Transcript Highlights:

• in nonrecurring revenue.
• in nonrecurring revenue.
• in nonrecurring revenue.
• in nonrecurring revenue.
• in nonrecurring revenue.

Summary: The Finance and Tax Committee met and first heard SB 674, which would allow county property appraisers, like tax collectors already can, to budget for and pay hiring or retention bonuses if approved in their Department of Revenue budget. Support came from property appraiser representatives, who said the bill would help them compete for specialized staff without requiring new funding. The bill was reported favorably. The committee then considered SJR 318, a proposed constitutional amendment on tangible personal property used on agricultural land, along with an amendment clarifying the exemption’s scope and allowing the Legislature to set conditions by general law. Farm Bureau and the Florida Chamber supported the measure, and the committee adopted the amendment and reported the joint resolution favorably. Members also took up CS for SB 1664, which would require voter reapproval of local discretionary taxes when they expire; an amendment changed the bill to require expiration dates and tied reapproval to tax expiration rather than a fixed eight-year cycle. Local government and tourism groups raised concerns about impacts on tourist development taxes, transportation surtaxes, beaches funding, and long-term financing, while supporters argued voters should periodically affirm local taxes. The committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably. Next, the committee considered SJR 1510 and its implementing bill SB 1512, both dealing with a homestead-style property tax benefit for certain long-term leased residential properties. After multiple amendments narrowed the proposal substantially, limiting it to one qualifying property and then to single-family homes, mobile homes, and condominium units, counties and cities still opposed the measures as a tax shift to other taxpayers. The sponsor said the changes reduced the scope and fiscal impact, and both measures were reported favorably. Finally, the committee heard SPB 7034, the Senate tax package, which includes permanent sales tax exemptions, multiple tax holidays, motor vehicle fee reductions, a property tax study, rural investment tax credits, a freeze on local communications services tax rates, and other tax changes, with an estimated $2.1 billion revenue reduction. Testimony was mixed: property appraisers supported the property tax study, while many public commenters opposed the firearm and ammunition tax holiday and urged inclusion of gun safes and locks instead. County, city, tourism, and lodging representatives raised concerns about tourist development tax limits and other local revenue impacts, while supporters emphasized tax relief and the study’s value. After debate, the committee adopted a motion to submit SPB 7034 as a committee bill and reported it favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• furthermore the department of revenues furthermore the department of revenues administration's<00
• corresponding and corresponding revenue corresponding and corresponding revenue from<00:50:49.359
• the tax rate we've grown the revenue the tax rate we've grown the revenue especially<00:57:50.160
• or meals and rooms revenue should get more of the revenue?
• million of gross revenue.

Keywords: 928, house, all

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:

• with surplus funds instead of revenue with surplus funds instead of revenue from<00:03:25.519>
• fiscal year 24 general fund revenues fiscal year 24 general fund revenues were were were 126.4<00
• <00:05:00.759> will and that our business revenues will and that our business revenues will
• chairman I can say also that our Revenue chairman I can say also that our Revenue estimates<00:15
• I appreciate your optimism about revenues because, as you know, business revenues are down by over $100

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Finance Committee heard a briefing from the governor on her recommended fiscal years 2026-2027 budget. She described it as a “recalibration” that reduces general fund spending by about $150 million from the prior budget, avoids tax increases, and aims to protect vulnerable residents while supporting the economy. She said the proposal addresses a projected current-biennium deficit, cites lower-than-expected revenues and off-budget spending, and includes a hiring freeze and other spending reductions. The governor also said the budget is built on current revenue estimates developed with the Department of Revenue Administration and the state’s chief economist. Major policy areas discussed included education, public safety, health and human services, housing, and workforce development. The governor said the budget increases spending on public education and special education, expands Education Freedom Accounts to public school students, funds a cell-phone-free classroom grant program, continues the community college tuition freeze, and supports workforce training. She also highlighted investments in the Group II retirement system for first responders, Northern Border Alliance and drug interdiction efforts, child advocacy and victim services, mental health services, developmental disability services with no wait list, and a streamlined housing permitting process with a 60-day review target. Committee members raised questions about the fiscal assumptions, the impact of possible federal funding changes, the Education Freedom Account expansion, dam infrastructure funding, and workforce issues such as state employee pay and vacant positions. The governor said the budget continues funding for federal programs currently assumed, and that she would advocate for block grants and other federal flexibility. On dams, administration officials said the budget includes about $13 million in capital funding, with possible fee increases under consideration. On staffing, the governor said the budget funds the previously bargained 12% state employee increase, includes eight position reductions tied to program changes, and would allow those employees to be rehired if openings arise. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We face revenue volatility.
• That's mainly reflecting much higher General Fund revenue estimates.
• Thank you. costs if revenues fall short.
• So, a 4% swing in revenue is worth about $9 billion.
• So a 4% swing in revenue is worth about $9 billion.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held its first hearing of the year on Proposition 98, focusing on the Governor’s budget estimates for the three-year budget window, the Public School System Stabilization Account (PSSA), and repayment of education deferrals. The Department of Finance said the minimum guarantee would rise by about $21.7 billion over the 2025 Budget Act, with increases in each year, full repayment of the existing settle-up obligation in 2024-25, a new $5.6 billion settle-up obligation proposed for 2025-26, and a higher guarantee in 2026-27. Finance also noted revised downward estimates for transitional kindergarten attendance and Los Angeles County property tax reimbursements, and said community colleges would be funded above the split because of enrollment growth. The Legislative Analyst’s Office emphasized fiscal risk and volatility, warning that recent revenue gains are tied heavily to the stock market and tech sector and could reverse quickly. The LAO argued the Governor’s proposed $5.6 billion delay shifts risk into future years and recommended instead fully funding the current estimate, making a larger reserve deposit, considering advance payments or pension-related uses, and finding additional non-Prop 98 solutions to reduce the state’s structural deficit. On the reserve and deferral items, Finance described revised PSSA deposits and withdrawals that would leave about $4.1 billion in the reserve by 2026-27, and both Finance and the LAO supported paying off the remaining LCFF and SCFF deferrals as good fiscal practice. Committee members questioned the size of the settle-up amount, the degree of revenue volatility, the use of the reserve, and the ongoing K-12/community college split. Finance said the proposal is meant to avoid overappropriation if revenues fall, while the LAO said a buffer of roughly $3.5 billion would address typical forecasting risk. Public commenters, including school boards, county offices of education, teachers, and advocacy groups, largely opposed the $5.6 billion withholding or settle-up delay, calling it a manipulation of Prop. 98 and urging full funding and more stable revenue solutions. Several speakers also urged dedicated funding for students experiencing homelessness. The hearing ended with no vote, and the chair announced that broader program discussions would occur in later hearings.

Transcript Highlights:

• Revenue categories explain the different Revenue categories in<00:08:42.959> more<00:08:43.240
• signifies the portion of our revenues signifies the portion of our revenues that<00:09:14.320>
• dependence on these other Revenue dependence on these other Revenue sources<00:37:15.119> from
• appropriation is a separate Revenue appropriation is a separate Revenue Source<01:15:45.280>
• increased dependence on other revenues increased dependence on other revenues and<01:34:49.719><

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We found that the City of Kent used fine revenues as required.
• Kent received $241,000 in fine revenue and spent $100,000.
• Kent also donated revenue to a group serving survivors.
• an approval process to ensure fine revenues were used properly.
• Finally, we found that some revenue was unused in general funds.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee I-900 Subcommittee heard JLARC’s annual update on the status of legislative implementation of State Auditor recommendations, followed by two State Auditor performance audits. JLARC staff reported that for the 2024 review period there were three new legislative recommendations and three unresolved older recommendations. They said the legislature did not convene a work group on civil asset forfeiture, and no formal action was taken on two water-use-efficiency recommendations. Two recommendations related to concurrent Medicaid enrollments were addressed in a bill introduced this session, but that bill was not adopted. The first audit examined how Washington can ensure climate-resilient electricity infrastructure. The State Auditor found the state has opportunities to better adapt new energy infrastructure by using more site-specific climate information, broader collaboration, and vulnerability assessments. The report recommended expanding climate analyses through the University of Washington Climate Impacts Group if funding is available, using forecasted information in DNR wildfire maps, designating a non-regulatory office to coordinate siting and conflict resolution, and expanding vulnerability assessments in Ecology and Commerce processes. Agency witnesses generally agreed resilience is important but emphasized existing efforts, the need to avoid duplicative requirements, the importance of affordability and efficiency, and the role of current forums such as the Clean Energy Siting Council and SEPA processes. The second audit reviewed fines for human trafficking and related sexual exploitation crimes. Auditors found courts assessed fines inconsistently, collection rates varied, some revenues were sent to the wrong local government, and some jurisdictions did not use the money as required for enforcement, prevention, or survivor services. The audit recommended courts work with prosecutors to improve awareness of mandatory fines, and that King and Pierce County improve coding, templates, and tracking so revenues are routed and used correctly. King County testified that it appreciated the audit and described its existing prevention and survivor-support work. The committee took no votes or formal actions and adjourned after the presentations and testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• One hundred percent of those revenues go into the HDF, and 60% of the investment sales tax revenues go
• <00:22:44.320> go<00:22:44.480> to 100% of those revenues go to 100% of those revenues
• the revenue picture the revenue forecast the revenue picture is<00:28:25.519> to<00:28:25.720>
• <00:28:33.799> is the next bayum the total revenue is the next bayum the total revenue is
• sorry I'm still going over the revenue sorry I'm still going over the revenue sources<00:32:07.039

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:05:02.560> and significantly reduce our revenue and significantly reduce our revenue and
• down 20 or more per in their revenue down 20 or more per in their revenue from<00:05:19.880>
• <00:05:22.880> of from December to January this revenue of from December to January this revenue
• <00:14:33.440> and don't want to hurt your own revenue and don't want to hurt your own revenue
• <00:37:04.960> or casinos seen a decrease in revenues or casinos seen a decrease in revenues

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House File 733, which would restore electronic pull-tab features such as open-all, free play, bonus games, and similar functions that were restricted in 2023. The bill’s supporters, including representatives of Allied Charities of Minnesota, the American Legion, and a Bloomington school activities foundation, argued that the 2023 changes reduced revenue for charitable gambling operations and, in turn, cut funding for veterans programs, youth sports, food shelves, school needs, and other local community services. Several supporters cited early revenue declines since the new rules took effect, including double-digit drops and one example of a Bloomington site reporting a 29% year-over-year decline overall and a 44% drop in e-tab revenue. They also argued that restoring the features would help charities without meaningfully increasing casino play. Opponents, including Citizens Against Gambling Expansion and the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, said the bill would expand slot-machine-like gambling in neighborhood bars and restaurants and increase problem gambling and related social harms. They argued the features in question mimic slot machines, are especially concerning in non-age-restricted locations, and would amount to a major expansion of gambling. The tribal representative also said the 2023 clarification was appropriate, that charitable gambling revenues do not translate efficiently into mission funding, and that tax relief or other policy changes would be better ways to help charities than restoring the disputed features. The chair reminded testifiers to keep comments neutral and not partisan. After testimony, a member discussion began, with Representative Ray Rower thanking the testifiers and expressing support for their work. The transcript excerpt does not show a final vote or disposition beyond the bill being recommended to be re-referred to the Commerce Finance and Policy Committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill Number 396 by Representative Pascal and others regarding the Department of Revenue is referred

Bills: SJR 12, SJR 81, SB 22, SB 32, SB 241, SB 393, SB 414, SB 458, SB 464, SB 568, SB 583, SB 609, SB 660, SB 664, SB 693, SB 731, SB 732, SB 746, SB 779, SB 783, SB 785, SB 868, SB 897, SB 921, SB 955, SB 1008, SB 1029, SB 1036, SB 1057, SB 1059, SB 1120, SB 1122, SB 1147, SB 1163, SB 1188, SB 1197, SB 1209, SB 1245, SB 1321, SB 1332, SB 1365, SB 1394, SB 1396, SB 1470, SB 1484, SB 1494, SB 1537, SB 1596, SB 1598, SB 1637, SB 1644, SB 1809, SB 1814, SB 1822, SB 1841, SB 1948, SB 2064, SB 2065, SB 2112, SB 2155, SB 2226, SB 2320, SB 2406, SJR 36, SJR 81, SJR 50, SJR 4, SJR 40, SJR 27, SCR 22, SCR 12, SCR 39, SCR 38, SCR 37, SB 1396, SB 1209, SB 765, SB 62, SB 666, SB 888, SB 687, SB 847, SB 1248, SB 504, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 241, SB 304, SB 1023, SB 204, SB 609, SB 670, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 1539, SB 447, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 1215, SB 1302, SB 583, SB 673, SB 681, SB 1172, SB 955, SB 957, SB 541, SB 266, SB 1415, SB 53, SB 1352, SB 785, SB 1450, SB 1502, SB 1566, SB 1062, SB 711, SB 746, SB 1404, SB 1448, SB 507, SB 1026, SB 1349, SB 1355, SB 1433, SB 1434, SB 1596, SB 1403, SB 667, SB 1059, SB 1567, SB 310, SB 311, SB 505, SB 1210, SB 1470, SB 264, SB 1358, SB 1364, SB 1569, SB 1376, SB 1228, SB 519, SB 1350, SB 462, SB 827, SB 1585, SB 1484, SB 1273, SB 927, SB 1227, SB 1229, SB 1353, SB 1464, SB 1709, SB 1729, SB 1733, SB 1744, SB 1772, SB 1841, SB 1147, SB 1008, SB 2016, SB 1173, SB 1163, SB 996, SB 1370, SB 1321, SB 1101, SB 860, SB 993, SB 693, SB 1537, SB 1332, SB 1307, SB 963, SB 493, SB 984, SB 619, SB 1122, SB 455, SB 522, SB 1057, SB 1239, SB 1254, SB 1255, SB 1259, SB 1341, SB 1877, SB 1277, SB 32, SB 732, SB 660, SB 731, SB 921, SB 268, SB 1822, SB 1589, SB 397, SB 1058, SB 1267, SB 2112, SB 1930, SB 532, SB 2155, SB 508, SB 292, SB 291, SB 901, SB 1333, SB 1436, SB 1494, SB 964, SB 779, SB 1378, SB 2312, SB 1719, SB 287, SB 2143, SB 1245, SB 261, SB 1247, SB 1948, SB 2406, SB 2407, SB 1882, SB 1814, SB 618, SB 38, SB 393, SB 1371, SB 1394, SB 1365, SB 2243, SB 2226, SB 2039, SB 1919, SB 1895, SB 1598, SB 1493, SB 1810, SB 1791, SB 1706, SB 1644, SB 1238, SB 783, SB 458, SB 22, SB 651, SB 897, SB 1809, SB 1080, SB 745, SB 826, SB 989, SB 1320, SB 1437, SB 2320, SB 2289, SB 1171, SB 664, SB 1637, SB 2064, SB 868, SB 1079, SB 1243, SB 1504, SB 1851, SB 1879, SB 2237, SB 1257, SB 2034, SB 1522, SB 883, SB 249, SB 1318, SB 1151, SB 596, SB 1191, SB 226, SB 570, SB 870, SB 991, SB 60, SB 365, SB 1067, SB 1786, SB 326, SB 1401, SB 1592, SB 1728, SB 1265, SB 586, SB 529, SB 217, SB 209, SB 1923, SB 1559, SB 1839, SB 387, SB 1874, SB 1872, SB 1873, SB 1921, SB 1883, SB 1677, SB 95, SB 1620, SB 1838, SB 2024, SB 2429, SB 1999, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 2166, SB 871, SB 510, SB 33, SB 2420, SB 1860, SB 1541, SB 1316, SB 1314, SB 1313, SB 1426, SB 1398, SB 1869, SB 1750, SB 1871, SB 36, SB 855, SB 1233, SB 760, SB 2425, SB 2037, SB 1758, SB 1759, SB 2365, SB 1924, SB 762, SB 1271, SB 1818, SB 605, SB 1405, SB 1762, SB 1968, SB 1977, SB 2077, SB 2148, SB 2321, SB 1967, SB 1662, SB 1663, SB 2124, SB 2204, SB 1855, SB 863, SB 37, SB 241, SB 1147, SB 1394, SB 1814, SB 1948, SB 2155, SB 1209, SB 1396, SB 609, SB 660, SB 921, SR 373, SR 374, SR 376, SR 377, SR 379, SR 381, SR 386, SB 2332, SB 3040, SB 3041, SB 2332, SB 3040, SB 3041

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, tax exemption, ad valorem, tangible personal property, income production, Texas, moving image industry, incentive program, film production, grant funding, job creation, economic development, ad valorem taxation, franchise tax credit, personal property, public camping

Transcript Highlights:

• Take it out of your sales tax revenue.

Bills: SJR12, SJR81, SB22, SB32, SB241, SB393, SB414, SB458, SB464, SB568, SB583, SB609, SB660, SB664, SB693, SB731, SB732, SB746, SB779, SB783, SB785, SB868, SB897, SB921, SB955, SB1008, SB1029, SB1036, SB1057, SB1059, SB1120, SB1122, SB1147, SB1163, SB1188, SB1197, SB1209, SB1245, SB1321, SB1332, SB1365, SB1394, SB1396, SB1470, SB1484, SB1494, SB1537, SB1596, SB1598, SB1637, SB1644, SB1809, SB1814, SB1822, SB1841, SB1948, SB2064, SB2065, SB2112, SB2155, SB2226, SB2320, SB2406, SJR36, SJR81, SJR50, SJR4, SJR40, SJR27, SCR22, SCR12, SCR39, SCR38, SCR37, SB1396, SB1209, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB504, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB241, SB304, SB1023, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB447, SB1119, SB1505, SB1215, SB1302, SB583, SB673, SB681, SB1172, SB955, SB957, SB541, SB266, SB1415, SB53, SB1352, SB785, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB1062, SB711, SB746, SB1404, SB1448, SB507, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB667, SB1059, SB1567, SB310, SB311, SB505, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB1350, SB462, SB827, SB1585, SB1484, SB1273, SB927, SB1227, SB1229, SB1353, SB1464, SB1709, SB1729, SB1733, SB1744, SB1772, SB1841, SB1147, SB1008, SB2016, SB1173, SB1163, SB996, SB1370, SB1321, SB1101, SB860, SB993, SB693, SB1537, SB1332, SB1307, SB963, SB493, SB984, SB619, SB1122, SB455, SB522, SB1057, SB1239, SB1254, SB1255, SB1259, SB1341, SB1877, SB1277, SB32, SB732, SB660, SB731, SB921, SB268, SB1822, SB1589, SB397, SB1058, SB1267, SB2112, SB1930, SB532, SB2155, SB508, SB292, SB291, SB901, SB1333, SB1436, SB1494, SB964, SB779, SB1378, SB2312, SB1719, SB287, SB2143, SB1245, SB261, SB1247, SB1948, SB2406, SB2407, SB1882, SB1814, SB618, SB38, SB393, SB1371, SB1394, SB1365, SB2243, SB2226, SB2039, SB1919, SB1895, SB1598, SB1493, SB1810, SB1791, SB1706, SB1644, SB1238, SB783, SB458, SB22, SB651, SB897, SB1809, SB1080, SB745, SB826, SB989, SB1320, SB1437, SB2320, SB2289, SB1171, SB664, SB1637, SB2064, SB868, SB1079, SB1243, SB1504, SB1851, SB1879, SB2237, SB1257, SB2034, SB1522, SB883, SB249, SB1318, SB1151, SB596, SB1191, SB226, SB570, SB870, SB991, SB60, SB365, SB1067, SB1786, SB326, SB1401, SB1592, SB1728, SB1265, SB586, SB529, SB217, SB209, SB1923, SB1559, SB1839, SB387, SB1874, SB1872, SB1873, SB1921, SB1883, SB1677, SB95, SB1620, SB1838, SB2024, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB2166, SB871, SB510, SB33, SB2420, SB1860, SB1541, SB1316, SB1314, SB1313, SB1426, SB1398, SB1869, SB1750, SB1871, SB36, SB855, SB1233, SB760, SB2425, SB2037, SB1758, SB1759, SB2365, SB1924, SB762, SB1271, SB1818, SB605, SB1405, SB1762, SB1968, SB1977, SB2077, SB2148, SB2321, SB1967, SB1662, SB1663, SB2124, SB2204, SB1855, SB863, SB37, SB241, SB1147, SB1394, SB1814, SB1948, SB2155, SB1209, SB1396, SB609, SB660, SB921, SR373, SR374, SR376, SR377, SR379, SR381, SR386, SB2332, SB3040, SB3041, SB2332, SB3040, SB3041

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, tax exemption, ad valorem, tangible personal property, income production, Texas, moving image industry, incentive program, film production, grant funding, job creation, economic development, ad valorem taxation, franchise tax credit, personal property, public camping

Transcript Highlights:

• rates quote a publicly accessible standalone document that explains the change in rate, anticipate revenue
• Senate bill 2830 by Huffman relating to the authority of certain municipalities to receive certain tax revenue
• Hina Oso of Nueces, related to prohibiting a school district from using interest and sinking tax revenue
• Senate Bill 2955 by Parker relating to the authority of certain municipalities to receive certain tax revenues
• relating to the authority of certain municipalities and local government corporations to use certain tax revenue

Bills: SJR 12, SJR 81, SCR 39, SB 22, SB 32, SB 241, SB 393, SB 414, SB 458, SB 464, SB 568, SB 583, SB 609, SB 660, SB 693, SB 731, SB 732, SB 746, SB 783, SB 785, SB 897, SB 993, SB 996, SB 1008, SB 1029, SB 1035, SB 1036, SB 1120, SB 1122, SB 1147, SB 1163, SB 1188, SB 1197, SB 1209, SB 1227, SB 1245, SB 1267, SB 1307, SB 1321, SB 1332, SB 1386, SB 1394, SB 1396, SB 1470, SB 1494, SB 1537, SB 1596, SB 1598, SB 1610, SB 1664, SB 1814, SB 1822, SB 1841, SB 1948, SB 2065, SB 2155, SB 2406, SB 2407, SJR 12, SJR 36, SJR 81, SJR 50, SJR 4, SCR 22, SCR 12, SCR 39, SB 765, SB 62, SB 666, SB 888, SB 687, SB 847, SB 1248, SB 504, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 241, SB 304, SB 1023, SB 204, SB 609, SB 670, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 1539, SB 447, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 1215, SB 1302, SB 583, SB 673, SB 681, SB 1172, SB 955, SB 957, SB 1120, SB 541, SB 266, SB 1415, SB 53, SB 1352, SB 785, SB 1450, SB 1502, SB 1566, SB 414, SB 1062, SB 711, SB 746, SB 1404, SB 1448, SB 507, SB 1026, SB 1349, SB 1355, SB 1433, SB 1434, SB 1596, SB 1403, SB 667, SB 1059, SB 1567, SB 310, SB 311, SB 505, SB 1209, SB 1210, SB 1470, SB 264, SB 1029, SB 1358, SB 1364, SB 1569, SB 1376, SB 1228, SB 519, SB 1350, SB 462, SB 827, SB 1585, SB 1396, SB 1484, SB 1273, SB 927, SB 1227, SB 1229, SB 1353, SB 1464, SB 1709, SB 1729, SB 1733, SB 1744, SB 1772, SB 1841, SB 1147, SB 1008, SB 2016, SB 1173, SB 1163, SB 996, SB 568, SB 1370, SB 1321, SB 1101, SB 860, SB 993, SB 693, SB 1610, SB 1537, SB 1332, SB 1307, SB 963, SB 493, SB 984, SB 619, SB 1122, SB 455, SB 522, SB 1057, SB 1239, SB 1254, SB 1255, SB 1259, SB 1341, SB 1664, SB 1877, SB 464, SB 1277, SB 32, SB 732, SB 660, SB 731, SB 921, SB 268, SB 1822, SB 1188, SB 1589, SB 397, SB 1058, SB 1036, SB 1267, SB 2112, SB 1930, SB 532, SB 1035, SB 2155, SB 508, SB 292, SB 291, SB 901, SB 1333, SB 1436, SB 1494, SB 964, SB 779, SB 1378, SB 2312, SB 1719, SB 1386, SB 287, SB 2143, SB 1245, SB 261, SB 1247, SB 1948, SB 2406, SB 2407, SB 1882, SB 1197, SB 1814, SB 618, SB 38, SB 393, SB 2065, SB 1371, SB 1394, SB 1365, SB 2243, SB 2226, SB 2039, SB 1919, SB 1895, SB 1598, SB 1493, SB 1810, SB 1791, SB 1706, SB 1644, SB 1238, SB 783, SB 458, SB 22, SB 651, SB 897, SB 1809, SB 1080, SB 745, SB 826, SB 989, SB 1320, SB 1437, SB 2320, SB 2289, SB 1171, SB 664, SB 1637, SB 2064, SB 868, SJR 40, SJR 27, SCR 38, SCR 37, SB 1079, SB 1243, SB 1504, SB 1851, SB 1879, SB 2237, SB 1257, SB 2034, SB 1522, SB 883, SB 249, SB 1318, SB 1151, SB 596, SB 1191, SB 226, SB 570, SB 870, SB 991, SB 60, SB 365, SB 1067, SB 1786, SB 326, SB 1401, SB 1592, SB 1728, SB 1265, SB 586, SB 529, SB 217, SB 209, SB 1923, SB 1559, SB 1839, SB 387, SB 1874, SB 1872, SB 1873, SB 1921, SB 1883, SB 1677, SB 95, SB 1620, SB 1838, SB 2024, SB 2429, SB 1999, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 2166, SB 871, SB 510, SB 33, SB 2420, SB 1860, SB 1541, SB 1316, SB 1314, SB 1313, SB 1426, SB 1398, SB 1869, SB 1750, SB 1871, SB 36, SB 855, SB 1233, SB 760, SB 2425, SB 2037, SB 1758, SB 1759, SB 2365, SB 1924, SB 762, SB 1271, SB 1818, SB 605, SB 1405, SB 1762, SB 1968, SB 1977, SB 2077, SB 2148, SB 2321, SB 1967, SB 1662, SB 1663, SB 2124, SB 2204

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, tax exemption, ad valorem, tangible personal property, income production, border security, southern border, federal immigration policy, illegal immigration, cartels, transnational cartels, fentanyl, drug trafficking, human trafficking, Operation Lone Star, Texas border

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on educational reforms, particularly in special education funding. Notably, Senator Bettencourt laid out the transformative impacts of Senate Bill 568, which aims to lift a historical cap on special education funding that affected approximately 775,000 students. The discussions included plans for an intensity-based funding model that could ensure fair distribution of resources depending on individual needs, thereby enhancing educational support for diverse learning requirements. Senators acknowledged past failures in the special education framework, emphasizing the necessity of moving towards a system that is transparent and focused on delivering adequate services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Counties will get new revenue.
• Third, the bill excludes recognized revenue streams, including revenue tied to renewable energy attributes
• Third, the bill excludes recognized revenue streams, including revenue tied to renewable energy attributes
• revenue, then you're not losing revenue.
• revenue, then you're not losing revenue.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If you take a look at the revenue estimate, we keep hoping for good news that something is doable, and
• uh a revenue uh a revenue estimate<00:27:01.919> so<00:27:02.880> um<00:27:03.880>
• both for the uh Department of Revenue both for the uh Department of Revenue and<00:27:27.559>
• They will reap some of the revenue from that local sales tax if they already have a sales tax.
• Revenue.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's now the second largest revenue source, and it's not a reliable revenue source, and there's...
• It's now the second largest revenue source, and it's not a reliable revenue source, and there's certainly
• These represent our revenues.
• In September, the state begins in earnest with our revenue estimates, as Kirk... with our revenue estimates
• So we're not only seeing a flattening of revenue, we anticipated revenue decline.

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Revenue collects on the left hand side. Revenue collects on the left hand side.
• audited revenue. audited revenue.
• revenues have been performing to date. revenues have been performing to date.
• So we are um lower revenue month.
• to even more revenue.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Committee of Conference on HB 1 and HB 2 was called to order, and Legislative Budget Assistant Michael Kaine reviewed the working documents before the committee. He explained the compare report, the detailed change sheet, the HB 1 index, the HB 2 side-by-side, the surplus statement, and a revenue handout, noting that the committee would vote up or down on all detail-change items and that unresolved items on hold would be removed from the final bills. He also identified staff available to answer technical questions and noted that the committee would track the dollar impact of decisions as it proceeded. Members then turned to the revenue outlook, with discussion focused on the gap between the House and Senate budget positions. House members said their budget guidance was based on revenue estimates that were significantly below the governor’s proposal, and they discussed whether additional revenue could close part of the gap. Department of Revenue Administration Commissioner Lindsey Stepp presented updated revenue estimates based on May data, explaining the methodology and the ranges for fiscal years 2025, 2026, and 2027. She said business taxes were the largest source of uncertainty, with estimates reflecting current economic conditions, recent revenue performance, and a range of possible growth rates. Committee members questioned the assumptions behind the business-tax ranges, including why the low and high scenarios were set at 2% and 8% growth. Stepp said the range was based on historical performance and current economic factors such as inflation, tariffs, and business behavior, and she noted that June is a major estimate-payment month for business taxes. Members also discussed recent revenue trends, including the effect of tariffs and the possibility of federal tax policy changes affecting repatriated profits. The commissioner and House members also discussed other revenue sources, including rooms and meals and real estate transfer taxes, with the House side arguing that lower mortgage rates and home prices could increase real estate transfer revenue. No votes were taken in the portion provided, but the committee discussed possible upward adjustments to House revenue assumptions, including increases of roughly $70 million in total based on the updated outlook and additional insurance-related revenue.

Transcript Highlights:

• , more business enterprise tax revenue, more business enterprise tax revenue.<00:33:21.519> To
• revenue. To me, this isn't an expense. revenue. To me, this isn't an expense.
• Um, we will be revenue amendment.
• million plus dollar increase in revenue. million plus dollar increase in revenue.
• new revenue. new revenue. Further<01:25:02.000> discussion. Further discussion.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• business tax revenue is a rare event. business tax revenue is a rare event.
• And I get the benefit that I have of a couple extra months of revenue, seeing revenue coming in.
• ,<00:20:41.440> but when we have more data revenue, but when we have more data revenue, but
• have of a couple extra months of revenue have of a couple extra months of revenue uh<00:20:56.320
• and what's going on existing revenues and what's going on with<00:21:02.240> revenues,<00:21:

Keywords: 1189, house, all

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:

• What is your mechanism that as you take this revenue, That comes in How do you return the general revenue
• There was general revenue and so and it's the interest of the committee such that any new general revenue
• In other words, with the enactment of the bill, if, if the uh general revenue dedicated revenue goes
• up, you could appropriate that revenue with an offsetting decrease in general revenue that would affect
• Uh, general revenue as opposed to fee-based income. Um, Mr.

Bills: HB16

Keywords: judicial administration, court reform, juvenile diversion, court security, mental health services, drug offenses, constitutional amendments

Transcript Highlights:

• I am James Eldridge, Senate Chair of the Joint Committee on Revenue.
• We simply cannot afford to leave this revenue on the table.
• Without this revenue, patients will suffer.
• Without this revenue, patients will suffer.
• So we very much support this funding and revenue raising.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue, chaired by Senator James Eldridge and Representative Adrian Madaro, opened its hearing with a moment of silence for the late Lowell State Senator Ed Kennedy and reviewed hearing procedures and deadlines. The committee then took testimony on several corporate tax bills, including S. 2033/H. 3110 on offshore tax avoidance, H. 3248 on a manufacturing tax exemption, H. 3057 on a tiered corporate minimum tax, and S. 2041 on a corporate tax haven blacklist, along with a separate business interest deduction bill. No votes were taken during the hearing. Supporters of S. 2033/H. 3110, including labor unions, health care workers, educators, public health advocates, seniors, and several legislators, argued that Massachusetts needs new revenue to offset federal cuts to Medicaid, SNAP, health care, education, and other services. They said the bill would raise roughly $400 million annually by increasing the share of offshore profits included in the state tax base from 5% to 50%, and they framed it as a fairness measure that would require large multinational corporations to pay more while leaving most local businesses and workers unaffected. Testimony emphasized risks to MassHealth, PCA services, adult dental care, hospitals, schools, and public health programs if new revenue is not raised. Opponents, including the Mass Taxpayers Foundation and the Council on State Taxation, argued the proposal is poor tax policy and likely unconstitutional because it would tax foreign-source income without allowing foreign tax credits or a comparable apportionment method. They said Massachusetts should take a broader, coordinated approach to federal tax changes rather than a standalone bill, and warned of litigation risk and possible double taxation. Supporters such as MassBudget and former tax counsel Don Griswold countered that the bill is a reasonable rough-justice approach, consistent with federal and neighboring-state treatment, and that it would primarily affect a small number of very large multinationals. On S. 2041, the Global Business Alliance opposed the proposed tax haven blacklist, while supporting a separate bill allowing business interest deductibility.

Transcript Highlights:

• And again, Senators, this is a discussion on the general revenue forecast.
• I would like to show what our monthly revenues...
• I would like to show what our monthly revenues... ...show what our monthly revenues are looking relative
• One is about halfway through that list: there's "Other non-operating revenue."
• And then, third from the bottom, are Indian gaming revenues, where there's more revenue sharing anticipated

Summary: The committee took up three tax-related bills and a staff presentation on the state revenue forecast and the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act. SB 856, by Senator DeSigley, would require online real estate listing platforms to display estimated property taxes using state-prescribed methods rather than the current owner’s taxes. Supporters from county, city, and property appraiser groups said the bill would improve transparency for homebuyers, especially first-time buyers and those facing large tax increases after a homestead cap reset. Senators discussed ensuring the estimate appears directly on listing platforms. The bill was reported favorably. The committee then considered SB 110, by Senator Arrington, which clarifies that people holding 98-year-or-longer residential leases remain eligible for the homestead exemption even if the lease ends upon death, aligning such leases with life estates for estate-planning purposes. An amendment was adopted to clarify that leases terminating at the lessee’s death are valid under current law. The Florida Bar’s Real Property, Probate, and Trust Law Section supported the bill, and Senator Gates noted its importance for long-term leaseholders on barrier islands. The amended bill was reported favorably. SB 434, by Senator Leak, would prevent property tax assessments from increasing because of improvements made to harden homes against wind damage, such as stronger roof attachments, shutters, and secondary water barriers. The sponsor said homeowners should not be penalized for resilience upgrades, and the bill was also reported favorably. Staff director Mr. Khan then reviewed the latest general revenue forecast, noting collections were running about $230 million above prior estimates through November and that the new forecast added roughly $500 million in the first budget year, with a smaller increase in the second year. He said corporate income tax was the main weakness in the forecast, due to softer collections and uncertainty around tariffs, while other sources were generally stronger. In the second half of the presentation, he explained that the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act would significantly affect Florida’s corporate income tax base if fully conformed to, with an estimated $3.5 billion general revenue impact in fiscal year 2026-27, largely because of retroactive provisions such as bonus depreciation and research expensing. Senators and the appropriations chair discussed the budget implications, including possible ways to limit the impact through decoupling or prospective treatment. No votes were taken on the forecast presentation, and the committee adjourned after members requested to be recorded as voting in favor on SB 856 and SB 110.