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

Democrats and advocates criticize Trump's executive order on homelessness
Democrats and advocates criticize Trump's executive order on homelessness

Associated Press

time12 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

Democrats and advocates criticize Trump's executive order on homelessness

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Leading Democrats and advocates for the homeless are criticizing an executive order President Donald Trump signed this week aimed at removing homeless people from the streets, possibly by committing them for mental health or drug treatment without their consent. Trump directed some of his Cabinet heads to prioritize funding to cities that crack down on open drug use and street camping, with the goal of making people feel safer. It's not compassionate to do nothing, the order states. 'Shifting these individuals into long-term institutional settings for humane treatment is the most proven way to restore public order,' the order reads. Homelessness has become a bigger problem in recent years as the cost of housing increased, especially in states such as California where there aren't enough homes to meet demand. At the same time, drug addiction and overdoses have soared with the availability of cheap and potent fentanyl. The president's order might be aimed at liberal cities such as San Francisco, Los Angeles and New York, which Trump views as too lax about conditions on their streets. But many of the concepts have already been proposed or tested in California, where Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democratic mayors have worked for years to get people off the streets and into treatment. Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court made it easier for cities to clear encampments even if the people living in them have nowhere else to go. Still, advocates say Trump's new order is vague, punitive and won't effectively end homelessness. Newsom has directed cities to clean up homeless encampments and he's funneled more money into programs to treat addiction and mental health disorders. His office said Friday that Trump's order relies on harmful stereotypes and focuses more on 'creating distracting headlines and settling old scores.' 'But, his imitation (even poorly executed) is the highest form of flattery,' spokesperson Tara Gallegos said in a statement, referring to the president calling for strategies already in use in California. San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie has also emphasized the importance of clean and orderly streets in banning homeless people from living in RVs and urging people to accept the city's offers of shelter. In Silicon Valley, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan recently pushed a policy change that makes a person eligible for jail if they reject three offers of shelter. Trump's executive order tasks Attorney General Pam Bondi and the secretaries for health, housing and transportation to prioritize grants to states and local governments that enforce bans on open drug use and street camping. Devon Kurtz, the public safety policy director at the Cicero Institute, a conservative policy group that has advocated for several of the provisions of the executive order, said the organization is 'delighted' by the order. He acknowledged that California has already been moving to ban encampments since the Supreme Court's decision. But he said Trump's order adds teeth to that shift, Kurtz said. 'It's a clear message to these communities that were still sort of uncomfortable because it was such a big change in policy,' Kurtz said. But Steve Berg, chief policy officer at the National Alliance to End Homelessness, called parts of the order vague. He said the U.S. abandoned forced institutionalization decades ago because it was too expensive and raised moral and legal concerns. 'What is problematic about this executive order is not so much that law enforcement is involved — it's what it calls on law enforcement to do, which is to forcibly lock people up,' Berg said. 'That's not the right approach to dealing with homelessness.' The mayor of California's most populous city, Los Angeles, is at odds with the Newsom and Trump administrations on homelessness. Mayor Karen Bass, a Democrat, opposes punishing sweeps and says the city has reduced street homelessness by working with homeless people to get them into shelter or housing. 'Moving people from one street to the next or from the street to jail and back again will not solve this problem,' she said in a statement. ___ Kramon reported from Atlanta. She is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

Trouble-packed NYC animal shelters land another $1M in taxpayer funds — GOP's Sliwa slams as ‘drop in the bucket'
Trouble-packed NYC animal shelters land another $1M in taxpayer funds — GOP's Sliwa slams as ‘drop in the bucket'

New York Post

time13 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Trouble-packed NYC animal shelters land another $1M in taxpayer funds — GOP's Sliwa slams as ‘drop in the bucket'

The city is dumping another $1 million into its troubled jam-packed animal-shelter system to hire and train 14 new staffers, City Hall said Friday. The Animal Care Centers of New York City — a nonprofit with a $1.4 billion contract to run the Big Apple's animal-shelter system for 34 years — recently announced it was suspending its intake of dogs and cats because of 'critical' overcrowding. The move came days after a Post expose revealed ongoing sickening conditions at ACC's new $75 million city-funded shelter in Queens. Advertisement 5 Anna Garguilo, an adoptions counselor with Charmy, 4, an Akita mix. Stephen Yang 'ACC's work to ensure no animal is left behind is essential to protecting animals across New York City, and our administration is proud to invest $1 million in additional funding to support the work ACC does and boost their capacity to better care for animals,' Mayor Eric Adams said in a statement. 'I also urge New Yorkers looking for a pet addition to their families to adopt, so we can ensure that every animal can find a loving home.' Advertisement But GOP mayoral candidate Curtis Sliwa slammed the funding announcement as a piecemeal solution to the larger problem of animal welfare in Gotham. 'The city has completely ignored animal welfare,' Sliwa wrote on X. 'Today's $1M for ACC is a drop in the bucket. ACC has a 34-year contract worth over $1B—and yet our shelters are overcrowded, surrenders are paused, and animals are suffering.' 5 New York City mayoral candidate Curtis Sliwa holds a campaign event outside of an Animal Care Center on 110th street in East Harlem in Manhattan. Stephen Yang 5 'ACC has a 34-year contract worth over $1B—and yet our shelters are overcrowded, surrenders are paused, and animals are suffering,' Sliwa said. Stephen Yang Advertisement The red-beret-wearing Republican, who shares an apartment with six rescue cats, earlier this week called for the city to end its contract with ACC and replace it with a city-run overhaul that would include a 'quasi-private public partnership' to shift the cost away from taxpayers. A new animal welfare agency would be created in the 'basement' of City Hall and all shelters would be kill-free and offer free spay and neuter programs under a Sliwa administration. The ACC has three active sites across the five boroughs with more than 1,000 animals in its care. 5 New York City Mayor Eric Adams speaks at a press conference to announce that 200 rescues have been made through the NYPD's drone and enforcement operations targeting subway surfing on July 21, 2025 in New York City. Andrew Schwartz / Advertisement 5 A new animal welfare agency would be created in the 'basement' of City Hall and all shelters would be kill-free and offer free spay and neuter programs under a Sliwa administration. Stephen Yang While the ACC is mandated to have a location in each of the five boroughs, the Brooklyn location is currently closed till 2026 for renovations, and the Bronx resource center has been 'temporarily' closed since May. Another $92 million facility in The Bronx is still under construction even though it was slated to open in the spring. The ACC did not respond to a Post request for comment. Adams' campaign did not respond to a request for comment, either.

The next big health care fight that's splitting Republicans: From the Politics Desk
The next big health care fight that's splitting Republicans: From the Politics Desk

NBC News

time14 minutes ago

  • NBC News

The next big health care fight that's splitting Republicans: From the Politics Desk

Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, an evening newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail. Happy Friday! In today's edition, Sahil Kapur notes that a looming Obamacare deadline is dividing Republicans on Capitol Hill. Plus, Kristen Welker breaks down the political fallout thus far from the Jeffrey Epstein saga. And Scott Bland answers this week's reader question on Texas Republicans' redistricting efforts. — Adam Wollner The next big health care fight that's splitting Republicans By Sahil Kapur After passing President Donald Trump's sweeping megabill that included steep cuts to Medicaid, Republicans have another big health care fight on their hands. GOP leaders are facing growing calls from their members to extend a bucket of funding for the Affordable Care Act that is set to expire at the end of this year as some look to avert insurance premium hikes and millions of Americans losing their health coverage. But the cause faces opposition from conservatives who detest Obamacare and don't want to lift a finger to protect it. Some argue it'd be too expensive to continue the premium tax credits, which cost over $30 billion per year and were initially adopted as part of a Covid-19 response. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects that about 5 million Americans will lose their insurance by 2034 if the money expires. The divide: Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., who represents a swing district that Trump lost in 2024, said that Congress should continue those ACA tax credits in order to avoid price increases. 'I think we gotta be doing everything to keep costs low across the board — health care, groceries, energy, all of the above. So I am currently working on addressing that as we speak,' he said. But Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., the chair of the hard-right House Freedom Caucus, said he 'absolutely' wants that funding to end. 'It'll cost hundreds of billions of dollars. Can't afford it,' he said. 'That was a Covid-era policy. Newsflash to America: Covid is over.' For now, top Republican leaders are keeping their powder dry about whether — or how — they will take up the issue. 'I think that goes to the end of the calendar year, so we'll have discussion about the issue later. But it hasn't come up yet,' House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said when asked about an ACA subsidy extension. 'But it's on the radar.' A midterm warning: Veteran GOP pollsters Tony Fabrizio and Bob Ward recently released a memo warning that extending the health care tax credits is broadly popular, even with 'solid majorities of Trump voters and [s]wing voters.' They warned that the GOP will pay a 'political penalty' in the competitive districts in the 2026 midterm elections if the funding expires on schedule. Analysis by Kristen Welker The Jeffrey Epstein saga is the political headache that won't go away for President Donald Trump, as the drip-drip of new reporting on his past relationship with the convicted sex offender and repeated attempts to deflect have only fed the story. It's the first time we've really seen Trump's base break with him to this degree. Even though the impulse to rally around their leader remains as each new story breaks, no matter how Trump tries to change the subject, the calls for his administration to release more information from the Epstein files are only growing louder. The issue transcends politics — it's a devastating reminder of the victims of the crimes committed by Epstein and those who enabled him. As far as how it's playing out on Capitol Hill, Democrats and even some Republicans are trying to hold the Trump administration's feet to the fire. Both parties believe the GOP could pay a political price on the issue as they look to defend their congressional majorities in next year's midterms. That includes Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., one of our guests on 'Meet the Press' this Sunday. 'People will become apathetic again. They'll say, we elected President Trump. We gave him a majority in the House and the Senate, and they couldn't even release evidence of an underage sex trafficking ring. They couldn't even bring themselves to release that. I thought we were the party of family values, and I guess we're not,' Massie said this week on the 'Redacted' podcast. And Democrats, including Rep. Ro Khanna of California — another one of our guests this Sunday — argue the issue has salience on multiple fronts. They note it divides Trump and his base while also making a relatively popular appeal for transparency, one piece of a broader Democratic line of attack that the administration isn't being open with the American people. While it's unsurprising that Democrats overwhelmingly disapprove of how the Trump administration is handling the Epstein files, according to a recent Quinnipiac University poll, 71% of independents disapprove, too. And Republicans are about evenly divided, with 40% approving and 36% disapproving of the administration's handling of the issue. The political cost for Republicans isn't clear yet. Will it depress the enthusiasm of voters Republicans are scrambling to motivate to turn out with Trump not on the ballot? Will it force the party onto the defense at a time where it needs to be cementing public sentiment about its landmark tax cuts and spending bill, which Democrats are already weaponizing as a key midterm issue? Could Democrats overplay their hand if it overshadows their message on the most important issue to many voters, the economy? We'll discuss this and more on this Sunday's 'Meet the Press.' In addition to Khanna and Massie, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., will also be joining us. Thanks to everyone who emailed us! This week's reader question is on Republicans' attempts to draw new congressional maps in Texas. 'Is it legal what Gov. Greg Abbott and Texas Republicans want to do for Trump?' To answer that, we turned to senior politics editor Scott Bland. Here's his response: Redistricting happens every decade after the decennial census, so that each state has representation in the House of Representatives reflecting its official population and each district in a state has the same number of people in it. But this isn't the first time someone has moved to change the maps mid-decade. In fact, this isn't even the first time it's happened in Texas. In 2002, Texas Republicans gained full control of the state Legislature, and they decided the following year to draw a new map to replace a court-drawn one that had been imposed for that decade — and to increase the GOP advantage in the state. 'I'm the majority leader and we want more seats,' Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, told reporters at the time. What flies in Texas doesn't necessarily fly everywhere, though. Colorado Republicans also tried to redraw maps in their state in 2003, but the state Supreme Court ruled that the state Constitution forbade revisiting the maps more than once per decade. While Democrats are eager to fight back against the GOP's effort to draw more red seats in Texas, such obstacles could stand in their way. As New York Democratic Party Chair Jay Jacobs told Politico this week, 'I understand those in New York who are watching what's happening in Texas and Ohio want to offset their unfair advantage.' But, he added, 'The [state] Constitution seems pretty clear that this redistricting process should be done every 10 years.'

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