logo
Competing property tax bills get their day on the floor

Competing property tax bills get their day on the floor

Yahoo27-02-2025
Lawmakers are looking to address property taxes this week. (Micah Drew/Daily Montanan)
Property tax discussions have dominated the halls of the Montana capitol this week, as Republican leaders pushed back against criticism from Gov. Greg Gianforte that legislators had yet to send him a property tax relief bill to sign.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are pushing proposals on the topic, and six property tax proposals in the two chambers moved forward on Wednesday.
House Democrats moved two tax bills on the floor on Wednesday and Republicans in the House also brought a proposal to the floor Wednesday. Republican leaders in the legislature, meanwhile, spent part of Tuesday refuting comments from Gianforte during a Monday call-in session on conservative talk radio.
'I think taxes are too high,' Gianforte said. 'I laid out my agenda during the State of the State. We have a proposal that would permanently reduce property taxes, I haven't seen that bill to my desk yet. I proposed a full percentage point cut in income taxes that we funded because we were fiscally responsible over the last four years. I haven't got that bill to my desk yet. In fact, as of last week, the only bills I've got from the legislature, one renamed a bridge and the other one bought lunch money for the legislature.'
He added: 'I just wish the legislature could focus on getting the work done for the people of Montana.'
Legislative Republicans quickly sent out a joint press release highlighting when the governor got his legislation to them. House Bill 231, sponsored by Rep. Llew Jones, R-Conrad was introduced on Jan. 16, while Senate Bill 323, sponsored by Sen. Josh Kassmier, R-Fort Benton, was introduced on Feb. 13.
'The governor understands the legislative process and should have submitted his proposals earlier if he wanted them enacted more quickly,' the joint Republican House and Senate release stated.
Jones said he understands the frustration and spoke to some of the dissension surrounding the property tax discussion, even among Republican leadership.
'Some legislators are busting their asses to try to move this and some are being a little obstructionist,' Jones told the Daily Montanan. 'I know it frustrated the speaker (Rep. Brandon Ler, R-Savage), because he has been trying to get this stuff to vote. And, you know, the (Senate) President, not so much. He's been trying to get it not to vote. It's not his vision. He doesn't like that.'
Meanwhile, House Democrats found support for their bills in the Republican-dominated session. House Bill 154, introduced by Rep. Jonathan Karlen, D-Missoula, and House Bill 155, from Rep. Mark Thane, D-Missoula, both cleared significant hurdles in the House on Wednesday. They are up for a third reading on Thursday afternoon and if approved again, will be on their way to the Senate.
If nothing is done, there's worry property tax rates could spike again because of a state law that reassesses property.
'We need to come home with some kind of property tax relief, and if we don't, we're not going to get elected again. They will come after all of us,' Sen. Barry Usher, R-Billings, said Wednesday on the Senate floor.
House Bill 231, known as the 'Homestead bill,' and Karlen's HB 154 are tied together through an amendment passed in the Appropriations Committee last week.
Jones' bill tries to shift some of the tax burden onto those who are not residents of the state, but own property in Montana.
'There's a whole group of people out there that just don't pay income tax in Montana,' Jones said in an interview Thursday morning. 'They're not breaking the law. They just don't live here more than seven months a year, but they benefit from all the dollars of the income tax.'
Karlen's bill is essentially a tax credit with stipulations that renters could receive money back, instead of those breaks going directly to landlords.
Jones gave a passionate defense of his bill on the floor, saying it would directly impact 230,000 Montana homeowners, 130,000 renters and 30,000 small businesses.
'I get that some folks might be angry with me and just vote against this bill because I'm the sponsor,' Jones said on the House floor. 'You know, I get that. I may look a little like Santa Claus without hair, but I'm not always the most cuddly of personalities. I don't always claim to be an elegant speaker. I have a face made for radio, but I do usually do pretty well with numbers. This is a difficult problem to make work.'
Doubly so, Jones said, because the governor has expressed no interest in a sales tax.
'The governor said he wouldn't sign the sales tax,' Jones said. 'So you're gonna have to try to build a property tax solution with the cards that you have in your hand.'
While the Gov. Gianforte favors HB 231, Jones said the bill was his idea, not the governor's and the representative said that until he pushed the Governor's Office to model it, they felt it wouldn't work either.
'We have to find a way, because we're still selling the land in Montana,' Jones said. 'We're just selling it to a whole lot of folks that don't pay income tax here.'
Jones' bill seeks to shift away some tax burden currently on full-time residents.
If HB 154 doesn't pass and HB 231 does, rates on properties that are twice the median residential value or less drop from 0.9% to 0.74%. That amendment was added on Feb. 20.
'The way I see that coordinating language is that it's some recognition from the Appropriations Committee that the governor's bill alone will not solve this problem,' Karlen told the Daily Montanan.
However, in the Senate, Republican leadership expressed concern the tax relief in HB 231 won't benefit people that actually need it. During a Tuesday media session, Senate President Matt Regier, R-Kalispell, said tying the rates to market value means some rural communities, especially in the eastern reaches of the state, drop the property tax rate for people who aren't especially concerned with it.
'Here we're seeing the property tax problems, Gallatin, Flathead, Missoula, those homes are all going to be in the higher tax rate,' Regier said. 'And a home in Circle, that isn't as high as the median, they're going to see way lower rates than the people that are complaining about property tax.'
HB 231 is among Gianforte's legislative priorities and also seeks to push taxation more on large businesses and less on smaller ones.
Jones pointed out in an interview that part of the intention is to make sure small businesses, like a cafe, are not taxed the same as a large refinery or other big industrial business.
Karlen's bill would establish a Housing Fairness Income Tax Credit, which is aimed at property owners and also includes relief for renters.
It passed a second reading in the House, 60-40.
It would help renters by giving them a tax break that theoretically would help with increasing rents. Bills helping renters have not had much luck this session, but Karlen hopes his will help.
In order to qualify for the credit, a taxpayer is required to live in the state for at least nine months during the tax year, occupy a qualified residence for at least seven of those months, and have a household income of less than $150,000.
The credit would also benefit those who are going through a life change, like a spouse dying. In that situation, the property tax stays the same but household income would decrease.
Karlen believes there needs to be a 'rebalance' on tax policy. His credit is determined based on property taxes bills or rent-equivalent property taxes paid and there are specific thresholds based on household income.
'House Democrats, we will work with anybody to pass property tax relief,' Karlen said in a Tuesday interview. 'We are doing everything possible, working with anybody that wants to provide a real middle-class tax cut. And I think that the fact that Mark Thane's bill had more votes than any other major property tax policy seems like there's definitely interest there.'
Thane wants to establish a graduated tax rate for residential properties based on market value.
HB 155 passed a second reading on Wednesday, 87-13.
The hope is to spread out taxation among different classes of taxpayers, of which there are 18. In 2022, residential property taxpayers made up 51.85% of the total, while commercial businesses made up another 15.2%. In 2023, residential properties made up almost 58% of property taxes collected in the state.
Under Thane's proposal, residential property taxes would contribute 52.56% of total property taxes and commercial businesses would make up 16.77% of the state's property tax pie.
Additionally, the burden put on agricultural business would be 3.83%, a small decrease from 2022.
'The premise of House Bill 155 is to reduce to essentially that proportional share,' Thane said in an interview.
He's confident in his bill, but also said he's a realist — if nothing else, he said he hopes his bill helps inform HB 231.
'My interest right now is being able to continue the conversation in the Senate,' Thane said. 'To get over to Senate tax so that they understand, number one, that there are other alternatives, and number two, that there can be some pressure applied to continue to refine 231.'
Reiger mentioned Thane's bill on Tuesday, saying some of the ideas in it have some 'merit.'
'The concept of moving the rates, I think, is something that could end up in the final package,' Reiger told assembled media.
Senate Bill 32 passed a second reading on Wednesday afternoon, a proposal from Sen. Jeremy Trebas, R-Great Falls.
SB 32 seeks cuts to property tax rates for many of the classifications that have not been directly addressed in other Republican bills dealing with property taxes. Metal mines, nonproductive mining claims, and utilities would all see their rates cut under the proposal.
'I think this is the most simple, elegant, transparent attempt at reforming property tax, and it's an option for us, and you know, we're getting close to transmittal without too many options available to us,' Trebas said on the Senate floor.
Regulatory bills have to transmit by this week, while bills that deal directly with revenue are subject to a later deadline.
Residential rental properties and commercial property tax rates would increase from 1.35% to 1.65%. Trebas said in a message that rate would impact, 'non owner-occupied homes, so long and short term rentals, second homes.'
Importantly, under his proposal, owner-occupied properties would be taxed at 1.25%.
'If you want to automatically decrease ratepayers' tax or their energy bills, this is a great way to do it,' Sen. Daniel Zolnikov, R-Billings said during the Senate floor session.
Wednesday, the Senate advanced a couple of other proposals related to property taxes, one to credit residential payers from taxes paid by tourists, and another to express levies in dollars instead of mills. The Senate also 'blasted' two property tax reform bills onto the floor, a procedure to move a bill tabled in committee to the full body.
Sen. Mary Ann Dunwell, D-Helena, is also continuing to push Senate Bill 189, a bill which would reduce residential property taxes from 1.35% to 0.76%. It would also remove a higher tax rate on high-value homes.
Dunwell said she's been working with Rep. Ed Byrne, R-Bigfork, though Byrne's proposal was tabled in committee early this month.
There's hope, Dunwell said, that the 0.76% rate for residential properties might end up in HB 231.
'Unless we drop the tax rate,' Dunwell said. 'All the other stuff is lipstick on a pig.'
Keila Szpaller contributed to this report.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Meta clashes with Apple, Google over age check legislation
Meta clashes with Apple, Google over age check legislation

Los Angeles Times

time7 minutes ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Meta clashes with Apple, Google over age check legislation

The biggest tech companies are warring over who's responsible for children's safety online, with billions of dollars in fines on the line as states rapidly pass conflicting laws requiring companies to verify users' ages. The struggle has pitted Meta Platforms Inc. and other app developers against Apple Inc. and Alphabet Inc.'s Google, the world's largest app stores. Lobbyists for both sides are moving from state to state, working to water down or redirect the legislation to minimize their clients' risks. This year alone, at least three states — Utah, Texas and Louisiana — passed legislation requiring tech companies to authenticate users' ages, secure parental consent for anyone under 18 and ensure minors are protected from potentially harmful digital experiences. Now, lobbyists for all three companies are flooding into South Carolina and Ohio, the next possible states to consider such legislation. The debate has taken on new importance after the Supreme Court this summer ruled age verification laws are constitutional in some instances. A tech group on Wednesday petitioned the Supreme Court to block a social media age verification law in Mississippi, teeing up a highly consequential decision in the next few weeks. Child advocates say holding tech companies responsible for verifying the ages of their users is key to creating a safer online experience for minors. Parents and advocates have alleged the social media platforms funnel children into unsafe and toxic online spaces, exposing young people to harmful content about self harm, eating disorders, drug abuse and more. Meta supporters argue the app stores should be responsible for figuring out whether minors are accessing inappropriate content, comparing the app store to a liquor store that checks patrons' IDs. Apple and Google, meanwhile, argue age verification laws violate children's privacy and argue the individual apps are better-positioned to do age checks. Apple said it's more accurate to describe the app store as a mall and Meta as the liquor store. The three new state laws put the responsibility on app stores, signaling Meta's arguments are gaining traction. The company lobbied in support of the Utah and Louisiana laws putting the onus on Apple and Google for tracking their users' ages. Similar Meta-backed proposals have been introduced in 20 states. Federal legislation proposed by Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah would hold the app stores accountable for verifying users' ages. Still, Meta's track record in its state campaigns is mixed. At least eight states have passed laws since 2024 forcing social media platforms to verify users' ages and protect minors online. Apple and Google have mobilized dozens of lobbyists across those states to argue that Meta is shirking responsibility for protecting children. 'We see the legislation being pushed by Meta as an effort to offload their own responsibilities to keep kids safe,' said Google spokesperson Danielle Cohen. 'These proposals introduce new risks to the privacy of minors, without actually addressing the harms that are inspiring lawmakers to act.' Meta spokesperson Rachel Holland countered that the company is supporting the approach favored by parents who want to keep their children safe online. 'Parents want a one-stop-shop to oversee their teen's online lives and 80% of American parents and bipartisan lawmakers across 20 states and the federal government agree that app stores are best positioned to provide this,' Holland said. As the regulation patchwork continues to take shape, the companies have each taken voluntary steps to protect children online. Meta has implemented new protections to restrict teens from accessing 'sensitive' content, like posts related to suicide, self-harm and eating disorders. Apple created 'Child Accounts,' which give parents more control over their children's' online activity. At Apple, spokesperson Peter Ajemian said it 'soon will release our new age assurance feature that empowers parents to share their child's age range with apps without disclosing sensitive information.' As the lobbying battle over age verification heats up, influential big tech groups are splintering and new ones emerging. Meta last year left Chamber of Progress, a liberal-leaning tech group that counts Apple and Google as members. Since then, the chamber, which is led by a former Google lobbyist and brands itself as the Democratic-aligned voice for the tech industry, has grown more aggressive in its advocacy against all age verification bills. 'I understand the temptation within a company to try to redirect policymakers towards the company's rivals, but ultimately most legislators don't want to intervene in a squabble between big tech giants,' said Chamber of Progress CEO Adam Kovacevich. Meta tried unsuccessfully to convince another major tech trade group, the Computer & Communications Industry Association, to stop working against bills Meta supports, two people familiar with the dynamics said. Meta, a CCIA member, acknowledged it doesn't always agree with the association. Meta is also still a member of NetChoice, which opposes all age verification laws no matter who's responsible. The group currently has 10 active lawsuits on the matter, including battling some of Meta's preferred laws. The disagreements have prompted some of the companies to form entirely new lobbying outfits. Meta in April teamed up with Spotify Technology SA and Match Group Inc. to launch a coalition aimed at taking on Apple and Google, including over the issue of age verification. Meta is also helping to fund the Digital Childhood Alliance, a coalition of conservative groups leading efforts to pass app-store age verification, according to three people familiar with the funding. Neither the Digital Childhood Alliance nor Meta responded directly to questions about whether Meta is funding the group. But Meta said it has collaborated with Digital Childhood Alliance. The group's executive director, Casey Stefanski, said it includes more than 100 organizations and child safety advocates who are pushing for more legislation that puts responsibility on the app stores. Stefanski said the Digital Childhood Alliance has met with Google 'several times' to share their concerns about the app store in recent months. The App Association, a group backed by Apple, has been running ads in Texas, Alabama, Louisiana and Ohio arguing that the app store age verification bills are backed by porn websites and companies. The adult entertainment industry's main lobby said it is not pushing for the bills; pornography is mostly banned from app stores. 'This one-size fits all approach is built to solve problems social media platforms have with their systems while making our members, small tech companies and app developers, collateral damage,' said App Association spokesperson Jack Fleming. In South Carolina and Ohio, there are competing proposals placing different levels of responsibility on the app stores and developers. That could end with more stringent legislation that makes neither side happy. 'When big tech acts as a monolith, that's when things die,' said Joel Thayer, a supporter of the app store age verification bills. 'But when they start breaking up that concentration of influence, all the sudden good things start happening because the reality is, these guys are just a hair's breath away from eating each other alive.' Birnbaum writes for Bloomberg.

Texas Democrats meet with Newsom to stop Trump's push to 'rig' the 2026 election
Texas Democrats meet with Newsom to stop Trump's push to 'rig' the 2026 election

Yahoo

time35 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Texas Democrats meet with Newsom to stop Trump's push to 'rig' the 2026 election

Gov. Gavin Newsom stood alongside six Democrats from the Texas Legislature on Friday and joined them in accusing President Trump and Republicans of trying to "rig" elections to hold onto congressional seats next year. "They play by a different set of rules and we could sit back and act as if we have some moral authority and watch this 249-, 250-year-old experiment be washed away," Newsom said of the nation's history. "We are not going to allow that to happen." The Texas lawmakers and the governor spoke with reporters after meeting privately at the Governor's Mansion in Sacramento to discuss a national political fight over electoral maps that could alter the outcome of the midterm elections and balance of power in Congress. At the urging of President Trump, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called his state Legislature into a special session this week that includes a call to redistrict the Lone Star State to help Republicans pick up seats in Congress. The move is part of a gerrymandering effort pushed by Trump to prevent the GOP from losing control of the House of Representatives next year. If Democrats take the House, they could derail the president's agenda, which has so far included a crackdown on undocumented immigrants, tariffs on imports, rescinding efforts to combat climate change and undercutting state protections for the LGTBQ+ community, among other policy priorities. Newsom has threatened to mirror Trump's tactics and said he's in talks with leaders of the California Legislature to redraw the state's congressional districts to favor electing more Democrats and fewer Republicans. Texas Democrats, who said they traveled to California to meet with the governor and explain the state of play in Texas, pledged do everything in their power to push back against Trump's plan. "We're going to use every tool at our disposal in the state of Texas to confront this very illegal redistricting process that is going to be done on the backs of historic African American and Latino districts," said Texas state Rep. Rafael Anchía. Another group of Texas lawmakers are expected to meet with Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker in Chicago. Read more: California Democrats may target GOP congressional districts to counter Texas Changing the maps to benefit Democrats is a massive departure from California's work over the last decade to remove political partisanship from the redistricting process. California voters in 2010 gave an independent Citizens Redistricting Commission the power to determine the boundaries of voting districts for the U.S. House of Representatives instead of leaving that authority with the state Legislature. To redistrict before the midterms, the most legally sound option is for state lawmakers to send a constitutional amendment to voters that seeks to allow changes to the voter map outside the boundaries of California's independent redistricting process. The vote would need to happen in a special election before the June primary. Newsom has said he's also exploring a potential legal loophole that could allow the California Legislature to redraw the congressional maps themselves with a two-thirds vote. The governor's office said state law charges the redistricting commission with crafting new maps after a census, which is conducted about every 10 years. But they say the law is silent on everything that happens in between that time period. Newsom's lawyers believe it could be possible for the Legislature to redistrict congressional seats mid-decade on its own without going to the ballot. Read more: Texas Republicans aim to redraw House districts at Trump's urging, but there's a risk The governor's call to fight Trump using his own gerrymandering tactics has drawn a mixed response. Newsom argues that Democrats will continue to lose if they remain the only party that plays by the rules. But others worry about the integrity of electoral outcomes across the nation if political parties in every state resort to naked political gamesmanship to gain control. Texas Republicans have long been accused of crafting political maps to dilute the power of Black and Latino voters, which led to an ongoing lawsuit from 2021. Newsom's effort in California would effectively seek to increase the share of Democrats in Republican-held districts. Redistricting experts in California say redrawing the maps in the Golden State could create the potential for Democrats to flip at least five of the seats held by GOP incumbents. Democrats may have the potential for greater gains from gerrymandering, particularly in places such as California that have attempted to practice nonpartisan redistricting, compared to states such as Texas, where maps are already drawn in favor of Republicans. "It should be no surprise to anybody who covers Texas that every decade since 1970 Texas has been found to discriminate against people of color in its redistricting process," Anchía said. "In trying to do this, it is going to create great harm, not only to the people we represent, to the voters of the state of Texas, but also potentially to all Americans," he said about Trump's plan. It's common for the party in control of the White House to lose seats nationally in the first election after a presidential contest. Republicans hold majorities in the Senate and the House, and losing power to Democrats could be detrimental to Trump's presidency. Trump's job approval rating dropped to a second-term low of 37% in a Gallup poll conducted earlier this month. The dip is just above his lowest approval rating ever of 34% at the end of his first term. Trump has said publicly that he thinks it's possible for Republicans to redistrict and pick up five seats in Texas, with the potential for gains in other states that redraw their maps. Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Judge dismisses Justice Department lawsuit over sanctuary laws in Chicago and Illinois
Judge dismisses Justice Department lawsuit over sanctuary laws in Chicago and Illinois

USA Today

time37 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Judge dismisses Justice Department lawsuit over sanctuary laws in Chicago and Illinois

WASHINGTON - A federal judge on Friday dismissed a lawsuit brought by the Justice Department that accused the state of Illinois and the city of Chicago of unlawfully interfering with President Donald Trump's crackdown on illegal immigration. The ruling by U.S. District Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins in Chicago was a setback for Trump's litigation campaign against local "sanctuary" laws that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. White House and Justice Department spokespersons did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Trump, a Republican seeking to deport millions of immigrants in the country illegally, has sparred with Chicago and other Democratic strongholds over their policies. Democrats, in turn, have criticized the Trump administration's aggressive enforcement tactics, including plainclothes immigration agents covering their faces to hide their identities and arrests of immigrants with no criminal records. Supporters of sanctuary laws have said local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration enforcement would discourage immigrants who are living in the country illegally from coming forward as victims or witnesses to crimes. The Chicago City Council passed an ordinance in 2012 that stops city agencies and employees from getting involved in civil immigration enforcement or helping federal authorities with such efforts. The Illinois legislature passed a similar state law, known as the TRUST Act, in 2017. The Justice Department sued Chicago and Illinois in February, alleging these laws violate the U.S. Constitution's "Supremacy Clause" that states that federal law preempts state and local laws that may conflict with it. Jenkins, who was appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, rejected that argument in Friday's ruling, saying the city's and the state's policies are protected by the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which ensures that states retain significant powers not explicitly granted to the federal government. The Trump administration on Thursday filed a similar lawsuit against New York City over its local sanctuary laws. A similar case against Los Angeles is pending.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store