requested ongoing funding to implement cannabis tax changes, enforce the new intoxicating hemp restrictions and flavored tobacco seizure authority, and continue compliance work. The department said it is targeting illicit product, protecting licensed businesses, and using referrals from the public and lawmakers to focus inspections. The LAO supported some of the proposals but urged the Legislature to treat them as part of a longer-term enforcement strategy and raised concerns about the use of General Fund support for cannabis enforcement. Public testimony on the cannabis item largely supported stronger enforcement and funding for the legal market. The committee also heard CDTFA’s request to reappropriate funds for an upgrade to the CROS tax collection system, which would improve taxpayer services, security, and software maintenance without adding new money. A separate CDTFA proposal would make all delivery network companies, such as DoorDash and Uber Eats, marketplace facilitators for sales tax purposes. CDTFA said the change would reduce confusion for restaurants and improve compliance, while the LAO questioned whether the proposal functioned more like a tax increase because it would also capture service fees. Members raised affordability concerns, but the proposal was framed by the administration as a parity and compliance measure. The subcommittee then considered a governor’s proposal for a sustainable aviation fuel tax credit. Finance argued the credit would help decarbonize aviation and support in-state production, while the LAO recommended rejection, citing cost, uncertainty about environmental benefits, possible diversion of diesel excise tax revenues from transportation programs, and concerns about consistency with voter-approved transportation funding rules. Testimony from airlines, labor unions, airports, and refinery workers strongly supported the credit, emphasizing union jobs, refinery conversions, and emissions reductions, while fuel retailers and some others warned about fiscal risk and higher fuel prices. The chair and some members expressed support for the proposal despite the funding concerns. Finally, the BOE presented an IT modernization project for state-assessed property administration, saying the current system is outdated and manual and that a new system is needed to improve accuracy, cybersecurity, and workflow efficiency, especially with a likely increase in workload from new VoIP assessments. The LAO asked for more justification for the timing, but BOE said the urgency stems from aging systems and growing workload. BOE also requested modest funding to implement SB 293 changes to intergenerational property transfers and wildfire relief guidance, which the LAO did not oppose. The Franchise Tax Board began its presentation on the final phase of its Enterprise Data to Revenue modernization effort, describing the project’s rollout across audit, collections, legal, and filing enforcement workloads and noting it is now in a warranty period.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Committee on Taxes - 02/18/26

Taxes

Transcript Highlights:
  • is that would apply to non-exempt is that would apply to non-exempt employees<00:59:36.720> because
  • And what would I non-exempt status?
  • be refundable up to $1,700. be refundable up to $1,700.
  • So, um, other ways in which we stop fraud, you know, forged refund checks, altered refund checks, and
  • > checks<01:54:42.320> and refund check, altered refund checks and refund check, altered refund
Keywords: 1187, senate, all
NH
Transcript Highlights:
  • been termed a non-refundable deposit. been termed a non-refundable deposit.
  • refundability or issue of refundability or non-refundability<00:47:31.920> is<00:47:32.079>
  • non-refundable provision doesn't apply. non-refundable provision doesn't apply.
  • <00:49:04.319> But refundable versus non-refundable.
  • But refundable versus non-refundable.
Keywords: 928, house, all
Summary: The committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 25, which would allow New Hampshire state-chartered credit unions to choose, by member vote, to compensate their board members. Prime sponsor Senator Dan Innis said the bill is enabling only, does not require compensation, and is intended to align New Hampshire with other states that already permit this. He argued that credit union board service now requires more time and expertise, and that compensation could help attract stronger candidates and improve governance. Representatives from the Cooperative Credit Union Association and St. Mary’s Bank testified in support. They said the change would not create salaries, but could cover modest compensation or reimbursements such as daycare, education, cybersecurity, or accounting training. They emphasized that credit unions remain nonprofit and member-driven, that board members must be credit union members and elected by members, and that any compensation decision would be made by the membership at an annual meeting or through the credit union’s voting process. Witnesses also said the bill would help with recruitment and retention, especially as credit union operations have become more complex and digital, and noted that similar authority exists in 16 other states, including Rhode Island. Committee members asked about the historical reason credit unions were excluded, the amount and structure of compensation, whether there would be a cap, and how voting would work. Witnesses said the bill does not set a statutory maximum, but in practice the amount would be disclosed to members and set through the vote; they also described St. Mary’s Bank’s ballot process and said proxy or ballot procedures depend on each credit union’s bylaws. One witness noted that federally chartered credit unions are subject to different limits. After testimony and questions, the chair closed the public hearing on Senate Bill 25 and then moved on to Senate Bill 26.
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

CPC Public Hearing - Tue Apr 7, 2026 @ 2:00 PM HST

Consumer Protection & Commerce

Transcript Highlights:
  • Specifies conditions under which a home health agency may be exempt and requires information obtained
Summary: The committee heard several resolutions and one bill focused on energy reliability, utility infrastructure, insurance, tenant rights, and home health licensing. On the energy side, members heard HCR 203/HR 193 on a status update for the Hawaii Electric Reliability Administrator, HCR 204/HR 194 on a comprehensive PUC analysis of cost reduction and risk, and HCR 202/HR 192 creating a legislative task force on future energy pathways. Testimony on the energy measures was generally supportive from the PUC, DCCA’s Division of Consumer Advocacy, the Hawaii State Energy Office, and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, with OHA urging that equity, native Hawaiian impacts, and public trust resources be considered alongside cost savings. The committee also heard HCR 125/HR 117 on coordinating with utilities to address aging utility poles and lines along Farrington Highway and other high-risk corridors; Hawaiian Electric supported the measure, Hawaiian Telcom and Charter Spectrum said much of the work is already underway and questioned whether the resolution was necessary, and committee questioning focused on existing double-pole tracking and the role of DOT and the PUC. The committee then took up HCR 137/HR 129 on timely reimbursement of health care claims under the clean claims statute. The DCCA Insurance Division and the Hawaii Insurers Council opposed the measure as drafted, saying it could be read to require payment beyond policy limits and could raise premiums or reduce market participation. United Policyholders supported the measure, arguing it would simply give policyholders more time to collect benefits they already purchased, and clarified that it was not intended to increase coverage beyond policy limits. The committee later amended the resolution to direct the DCCA Insurance Division to prioritize investigation and enforcement of clean claims complaints. In the decision meeting, the committee recommended and adopted passage of HCR 203/HR 193 as is, HCR 204/HR 194 with an amendment removing the eighth whereas clause, HCR 202/HR 192 with an amendment adding a committee representative to the task force, HCR 125/HR 117 as is, and HCR 137/HR 129 with amendments. The committee also heard SB 2960 SC1 on property insurance, which would extend the time policyholders have after a declared disaster to document replacement-cost claims. The Insurance Division and Hawaii Insurers Council opposed it, warning it could force coverage beyond policy limits and increase premiums, while United Policyholders supported it and said it would help disaster survivors recover benefits they already paid for; members questioned whether similar laws in other states had caused premium spikes and clarified that the bill was not intended to exceed policy limits. The committee also heard SB 2347 SD1 on multilingual tenant-rights notices, with OHA, Hawaii Appleseed, and others supporting the bill but urging restoration of language requiring landlords to directly provide the notice at lease signing. Finally, SB 2272 SD1 HD1 on home health licensing drew support from the Department of Health, SHPDA, and the Health Care Association of Hawaii, with the association requesting an effective date amendment; testimony explained that the bill would allow state licensing compliance to be demonstrated through CMS-approved accreditation or certification surveys, potentially reducing duplication and freeing state resources.
AZ

Arizona 2026 Regular Session

02/17/2026 - House Commerce

Commerce

Transcript Highlights:
  • Members, the Carter amendment to House Bill 2128 changes the exemption from statutory authority to take
  • So does this bill mean that if you create the district, you're exempt from the impact fee? Mr.
  • By allowing them to finance this with tax-exempt, long-term debt, with rates significantly less than
  • By allowing them to finance this with tax-exempt, long-term debt, with rates significantly less than
  • The bonds are tax-exempt by virtue of the district's status as a governmental entity for IRS tax-exempt
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Public Health Apr 28th, 2025

Public Health

Transcript Highlights:
  • Exempted kids are exempted for those reasons, right?
  • Not having that exemption or not turning in an exemption means that I've done everything I can. ...hand
  • Brass conscientious exemption.
  • By allowing the unlimited download of exemption forms, it opens the door to misinformation, making exemptions
  • But we can tell how many exemptions there are.