Transcript Highlights:

• Callaway County for just over $4 million, refunding the 2013 bonds.
• <00:28:38.480> Looks<00:28:38.720> like refunding the 2013 bonds.
• Looks like refunding the 2013 bonds.
• Next, Harden County, 16.9 million refund Next, Harden County, 16.9 million refund the<00:28:48.799
• They require at current refundings.

Keywords: 00:09 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:42 Approval of Minutes 01:07 Information Items 04:05 Lease Rpt - Finance and Administration Cabinet 18:59 OFM - Economic Development Fund Grants 25:42 OFM – KY Housing Authority 31:30 Remaining 2025 Meetings 33:26 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with quorum, approved the September meeting minutes, and received a set of information reports on capital projects, debt, school district bond issues, UK and KCTCS asset preservation projects, and the Louisville Arena Authority’s financial report, with the latter noted as lengthy and expected to be discussed further in person in December. The committee also heard a Finance and Administration Cabinet lease report covering three leases: a temporary lease for the Cabinet for Health and Family Services in Louisville due to ongoing maintenance and safety issues at its current site, a Department of Juvenile Justice lease in Hardin County for a day-treatment/alternative school program, and a Warren County lease renewal. Members questioned the Hardin County lease about the higher rate and limited competition; agency staff explained the specialized school setting, transportation and program requirements, and the difficulty of attracting bidders for alternative-school space. The lease package was approved after roll call. The committee then considered seven economic development grants: four EDF grants and three KPDI grants. The projects included infrastructure for Allen County’s industrial park, flood-related repairs for Weddington Plaza in the Big Sandy area, an Owensboro manufacturing expansion for Mscan America, a new Louisville manufacturing facility for Anthro Energy, a Henderson due-diligence study, a Paducah spec building, and utility extensions for the Riverbend site in Carrollton. Staff said the projects had been approved by KEFA and recommended by the relevant cabinet leadership, and the committee approved them by roll call. Finally, the committee reviewed a new Kentucky Housing Corporation conduit bond issue for about $43 million for 233 Louisville housing units, which was approved. It then took up five SFCC debt issues together: new money for an Edmonson County elementary school and Knox County middle school gym improvements, plus refundings for Callaway, Hardin, and McCracken counties. Members raised concerns that the refundings were bundled together and that some did not appear to meet a newly referenced 3% net present value savings guideline, but the package was still approved on a 5-2 vote. The meeting ended with calendar updates, including a November 20 meeting at noon and a December 16 meeting featuring the Yum Arena presentation, followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Kentucky's incentive is stronger because it's refundable.
• <00:08:37.880> in stronger because it's refundable in stronger because it's refundable in
• then<00:15:21.160> the went to a non-refundable and then the went to a non-refundable and
• refund refund upfront<00:23:46.000> so<00:23:46.520> Wrigley<00:23:47.240> is<00
• Anything here, you have to generate something to be taxed to get a refund.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Roll Call 00:52 SB 1 Discussion 01:33 SB 1 Vote 32:39 SB 76 Discussion 34:35 SB 76 Vote 36:20 SB 162 Discussion 37:04 SB 162 Vote 46:35, 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 1, which would create a Kentucky Film Office and a Kentucky Film Leadership Council to promote film production in the state. Sponsors said the bill is intended to expand Kentucky’s use of film tax incentives, improve marketing and infrastructure, and attract productions that could generate jobs, tourism, and broader economic development. They noted a committee substitute made two changes: adding a salary cap for the film office executive director and correcting a date. Members asked about whether the office should instead be housed in the Economic Development Cabinet, how Kentucky’s refundable credit compares with Georgia’s transferable credits, the bill’s obscenity language, the size of the current incentive cap, and whether there should be reporting on the program’s results. Supporters cited a University of Louisville study estimating about $200 million in industry revenue in 2022 and argued the state is not fully using existing credits; an outside witness, Andrew McNeel, opposed the bill, calling the incentives subsidies, warning that Georgia’s uncapped program could lead to pressure to raise Kentucky’s cap, and arguing the bill could subsidize films with little lasting local benefit. After debate, the committee adopted the substitute and passed Senate Bill 1 as amended by House Committee Substitute 1 with an expression of opinion that it should pass. Several members explained their votes, including concerns about transparency, local hiring, and the need for further review. The committee then moved on to Senate Bill 76, which would raise the threshold for a retainage/escrow requirement in certain real estate improvement contracts from $500,000 to $2 million. The sponsor said the change is meant to reflect construction cost inflation since the statute was enacted in 1990. The transcript indicates a motion and second were made, but the discussion was cut off before any final action on the bill is shown. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 162, a simplified bill on unemployment insurance fraud. The sponsor said it would require suspected fraud to be referred to the appropriate state or federal law enforcement authorities, including the Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, county or Commonwealth’s attorneys, and, where applicable, the U.S. Department of Justice, to create a clearer process and accountability. The transcript ends during the presentation, before any vote or committee action on SB 162 is recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• If they collect more than that, they have to refund or tax break for local business tax.
• If they collect more than that, they have to refund or tax break for local business tax.
• Refunds could take up to two years to be identified and processed, and that process of issuing those
• refunds may actually cost more than the value of the refund itself to the LBT payers.
• So I am really hoping that Representative Botana will look at the refund situation because the refunds

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee met on March 13, 2025, for its first meeting of the session, with member and staff introductions followed by consideration of several tax-related bills. The committee first heard HJR 163 and its implementing bill HB 165, which would extend the homestead property tax exemption for quadriplegics to surviving spouses, similar to the treatment for surviving spouses of certain disabled veterans. Sponsor Rep. Tant and constituent J.R. Harding described the financial and caregiving burdens faced by spouses of quadriplegics. The committee heard supportive testimony from the Florida Association of Property Appraisers and members voted both measures favorably without opposition. The committee then considered HB 785 on heated tobacco products. Rep. Tramont said the bill would create a new tax/regulatory category for the product, and an amendment clarifying the definition was adopted. The James Madison Institute offered a resource on the issue, the Florida Retail Federation waived in support, and Ranking Member Eskamani said she had concerns about the excise tax treatment and would vote no. The bill passed 16-1. Next, HB 321, a property tax exemption clarification for homes for the aged, was presented by Rep. Smith as a technical “glitch bill” to align state law with IRS tax code and ease development of low-income senior housing. It drew supportive testimony and passed unanimously. The final bill, HB 503 by Rep. Botana, would cap local government revenue from local business taxes and require refunds if collections exceed the cap, with carve-outs for fiscally constrained areas. Local government and economic development groups, including the Florida League of Cities, the City of Winter Haven, the Miami-Dade Beacon Council, and the Florida Association of Counties, opposed the bill, arguing it would limit funding for public safety, inspections, economic development, and other services and create administrative refund problems. Several members supported the bill as a tax-cutting measure, while others warned of impacts on local services and revenue flexibility. The committee reported HB 503 favorably on a 14-5 vote, and then adjourned.

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• Subdivision 1B provides that the funds would be issued as a refund to the city.
• It is Senate File 66, also asking for an exemption refund.
• <00:43:34.680> um<00:43:35.680> and refund um and refund um and uh<00:43:37.800> uh<
• Subdivision 1B provides that the funds be issued as a refund to the city.
• Department of Revenue for a refund to the city of Watertown after the effective date.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then in the bill, we had a refund program because we have the registration fee that EV drivers in
• So the idea would be to have a refund program that those in-state drivers could get a refund on the new
• The body across the hall basically said this refund program is going to be too much work.
• program and then reduce the refund program and then reduce the registration<00:54:15.599> fees.
• <00:54:38.880> program compromise to switch the refund program compromise to switch the refund

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And every year they pay a little refund.
• <00:17:33.600> Um mandated the state issue a refund.
• Um mandated the state issue a refund.
• It just to 400% issue refunds for that.
• c><00:18:25.440> DRA mandatory refunds issued by DRA mandatory refunds issued by DRA bills<00:

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• uh to uh so that way it can be refunded uh to uh so that way it can be refunded back<00:32:55.679
• Is it that lower number, which has a total sales tax exemption amount for the refund of $300,000?
• Is it that lower number, which has a total sales tax exemption amount for the refund of $300,000?
• Is it that lower number, which has a total sales tax exemption amount for the refund of $300,000?
• Which has a total sales tax exemption amount for the refund of $300,000?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The renters credit refunds a portion of the property taxes that qualifying renters have paid through
• between Minnesota's property tax refunds between Minnesota's property tax refunds for<00:09:25.200
• The renters's credit<00:10:02.399> refunds<00:10:02.800> a<00:10:03.040> portion
• for the most provide the largest refunds for the most struggling<00:10:23.680> motans.
• program, um, for the property tax refund program, um, for both<00:15:21.440> homeowners<00:15

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard House File 2499, as amended by the DE1, which would expand Minnesota’s renters’ credit by nearly doubling the income cutoff and increasing the maximum credit, with the bill laid over for possible inclusion in the tax bill. Representative Lee explained that the DE1 updated tax years and amounts after a new forecast, and argued the bill would bring the renters’ credit closer to parity with the homestead credit. She cited Department of Revenue data showing that recent changes to the renters’ credit increased participation and average refunds, and said the proposal would help more renters, including middle-income households and more seniors and people with disabilities. Testifiers Michael Dah of Homeline and Nan Madden of the Minnesota Budget Project supported the bill. Dah said renters face rising housing costs and a shortage of affordable homes, and described how renters use the credit for basic needs like school supplies, clothing, eyeglasses, dental care, groceries, and car repairs. Madden said the credit refunds property taxes paid through rent, helps workers, families, seniors, and people with disabilities, and noted that more than 310,000 households received the credit in 2023 across every part of the state. She also said recent filing changes made the credit easier to claim and increased participation. Members broadly discussed the fairness of treating renters and homeowners similarly, the role of property taxes in housing costs, and whether the bill should be viewed as helping low-income or more middle-income households. Representative Abeler, Smith, Howard, and Huitt expressed support, while Representative Roach argued the broader problem is rising property taxes driven by mandates on counties and said the bill is only a temporary fix. Representative Anderson questioned extending the credit to higher-income renters and said policy should prioritize homeownership, while Representative Lee responded that many renters are middle-class, that renters often cannot save for a down payment, and that the bill would help them stabilize financially. The bill was then laid over as amended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Average refunds are up 11% this year, and sitting around $3,500 nationally as the refund for families
• Average<00:01:57.960> refunds<00:01:58.400> are<00:01:58.520> up<00:01:58.680>
• Average refunds are up 11% this year. Average refunds are up 11% this year.
• the refund for families. the refund for families.
• refund for property taxes next year? refund for property taxes next year?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: Republican senators held a Tax Day press event focused on affordability, arguing that DFL control has led to overspending, higher taxes, and reduced competitiveness in Minnesota. They criticized recent state tax increases and proposed new taxes, including taxes on social media and advertising, extending sales tax to legal and accounting services, a higher income tax tier, a statewide property tax, and a housing-related sales tax amendment. They also contrasted Minnesota policy with federal tax relief, saying Minnesotans need spending restraint, fraud reduction, and a smaller, more efficient state government instead of additional revenue measures. Senator Dziedzic focused on transportation costs, especially high license tab fees, saying residents are overwhelmed by taxes and fees and that the state should fund roads and bridges with existing money rather than raising fees. He cited a House proposal to quintuple tab fees and said Minnesota’s vehicle ownership costs are far higher than neighboring states. Senator Kunesh focused on property taxes, saying homeownership is becoming unaffordable because of state spending and unfunded mandates passed on to local governments. He argued that Democrats’ 2023 spending drove up property taxes and warned that a proposed statewide property tax would worsen the housing crisis and hurt families, seniors, and first-time buyers. In response to questions, the senators said their caucus is open to companion bills and some targeted tax relief measures, including conformity with federal changes such as tax treatment of tips and overtime and Section 179 business provisions. They said they support transportation investment but want it funded through existing resources and better prioritization, not new taxes or fees. They also discussed possible bonding negotiations and said they are still evaluating proposals related to HCMC and a one-time property tax rebate, which they described as insufficient compared with the need for permanent relief. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• structure if the good And also a refund structure if the good has to be revoked for any reason.
• As passed the Senate, the House had a 10-year refund structure.
• As passed the Senate, they reduced it to a five-year refund structure.
• The conference committee includes that five-year structure, but also changes the refund structure to
• ... ...per year for the five years, so it makes it equitable, and it also clarifies processes for refunds

Summary: The caucus reviewed several bills and Senate or conference committee amendments, with members generally noting whether the sponsor intended to concur. HB 2749 would let courts enter a Class 1 misdemeanor conviction for certain lower-level felony convictions, with the Senate amendment requiring at least five years since completion of sentence before eligibility. HB 2082 would create a childhood cancer and rare childhood disease research commission and adjust funding rules, including a five-million-dollar threshold tied to appropriations or federal grants. HB 2096 would allow counties to seek WIFA assistance for cesspool remediation, with the Senate adding an alternative compliance path using ADEQ’s nonpoint source management plan. HB 4001 would regulate alternative nicotine products through the Department of Liquor Licensing and Control; members discussed whether some tobacco-related products remain outside the bill, tribal enforcement limits, and the absence of a tax provision. The presenter said the AG and governor support the bill. The caucus then shifted to conference committee bills. HB 2003 would lower the learner’s permit age from 15.5 to 15 and increase supervised driving time, but several members raised safety concerns and questioned whether the change was needed; the conference amendment would let current instruction permit holders qualify for a license after six months, while still requiring age 16 for licensure. HB 2133 would impose content-verification requirements for commercial websites publishing sexual material, with conference changes exempting pre-effective-date motion pictures and television programming. Members noted the Motion Picture Association still had concerns, though the changes addressed some retroactivity issues. HB 2874 would change campaign finance penalty rules, including a five-day publication requirement for committees owing late-filing penalties, a $5,000 cap on penalties per late report, and retroactive relief for certain inactive committees that filed no-contribution/no-expenditure reports and later terminated; one member said they still had not received the outstanding fee totals requested on the floor. HB 2010 would regulate digital goods sellers and refunds for revoked access to licensed digital content; the conference version kept a five-year refund structure but changed the refund amount to 20% per year, clarified refund procedures, and removed the refund requirement if alternative access is provided. The caucus took no votes in the transcript and ended after the bill presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• But if we're talking about smaller refunds... Potential refunds?
• My understanding a year... we're talking about smaller refunds, we're talking about smaller refunds,
• And we were planning on issuing a refund, and we may not be able to refund the bonds because, again,
• we have to refund overpayments. we have to refund overpayments.
• you have to refund you have to refund assuming<01:11:14.120> all<01:11:14.360> things<

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the electronic filing system for the political<00:05:26.120> contribution<00:05:26.720> refund
• contribution refund um there's changes<00:05:28.319> to<00:05:28.479> the<00:05:28.600
• It is Representative Bonner's provision for the Political Contribution Refund Modernization Act.
• <01:06:19.839> yeah their entire taxpayer refund yeah their entire taxpayer refund yeah and
• <01:18:33.360> by federal and state tax refunds by federal and state tax refunds by providing

Bills: HF2274, HF1932

Keywords: taxation, income tax, property tax, corporate tax, homestead credit, local government aid, tax credits, economic development, taxpayer assistance, tax credit outreach, tax preparation, free tax help, IRS, Department of Revenue, general fund appropriation, earned income tax credit, child tax credit, volunteer income tax assistance, VITA, low-income taxpayers

Transcript Highlights:

• refund? refund?
• Taber refund. Taber refund.
• We're going to decrease people's TABOR refunds, taxpayers' TABOR refunds by $276.4 million.
• Their refund check goes away.
• your Taber refund check. your Taber refund check.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The Senate met with a quorum, approved the previous day’s journal, and received committee and conference reports. Committee actions included favorable reports on several appropriations and local government bills, postponement of some measures indefinitely, and a conference committee report on House Bill 1357 concerning the teacher recruitment, education, and preparation program and related appropriations. The chamber also received a House message indicating House Bill 140 had been postponed indefinitely. The main floor action was consideration of Senate Joint Resolution 24, designating May 2026 as Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month. Supporters described motorcycle riding as part of Colorado culture and emphasized safety, rider education, and sharing the road. The resolution was adopted 33-0, and ABATE of Colorado was recognized in connection with the measure. The Senate then moved into special orders and took up Senate Bill 116, which as amended focused on property tax changes, including setting the business personal property exemption ceiling at $58,000 without future inflation adjustment and aligning dates for the portable senior property tax exemption pilot. Senator Weissman argued the changes simplified administration and were fiscally prudent, while Senators Pelton and Frizell opposed the bill, saying the business property tax cap would hurt small businesses and that the portable senior exemption’s sunset would raise taxes for affected seniors. The debate continued as the bill was considered in committee of the whole.

Transcript Highlights:

• structure if the good ...and also a refund structure if the good has to be revoked for any reason.
• As passed the Senate, the House had a 10-year refund structure; as passed the Senate, they reduced it
• to a five-year refund structure.
• The conference committee includes that five-year structure, but also changes the refund structure to
• ... ...per year for the five years, so it makes it equitable, and it also clarifies processes for refunds

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 379 mandates that property managers fully disclose application fees, screening criteria, and non-refundable
• And they're often charged a flat refundable—sorry, yeah, refundable application deposit that is supposed
• The Virginia law currently states that landlords can collect a refundable security deposit up to two
• Rather than a refundable deposit for any potential damage an animal may cause, the property landlords
• Non-refundable one-time fees at the beginning of their lease ranged from $150 to $550 in combination

Keywords: Virginia Housing Commission - Fees in Residential Rental Agreements Workgroup, 976, house, all

Summary: The workgroup began with introductions and then reviewed staff research on rental fees, including recent Virginia laws on lease transparency, application fees, payment portal fees, security deposits, pet fees, late fees, and maintenance charges, as well as approaches in other states. Members discussed the federal FTC rule on rental advertising and how Virginia’s current laws interact with broader consumer protection provisions. Several participants raised concerns about enforcement, remedies, and whether transparency rules should be placed in the landlord-tenant code to make them easier for tenants to use. The main legislative discussion centered on Senator Van Valkenburg’s SB 349, which would standardize and limit several rental charges. The bill would cap application fees at $50, make application deposits optional, limit administrative and utility-related fees, restrict renewal fees, require earlier disclosure of fees before touring, shorten the security deposit return deadline from 45 to 30 days, prohibit automatic move-out fees, and cap security deposits at one month’s rent. Supporters said the bill would improve transparency, predictability, and affordability for renters, while opponents warned about unintended consequences, especially for landlords in college towns and for tenants with weaker credit or unusual circumstances. There was also debate over whether application deposits are used to hold units off the market or function as a barrier to entry, and whether the bill should instead focus on clearer definitions and timing. Members also discussed application fee practices in Virginia, including whether landlords charge every adult on the lease, whether fees are truly capped at $50 plus out-of-pocket costs, and whether portable tenant screening reports should be considered. On security deposits, there was a sharp divide: tenant advocates argued that a one-month cap would reduce barriers for low-income renters and that larger deposits do not clearly correlate with damage risk, while industry representatives said the current two-month cap helps landlords manage risk and avoid higher rents or litigation costs. The workgroup did not take any formal votes, but the chair indicated that some issues appeared closer to consensus than others and that the application deposit and security deposit provisions likely need further follow-up before any final recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• So once we have that overage, it gets paid out to folks in a refund.
• Just look at the refund issued when the revenue cap first went into place in 1987.
• Just look at the refund issued when the revenue cap first went into place in 1987.
• The refund to taxpayers totaled $29 million.
• And even with that refund, income tax revenue retained by the state after the refund was substantially

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on two proposed ballot initiatives: one to reduce the state personal income tax rate from 5% to 4% over three years, and another to revise the state’s tax collection cap/62F process so it would be based on prior-year collections plus wage growth and include surtax revenue. The committee chair and House co-chair outlined the hearing process, and the first witness was Doug Howgate of the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, who testified as the committee’s subject-matter expert on both measures. He said the income tax proposal would lower taxes broadly but would reduce state revenue by about $5.4 billion when fully implemented, with an estimated $800 million hit in FY27, and he discussed possible effects on competitiveness, taxpayer savings, and public finances. On the 62F proposal, he said the revised cap would make refunds more likely, could have produced several large refunds in recent years, and would reduce stabilization fund deposits and constrain recovery after recessions. Committee members questioned Howgate about competitiveness, outmigration, prior tax ballot measures, spending growth, MassHealth, and the interaction between the income tax and surtax. He emphasized that taxes are only one part of the state’s overall competitiveness and that housing, public services, and other factors also matter. He also noted that the surtax is constitutionally restricted but can still support ongoing spending choices. After his testimony, the committee moved to the proponents’ panel. Proponents of both initiatives, including representatives from Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts, the National Federation of Independent Business, Pioneer Institute, and the Mass Opportunity Alliance, argued that the measures would improve affordability, help retain residents and businesses, and support job growth. They cited polling support, outmigration, small-business reinvestment, and comparisons to lower-tax states such as North Carolina. Their economist, Rebecca Paxton, said her model showed smaller revenue losses than critics claim and projected that the revised revenue cap would not create additional annual revenue losses while producing more regular taxpayer refunds. Committee members pressed the panel on competitiveness, prior ballot initiative implementation, and whether the measures would actually address broader affordability pressures; the hearing ended with the committee continuing to take questions from the proponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• And as currently structured, I believe it is 20% refundable and 80% non-refundable.
• Yes, sir. 80% non-refundable? Yes, sir. Okay. That, you know, we tried to do an SB 6.
• You ask a company to put up $50 million that's non-refundable, that 80% of it is non-refundable, so $40
• So the financial security piece, no matter how much of it is refundable, is ultimately going to get refunded
• It's refundable, is ultimately going to get refunded.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There is no refundable tax credit in this bill, but I'm just thinking of ways to get more support for
• Yeah, I mean there could be a, I mean the legislature, if they want to, could create a refundable tax
• <00:25:28.000> tax<00:25:28.520> credit<00:25:29.240> to providing a refundable
• tax credit to providing a refundable tax credit to State<00:25:30.480> residents<00:25:31.480
• <00:25:51.360> tax balance um there is no refundable tax balance um there is no refundable

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint House Committee on Tourism and Committee on Water and Land heard HB 504, which would raise the transient accommodations tax by imposing a $20 nightly charge on stays booked with points, miles, or other rewards-program benefits, with revenues dedicated to DLNR for natural resource protection, management, and restoration. Supporters said Hawaiʻi faces major environmental funding shortfalls and that visitors should help pay for the lands and waters they enjoy. Testimony in support came from DLNR, the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, Care for Now Coalition, Hawaiʻi Ocean Legislative Task Force, Hawaiʻi Land Trust, The Nature Conservancy, Kuaʻulu, Mālama Puka, Resources Legacy Fund, and others, many citing visitor polling showing strong support for an environmental stewardship fee and the need for a dedicated funding source and community grants. Opposition or caution focused mainly on implementation and the tax structure. The Department of Taxation said the surcharge would create administrative difficulties because it would be hard to verify the value of points, miles, and similar bookings, and the Tax Foundation of Hawaiʻi said it supported the policy goal but not the funding source, warning that tourists have limited budgets and may choose other destinations. Some members also raised concerns about the $20 rate and administrative complexity, while others said the concept was creative but needed refinement. After discussion, the chair recommended passing HB 504 as HD1 with amendments, including noting DoTax’s concerns and changing the effective date for the surcharge to January 1, 2027. Both committees adopted the recommendation and passed the bill with amendments; one member in Water and Land voted with reservations, and several members were excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• <02:13:48.719> that<02:13:48.960> would taxpayer the the refund that would taxpayer
• Now, let's apply that to the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights refund for this past year.
• When someone now calls that refund an overrefund, they are doing something different.
• on my daughter's summer TBR refund on my daughter's summer league<02:23:54.880> softball."
• And now we're going to take the refund, take some of it the next couple years.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened, established a quorum, approved the journal, and heard several committee and floor announcements about upcoming hearings. The chamber then took up House Resolution 1006, a resolution honoring Colorado law enforcement officers. The resolution was read at length and supported by Representatives Woo and Clifford, who emphasized officers’ service, public safety role, and the need for community trust. Several members spoke in favor, including Representative Bacon, who tied the resolution to broader discussions of policing, transparency, body cameras, and community relationships. The resolution passed unanimously, 60-0, with five excused. After the resolution, the House received committee reports and then considered Senate Bill 143, which renames the Colorado Youth Advisory Council Review Committee to honor Senator Faith Winter. Supporters, including Representatives Wilford and Garcia, said the change recognizes Winter’s commitment to youth leadership and civic engagement and does not alter the committee’s function or create new costs. The bill passed on a voice vote. The chamber also passed Senate Bill 124, which updates the automated protection order notification system by requiring the Colorado Integrated Criminal Justice Information System, in addition to CBI, to provide information needed for notifications. The House then considered House Bill 1421, concerning prohibiting certain compensation arrangements in the legal profession and creating the Colorado Legal Practice Integrity and Fee Sharing Prohibition Act. Sponsors said the bill is aimed at preventing non-lawyer ownership and fee-sharing arrangements that could let outside investors influence legal strategy, while clarifying that it does not interfere with court regulation of the profession. Supporters from the business community argued it addresses profit-driven incentives in litigation, while one member objected to the late-night committee process and the number of amendments. The Judiciary Committee report was adopted, and the bill was then debated further as the transcript ended.