House Bill 4929 creates a new “Truth in Taxation Act” in West Virginia law to increase transparency when local taxing subdivisions propose property tax rates above a calculated revenue-neutral rate. The bill defines a revenue-neutral rate as the rate that would generate the same property tax revenue as the prior year using the current year’s assessed valuation, and requires county clerks to calculate and report that rate annually for budget purposes.
The bill establishes a notice-and-hearing process before any taxing subdivision may levy a property tax rate above the revenue-neutral rate. Local governing bodies would have to publish notice of the proposed higher rate, notify the county clerk by July 15, and ensure taxpayers receive mailed or electronic notice with detailed information about the prior-year tax, proposed tax, assessed value, estimated tax impact, and hearing details. A public hearing must be held by September 15, taxpayers must be allowed to comment, and the governing body must approve the higher rate by majority vote before adopting the budget. If a governing body fails to comply, it must refund over-collected property taxes attributable to the excess levy.
Impact
HB4929 would add a new article to the West Virginia Code governing property tax rate setting by counties and other political subdivisions that levy ad valorem taxes. It would require county clerks and the director of accounts and reports to incorporate revenue-neutral rate information into budget forms, impose new notice and hearing obligations on local governments, and create a refund remedy for noncompliance. The bill excludes school districts and very small taxing subdivisions that receive $5,000 or less in property tax revenue.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes are provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, amendments, or partisan division in the available record. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears aimed at taxpayer protection and local tax transparency, which typically draws support from those favoring limits on property tax increases and public notice requirements. The absence of recorded opposition or vote history means the overall sentiment cannot be measured from the supplied materials.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s restriction on local taxing authority and the administrative burden it places on county clerks and taxing subdivisions. Local governments may object to the requirement that they justify any rate above the revenue-neutral level through mailed notices, public hearings, and a majority vote before budget adoption, especially because the bill also authorizes refunds for noncompliance. Supporters would likely emphasize taxpayer notice, accountability, and limits on automatic property tax increases, while critics may focus on reduced fiscal flexibility and added compliance costs.
Authorizing the Legislature to exempt tangible inventory personal property directly used in business activity from ad valorem property taxation by general law