Transcript Highlights:

• whether it's someone calling about individual income tax, sales tax, or property tax questions.
• tax credit.
• tax revenue.
• For North Dakota, 16.3% is property tax, 21% is general sales tax, 6.4% is individual income tax, and
• 4.2% is corporate income tax. 52.2% is other taxes or severance taxes.

Committee: Joint Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee

Summary: The committee met to receive updates from the Tax Commissioner’s office on property tax relief programs and related compliance work. Commissioner Brian Croshys reviewed the Homestead Property Tax Credit, Disabled Veteran Credit, and Primary Residence Credit, noting that the Homestead program expanded significantly after HB 1158, that some households are “adjusting out” of eligibility as incomes rise, and that the committee may want to consider indexing income thresholds. Members asked for additional data on bracket breakdowns, possible costs of eliminating income limits for seniors, and how many households are zeroed out by the combined programs. Croshys also discussed the simpler administration of the disabled veteran credit, the growth in participation, and the heavy workload and auditing safeguards built into the new primary residence credit system. He said the department found no material compliance findings and that the program is designed to be digital-first, with county auditors and the Tax Commissioner’s office both involved in review and notification. The committee recessed for lunch and later reconvened, with the chair noting that more detailed PRC information would likely be available at a September meeting. Shelly Myers then presented the statewide property tax increase, or “zero growth,” report and the 2025 statistical report. She explained how county auditors report levy and valuation data, how increases and decreases are counted, and which jurisdictions showed the largest percentage changes in countywide, citywide, school district, and park district levies. In the statistical report, she summarized recent trends in assessed values: agricultural values remained relatively flat, while residential, commercial, and centrally assessed property values increased over the past five years. She also reviewed statewide tax levies by property class and clarified that centrally assessed growth figures were annual averages. Members discussed how shifts in land use and annexation can make it appear that tax burdens are moving from ag to residential/commercial property. Myers then summarized the interim study on the 3% levy limitation under HB 1176, saying most counties complied without budget changes, while some used hiring freezes, deferred purchases, or reserve funds; 23% of counties had to reduce levies, and the affected funds were mainly general, road and bridge, and weed control. She said 12 counties reported zero new growth in the data and that 35 counties reported not using all of their cap. The committee also received an oil tax presentation from Croshys on the stripper well extraction tax exemption. He outlined the number of active stripper wells, the production and revenue implications of the exemption, and projections for future biennia under different tax scenarios. He said the exemption represents substantial savings to operators but also corresponds to production tax revenue that would otherwise be collected, and he emphasized that future outcomes depend on oil prices, well counts, and technology such as CO2 enhanced oil recovery. Nathan Anderson of the Department of Mineral Resources briefly answered a question about why Red River wells have a different production threshold than Bakken wells, explaining it was tied to completion costs and lateral length. The committee then heard from Charlie Gorecki of the EERC, who presented an analysis of typical Bakken well decline curves and argued that most oil is produced before a well reaches stripper status, but that keeping wells open and investing in refracturing or other interventions can recover additional production. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting; the main actions were receiving reports, asking for follow-up data, and scheduling further discussion for a later meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• The employees pay income tax from institutes, so basically we get taxes anyway from the property.
• But when we tax corporations, we tax them on their national profits.
• pie each state can tax.
• into their own tax codes.
• That starts with permanently decoupling our tax code from Trump's corporate tax cuts.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Revenue

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue held a public hearing on H. 4975, Governor Healey’s bill to manage the impact of federal tax changes from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OB3) on Massachusetts. Secretary of Administration and Finance Matt Gorowitz said the bill would phase in selected corporate tax changes over time, avoid a $442 million FY26 revenue hit, preserve the current-year budget, and add a few related changes, including expanding the pass-through entity excise to income subject to the 4% surtax, delaying large federal tax changes over $20 million by one year, limiting opportunity zone benefits to Massachusetts investments, adjusting DFML contributions to match IRS guidance, and aligning casino slot-winnings reporting thresholds with federal law. Committee members questioned the administration about why it chose phased conformity rather than full decoupling, the effect on the budget if the bill does not pass, the purpose of the pass-through entity change, opportunity zones, and the slot-machine threshold and family leave provisions. Public testimony was sharply divided. MassBudget, Progressive Massachusetts, and Don Griswold of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities urged the committee to go further and permanently decouple from the five most costly OB3 corporate tax provisions, arguing that automatic conformity is fiscally risky, rewards investment outside Massachusetts, and has already caused or could cause large revenue losses. Labor and public-sector witnesses, including leaders from the Massachusetts Teachers Association, AFT Massachusetts, SEIU 509, the Massachusetts AFL-CIO, and building trades unions, also called for permanent decoupling, warning that the federal law will deepen state budget pressures, harm schools, health care, human services, and infrastructure, and shift costs onto workers and public programs. Several speakers said Massachusetts should not adopt federal corporate tax cuts that mainly benefit wealthy individuals and corporations. Other testimony focused on specific provisions. Unite Here Local 26 asked the committee to strike the casino slot-winnings threshold change from $1,200 to $2,000, saying the current limit helps identify problem gambling, creates an opportunity for intervention, and supports union jobs. The Massachusetts Society of CPAs supported the administration’s phased approach, especially the research and experimental expense deduction, citing the importance of certainty for business filers and Massachusetts’ strong R&D economy. Greater Boston Legal Services testified on the paid family and medical leave sections, explaining that the bill’s changes would align PFML payroll contributions with new IRS guidance and, if paired with administrative action, would be cost-neutral for workers and employers. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our small businesses are sending tax forms to folks, we’re receiving tax forms, we’re actively in tax
• Our small businesses are sending tax forms to folks, we’re receiving tax forms, we’re actively in tax
• tax.
• When you do your 2026 taxes, we’ll give you a special worksheet to take care of your 2025 taxes.
• a tax cut this year... ...by essentially increasing their taxes next year to offset what is a tax cut

Committee: Senate Senate Finance Committee of Reference

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee took up SB 1638, a federal tax conformity bill that updates Arizona’s tax code to the Internal Revenue Code as of January 1, 2026 and incorporates several H.R. 1-related changes, including subtractions for tips, overtime, seniors, and auto loan interest, plus changes to the standard deduction and charitable contribution deduction. Committee members and staff discussed two amendments: a chair’s clarifying amendment on retroactivity and foreign dividend language, and a more substantive Epstein amendment that would remove the broader conformity provisions and charitable deduction changes while limiting the standard deduction change to tax year 2025. The committee also discussed whether the bill would align Arizona with Department of Revenue forms and how much of the conformity package affected corporate versus individual taxpayers. Public testimony was split. Supporters, including the Arizona Tax Research Association and the National Federation of Independent Business, argued the bill was needed quickly to reduce filing-season confusion, keep Arizona aligned with DOR’s posted forms, and preserve business expensing provisions that help small businesses invest and hire. Opponents, including the Arizona Center for Economic Progress, argued the bill would significantly reduce state revenue, primarily benefit corporations and higher-income taxpayers, and worsen the state’s budget outlook; they also questioned the value of provisions such as SALT conformity, foreign dividend changes, and the tip/overtime subtractions. Committee members debated the fiscal impact, the policy merits of immediate expensing and conformity, and whether taxpayers would need amended returns if the bill changed after filing season. The committee adopted the chair’s clarifying amendment and rejected the Epstein amendment. It then voted to report SB 1638 as amended with a do-pass recommendation. The bill passed the committee by about 4-3, with members explaining their votes along lines of taxpayer certainty and conformity versus concerns about revenue loss and budget balance.

Transcript Highlights:

• And when both taxes exist, there is a uniform tax treatment.
• And when both taxes exist, there is a uniform tax treatment.
• tax.
• tax.
• . tax.

Committee: House Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Minnesota law you have no ta no income Minnesota law you have no ta no income tax tax tax liability<01
• </c><02:04:19.920><c> tax</c> or property direct property tax or property direct property tax liability
• but still pay taxes through sales taxes, through property taxes, which are embedded into their rent.
• liab ability but still tax no income tax liab ability but still pay<02:08:23.960><c> taxes</c><02:08
• </c> pay taxes through sales taxes through pay taxes through sales taxes through property<02:08:26.559

Transcript Highlights:

• It is not tax relief. It's tax shifting. It simply moves them. It is not tax relief.
• It's tax shifting.
• If this is not tax reform or tax relief, and it is a tax shift like most of us know it will be, we're
• most property taxes.
• Most property taxes.

Transcript Highlights:

• tax.
• tax is not a tax um the communications tax is not a tax<03:20:51.520><c> on</c><03:20:51.800><c> internet
• </c> tax on internet access it is only a tax tax on internet access it is only a tax essentially<03:20
• property tax.
• property tax.

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on HB 135, introduced by Representative Michael Harrington. He said the bill would codify a portion of the New Hampshire Constitution to bar New Hampshire businesses from being required to collect sales or use taxes for other states unless Congress mandates it, arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court’s Wayfair decision created an onerous compliance burden for businesses. He described the patchwork of state and local sales tax rules, thresholds, and product exemptions as extremely complex and said the bill was intended to push the issue back toward Congress and the courts. Members questioned whether the bill’s reference to a “foreign government” would apply to other U.S. states, whether the proposal would conflict with the Supremacy Clause, and whether it would create standing for businesses to challenge Wayfair. Harrington responded that “foreign government” meant any government other than New Hampshire, that he believed the state could challenge the decision in court by passing a law contrary to Wayfair, and that businesses were already being harmed by compliance costs. Some members raised concerns about whether the bill was an unfunded mandate or simply a private compliance burden, and Harrington argued that the state itself would not be collecting the taxes, but businesses would still face recordkeeping and administrative costs. Sam Garland of the Department of Justice then testified. He said the department was not taking a formal position on the bill, but offered technical comments. Garland acknowledged that Wayfair created significant compliance burdens and noted that states have become somewhat more uniform, with all states now having a $100,000 economic nexus threshold, though not all use the 200-transaction threshold and local tax variation remains substantial. He said the department’s concerns were legal, describing the issue as uncharted constitutional territory involving both vertical and horizontal federalism. No vote or final action was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's like a tax the income tax.
• </c> tax net taxes that they pay. Right? tax net taxes that they pay. Right?
• </c> law, your income tax li state income tax law, your income tax li state income tax liability<01:09
• ." taxes." taxes."
• . taxes. taxes.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:02:53.720><c> committee</c> chairman members of the tax committee chairman members of the tax
• The Social Security tax is really a double tax on income.
• </c> the tax it had nothing to do with tax the tax it had nothing to do with tax brackets<00:59:04.799
• taxes is $220,000 a year.
• This is just another tax break.

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• Problem number two, problem number three, property taxes, property taxes, property taxes.
• ><c> taxes.
• </c> taxes, property taxes, property taxes. taxes, property taxes, property taxes.
• Tax cut tomorrow.
• c> trigger</c> business tax enterprise tax cut trigger business tax enterprise tax cut trigger language

Summary: The committee of conference on HB 155 continued discussion of a compromise over business tax relief, small-business filing thresholds, and nursing home funding. Representative Sweeney proposed raising the filing threshold to $400,000 and creating a trigger for future Business Enterprise Tax reductions if business tax revenues produce a $200 million biennial surplus, with the Department of Revenue Administration commissioner able to exclude one-time or non-sustainable funds. Supporters said the proposal would provide a clear policy direction, immediate relief to about 4,500 small and micro businesses, and a future path back to the BET’s original 0.25% rate. Opponents, led by the Senate side, argued the trigger language was premature, better handled in a budget year with more revenue data, and inappropriate to decide in a short conference committee meeting. The Senate also emphasized that the tax policy should not be locked in without a fuller public process, while House members argued the trigger would not take effect until a future biennium and was therefore a prudent way to signal New Hampshire’s direction on taxes. A separate point of discussion involved nursing homes: the House said its report would include $2.5 million for nursing homes with non-lapsing language, and senators stressed the importance of that funding for the health care system and county property taxpayers. One senator warned that triggers could encourage revenue underestimation and noted bond rating concerns about a structural deficit. Several motions were made to accept the Senate position with the $400,000 threshold and related amendments, but the first motion failed on a party-line style split, with the Senate voting yes and the House voting no. A second House motion to accede to the Senate position while also including the nursing home funding, the threshold increase, and the future trigger language was also rejected by the Senate. The meeting ended with the report filed without agreement on the trigger language, and the transcript then notes a separate reconvened committee of conference on HB 751 being postponed until 12:30 the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• On page 27, on item 4, in your experience, how many different tax credits pay the tax credit, and then
• ... ...the political subdivisions for the amount of tax they didn't receive due to there being a tax
• tax credit, that's on their local property tax liability.
• Sitting in a party that do typically does not like taxes, do not like fees, do not like tax credits,
• But on the, not the rolling stock, but the other tax—short line tax credit—those tax credits, and I have

Committee: House Agriculture

Transcript Highlights:

• taxed so we don't want to add a<00:01:04.920><c> tax</c><00:01:05.159><c> to</c> a tax to a tax to them
• , to have a flat tax, to lower the tax rates.
• half of that tax cut.
• ><c> stop</c><00:16:04.319><c> taxing</c><00:16:04.720><c> us</c> and reduce our taxes and stop taxing
• </c><00:16:21.199><c> it</c> Taxes would simplify tax reporting.

Summary: The committee took up House File 169, which would change the tax structure for charitable gambling. Representative Robbins offered and the committee adopted the A1 author’s amendment, described as a technical correction to ensure sports-themed tip boards are not inadvertently taxed under the bill. Robbins then presented the bill as a way to replace the current tiered combined net receipts tax on charitable gambling with a flat 5% rate, arguing charities were being overtaxed and that prior promises of relief had not been fully delivered. Chair Stevenson pushed back on several of Robbins’ factual claims, correcting the record on the status of E-pull tabs, the share of charitable gambling revenue they represent, and the amount of tax relief already enacted in 2023 and 2024. He said E-tabs were not eliminated, that the revenue split between paper pull tabs and E-tabs is closer to 45/55, and that charities had already received a $15 million tax cut plus savings from reduced developer fees. Robbins responded that the changes still significantly reduced revenue and that the bill was intended as a middle-ground approach. Testimony largely came from charitable gambling and veterans groups in support of the bill. Rachel Jenner of Allied Charities of Minnesota said nearly 1,000 charities depend on charitable gambling, cited high taxes and fees, and said many organizations were seeing revenue declines after the new E-pull tab rules took effect. Dr. Christy Jano of the American Legion Department of Minnesota said charitable gambling funds support veterans, youth, and community programs, and that a flat 5% tax would help posts continue those efforts. Members asked about the size of the revenue drops and how much gambling proceeds go to overhead and operating costs; Jenner said the losses varied by organization and that it was too early to know the long-term effect, while Jano said some expenses are used for property taxes and building upkeep. The committee then moved on to additional testimony, including Tim Angstrom, but no final vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> taxed added added to the charity taxes taxed added added to the charity taxes already<00:02:19.760
• tax rates.
• The 5% flat tax would simplify tax reporting.
• The 5% flat tax would simplify tax reporting.
• </c> know that the taxes and the tax breaks know that the taxes and the tax breaks that<00:48:19.480>

Bills: HF169 , HF195 , HF194 , HF1756 , HF2133

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• It is not tax relief. It's tax shifting. It simply moves them. It is not tax relief.
• It's tax shifting.
• If this is not tax reform or tax relief, and it is a tax shift like most of us know it will be, we're
• most property taxes.
• just simply about taxes.

Transcript Highlights:

• It rewrites tax law, Mr. Speaker, completely rewrites tax law.
• A corporate tax, the corporation gets taxed, and then the owner gets taxed on his dividend or the...
• A corporate tax, the corporation gets taxed, and then the owner gets taxed on his dividend or the owners
• tax, the ABT.
• reducing the tax.

Transcript Highlights:

• You pay taxes.
• not taxed.
• taxes.
• taxes.
• taxes.

Committee: Senate Finance and Tax

Summary: The Senate Committee on Finance and Tax met to hear a staff presentation on Florida property taxes. Staff Director Azar Khan gave an overview of the property tax system, including constitutional limits, January 1 assessment rules, homestead and non-homestead residential property, commercial and agricultural classifications, tangible personal property, and centrally assessed property. The presentation highlighted major exemptions and assessment caps, such as the homestead exemptions, Save Our Homes, the 10% cap for non-homestead property, and favorable treatment for agricultural/classified use land. It also reviewed long-term growth in just value and taxable value statewide, along with declining millage rates over time as taxable values have risen. Members then discussed the possibility of eliminating property taxes and the fiscal consequences of doing so. Senator Jones asked about the impact on local governments and referenced estimates that replacing property tax revenue could require roughly $43 billion; staff responded that current levied amounts are in the ballpark of more than $30 billion for non-school levies and more than $20 billion for school levies, but that the exact impact would depend on county and district budgets and collections. Senators Bernard, Passidomo, Gates, and others emphasized the need for more data on alternative revenue sources, such as sales tax increases or other combinations, and for input from counties and cities before considering broad tax changes. Chair Avila explained the presentation was intended to give members a foundation before property tax proposals are heard in committee, noting that several bills had already been filed involving homestead and tangible personal property. No bills were voted on, and no formal action was taken beyond the informational presentation. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• tax credit?
• senior tax credit, that's on their local property tax liability.
• beef tax credit, qualified equity investment tax credit, grape and wine producers tax credit, alternative
• and school tax credit.
• kinds of tax credits.

Committee: House Agriculture, Food Production and Outdoor Resources

Summary: The House Agriculture Committee first met in executive session on House Bill 2998, adopting a committee substitute that narrowed the bill to a study of the Upper Mississippi River Basin and the Rural Development Office and extended the deadline to December 1, 2029. Members discussed the bill’s roughly $3 million fiscal note and whether the proposed river-related study and power-generation concept would be a worthwhile investment. The committee adopted the substitute and then voted the committee substitute for HB 2998 do pass by a 21-0 roll call. The committee then held a public hearing on Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 913, which would extend several agricultural tax credit programs for five years, including the Missouri Agricultural and Small Business Tax Credit (Mazbita), rolling stock credits, meat processing incentives, biodiesel-related credits, specialty crop credits, and a new short-line railroad credit. Senator Curtis Gregory said the bill was intended to provide certainty and support rural infrastructure, agricultural processing, and rail access, and witnesses from the Missouri Soybean Association, Missouri Farm Bureau, Missouri Corn Growers, Missouri Chamber, short-line railroads, Missouri AgriBusiness Association, Missouri Dairy, Missouri Bankers Association, Missouri Railroad Association, and Missouri Pork Association testified in support. Opposition came from a public advocate who argued Missouri’s tax credit system is too large, lacks adequate auditing, and could cost tens of millions of dollars while adding state administrative costs. Committee members raised questions about the fiscal note, the carryforward of unused credits, and whether the rolling stock credit backfills local property tax revenue; supporters responded that the credit makes local governments whole and that the programs have strong returns on investment and help preserve agricultural and rail infrastructure. No final vote on SB 913 was taken in the transcript, and the committee adjourned after the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the $94 million increase in sales tax, for example, is the addition to the new sales tax number.
• It's not sales tax and it's not corporate income tax; it's not documentary stamp tax.
• So tax liability, property tax liability in the end, is a function of taxable value or tax base, and
• it with sales tax, how much sales tax increase would there be?
• I mean, with the state sales tax, we generate about $50 billion in taxes.

Committee: Senate Finance and Tax

Summary: The Senate Committee on Finance and Tax met for its first meeting of the session, with a quorum present and several members excused. Chair Avila opened by framing the committee’s main focus as property tax relief and housing affordability, noting the complexity of any changes to Florida’s long-standing property tax structure and emphasizing the need to preserve funding for schools and local public safety. He also introduced new committee staff member Tamisha Black and thanked staff for summer work supporting analysis of potential proposals, including constitutional amendment concepts and other property tax relief ideas. Staff director Azar Khan then presented an update on the General Revenue forecast, explaining that collections remained above estimate but at a slower pace than the prior year, with recent economic indicators slightly weaker than earlier forecasts. He said the new forecast mostly reflected modest adjustments, with a notable share of the increase coming from earnings on investment rather than the usual drivers such as sales tax or corporate income tax. Khan also gave a detailed presentation on ad valorem millages, explaining the different millage types used by school districts, counties, municipalities, special districts, and water management districts; the rollback rate; TRIM notice and hearing timelines; voting thresholds for adopting higher millages; and long-term trends showing millage rates declining over time even as total taxes levied have increased. Members used the presentations to discuss property tax relief options and the relationship between local property taxes and state revenue. President Passidomo praised staff and Senator Bernard’s summer work on proposals. President Gaetz asked about converting homestead property tax revenue to sales tax and was told the rough equivalent could be around a 2.8-cent sales tax increase, though with important behavioral and distributional caveats. Senator Rouson asked about the decline in corporate income tax estimates, and Khan said it likely reflected changes in national corporate profit expectations and collection patterns, promising a follow-up. The Department of Revenue’s Lizette Kelly confirmed that TRIM data, including adopted millages, rollback rates, and maximum millage calculations, are collected by jurisdiction and can be provided to the committee. No bills were taken up and no votes occurred beyond adjournment, which was adopted by motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I will go through the provisions by tax category, starting with sales tax.
• Regarding mutual taxes and fees, the bill reduces the tax of 8 percent to 5 percent and reduces the tax
• and tax to the state.
• Skidmore: Palm Beach County Tax Collector has a concern about the Airbnb VRBO tax.
• and our tax committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's regressive taxes in Texas. There's no income tax.
• It's the total taxes, not just sales tax that matter.
• There's regressive taxes in Texas. There's no income tax.
• It's the total taxes, not just sales tax that matter.
• </c><01:24:22.040><c> we</c><01:24:22.639><c> is</c> income tax here and in sales tax we is income tax

Bills: HF1277 , HF1006

Committee: House Taxes