Georgia Laws Changing July 1: From Income Tax To Driver's Licenses
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
As the new fiscal year starts in Georgia on July 1, a slew of new laws will be coming into force, impacting residents across the Peach State.
State Governor Brian Kemp has put his signature on hundreds of new bills, including a decrease in income tax rates, a boosted child tax credit, new rules on phones in schools, and access to new medical treatments for seriously ill Americans.
Here's everything you need to know that's changing in Georgia starting next month:
Money & Finance
Georgia's flat income tax rate drops from 5.39 percent to 5.19 percent, with a plan to reach 4.99 percent over time.
The child and dependent care tax credit is expanded, with a new $250 credit for each child under the age of 6.
Sub-minimum wages for workers with disabilities are eliminated, ensuring equal pay.
Law & Justice
Sentences for fentanyl trafficking are now tougher, even for small quantities.
Wrongfully convicted individuals can seek compensation; misconduct by prosecutors may trigger reimbursement of attorney fees.
Survivors of domestic violence or trafficking can request reduced sentences for crimes committed under duress.
Statue of former Governor and U.S. Senator Richard B. Russell on the grounds of the Georgia State Capitol on December 30, 2024.
Statue of former Governor and U.S. Senator Richard B. Russell on the grounds of the Georgia State Capitol on December 30, 2024.
GETTY
Education & Children
Regarding schools and families, the following changes have been made:
Cell phones and devices must remain stored during K–8 school hours.
Known as "Ricky and Alyssa's Law," there is a new law requiring all public K-12 schools to install mobile panic alert systems that connect directly to emergency services.
School sports teams must be designated by sex assigned at birth, not preferred identity.
Home-study students are guaranteed access to standardized exams from local schools.
Schools can no longer expel students for chronic absences alone; supportive interventions are required.
Public colleges must report funding from any Chinese-linked sources.
Daycare and Head Start employees face stricter fingerprinting and registry checks.
Public education funding increases from $300 million to $375 million under the Quality Basic Education Act.
Motoring
There are only a few changes for motorists starting in July. Some of these are:
A phone wallet driver's license is legally valid—just remember to keep a physical copy, too.
Heavier vehicles will be able to use local roads, with trucks permitted to be 4,000 lbs heavier (up to a limit of 84,000 lbs) on non-interstate roads.
New "America First" specialty license plates will become available.
Health
In health and family policy, Georgia has:
Legalized the use of fentanyl test strips to help prevent overdoses.
Adult adoptees will have the right to request their original birth certificates without a court order—known as Andee's Law.
Patients with serious illnesses will gain expanded access to experimental treatments.
In vitro fertilization is now explicitly protected and defined under state law.
Health insurers will be required to provide better coverage for gestational diabetes during pregnancy.
Drug reimbursements under state health plans must reflect transparent pricing.
State employee health plans must include high-deductible options.
Military and Veterans
For military families and veterans:
Eligibility for burial in state veterans cemeteries has been expanded.
Military retirees are now exempt from paying state income tax on their retirement income.
Other Changes
Some other notable laws include:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ro Khanna calls on Democrats to reclaim identity as ‘the anti-war party'
In the days since Donald Trump authorized strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, and then forged a shaky ceasefire agreement, Congressman Ro Khanna has called on Democrats to reclaim a political identity he says they lost: being the party of peace. 'Now is the time for the Democratic party to be the anti-war party – the party against wars of choice,' Khanna said in an interview. 'We should be the party of peace abroad, good jobs at home. Donald Trump took that from us in 2016 and 2024 and my leadership this past week has been trying to reclaim the anti-war mantle.' On Capitol Hill, Khanna is at the center of a renewed push to reassert congressional authority over war-making. But away from the House floor, the California progressive, viewed as a potential 2028 contender, is challenging Democrats to act like an opposition party determined to prevent another 'forever war'. It is, in his view, both a morally correct position and politically wise one. 'The reality is that the Washington beltway is out of touch with where most Americans are,' he said. 'Most Americans are very opposed to these wars. They're opposed to this increase of defense contractor spending. They want to focus on building jobs here, building prosperity here.' Recent polling by CNN and Reuters/Ipsos found that a majority disapproved of the president's decision to bomb three nuclear sites in Iran. Khanna argues that the Democratic party's foreign policy – especially the Biden administration's unwavering support for Israel's war in Gaza – has damaged its standing with young voters. He sees a chance to rebuild trust with those disappointed by Trump – a president who once said his success would be judged by 'perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into', but has instead backed military strikes and later mused about the possibility of 'regime change' in Iran. 'This is something that can help us build a majority coalition – help us win back disaffected young men who don't want to see more wars,' he said. 'They want to see investments in their communities and it should really be something the Democratic Party should get out in front of.' It's not a new argument for Khanna, who launched one of the first anti-Iraq war primary challenges against a sitting House Democrat in 2004. During Trump's first term, he partnered with Senator Bernie Sanders and a coalition of anti-interventionist Republicans to pass a war powers resolution – the first ever to reach a president's desk – which Trump ultimately vetoed. The measure aimed to end US military support for Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen. 'What the American people want is for politicians and leaders to stand up and say, 'I'm going to take on the defense establishment. I'm going to take on the foreign policy bloc. I'm going to stand up against these wars,'' Khanna said. 'They want us to speak with clarity, not process arguments.' This time, Khanna has joined forces with Republican congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky, to sponsor a war powers resolution that would require congressional approval before the US military engages in further hostilities against Iran. According to Khanna, the resolution that, as of Wednesday, had nearly 70 Democratic co-sponsors, is on track to come up for a vote in mid July. But its fate is uncertain. Massie, who has faced withering criticism from Trump over his support for the resolution, has suggested the measure might not be necessary if the peace agreement endures. Khanna hopes Trump's ceasefire holds – but he does not believe that matters of war and peace should be left to the whims of a mercurial president. 'We need to have this resolution in case, over the next few weeks, [Trump] decides to threaten Iran again or gets pushed into Iran again,' he said. 'And more importantly, it should be given a vote so that we know that Congress is going to be willing to step up in the future when he's tempted to go into war.' Nearly all of Trump's Republican allies on Capitol Hill have rallied around the president, arguing that he had the right to order the strikes as commander-in-chief. On Tuesday, the House speaker, Mike Johnson, said that he believed the War Powers Resolution, the law Congress passed in 1973, overriding a presidential veto from Richard Nixon, to require congressional authorization for the use of military force, was itself 'unconstitutional'. The White House has hailed the strikes as a strategic success – a show of strength that blunted Iran's nuclear ambitions at minimal cost. US officials characterized Iran's retaliatory missile attack on a US base in Qatar as largely symbolic. But an initial US intelligence assessment has suggested that Iran's nuclear program was not 'obliterated' as Trump claimed, but set back only by a few months. It also found that much of Iran's stockpile of highly enriched uranium that could be used to build a nuclear weapon was moved before the strikes. The White House has rejected the report as 'flat-out wrong'. Citing both the intelligence findings and signs of hardline resistance inside Iran, Khanna warns the risk of escalation remains high. Trump has threatened further bombing if Iran restarts its nuclear program, and what Khanna calls the 'neocon wing' is already agitating for more aggressive action – including talk of regime change in Tehran. The Senate may vote as soon as this week on a similar resolution led by Tim Kaine, a Democrat of Virginia. Kaine has said he expects the measure to receive the support of all but one Democrat and at least some Republicans, but it remains unclear if it will garner enough votes to pass. 'Too many members of Congress, especially the tough-talking Iran hawks on the Republican side, they're OK with war, but by God, they're too chicken to vote for it,' Kaine said, speaking shortly before Khanna on a Tuesday night live stream hosted by the progressive activist group MoveOn. A growing number of Democrats are now publicly calling Trump's decision to strike Iran not only dangerous, but unconstitutional – an act of war carried out without congressional authorization. For Khanna, it's a sign his party may finally be rediscovering its anti-war roots. 'In the beginning, there was a muddled message and silence,' he said of the Democrats' response. 'But I think as the week has progressed, more and more people are coming around to my view.'
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mamdani says leftwing populist victory can be replicated across US
Zohran Mamdani, in his first major interview since his upset victory in the Democratic party's mayoral primary in New York shook up US politics, said his brand of campaigning and leftist political stances can translate to anywhere in the US. Mamdani, a Democratic socialist, stunned many observers by beating Andrew Cuomo on Tuesday night, delivering a devastating blow to the former New York governor who ran a centrist campaign backed by most of the party establishment. Mamdani told MSNBC's Jen Psaki that his populist campaign – which focused on inequality and promised radical moves on rent, the price of food and free public transport – could be deployed anywhere in the US as Democrats seek to combat Donald Trump and his Maga movement. 'I think ultimately this is a campaign about inequality, and you don't have to live in the most expensive city in the country to have experienced that inequality, because it's a national issue. And what Americans coast to coast are looking for are people who will fight for them, not just believe in the things that resonate with their lives, but actually fight and deliver on those very things,' he said. Mamdani added: 'I think that in focusing on working people and their struggles, we also return back to what makes so many of us proud to be Democrats in the first place.' Mamdani – who was backed by fellow socialists Bernie Sanders, the senator from Vermont, and the New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez – campaigned by combining an intense effort to knock on doors and meet voters with a highly effective social media strategy. That style contrasted sharply with Cuomo, who was backed by millions of dollars of money from rich donors and endorsements from party bigwigs including Bill Clinton and the South Carolina congressman Jim Clyburn, and who ran a campaign focused on more stage-managed events. Throughout he was dogged by the sexual harassment allegations that led to his ouster as state governor four years ago, as well as a sense he was using the mayoral campaign to reignite his own political career rather than any particular or longstanding commitment to the city he sought to lead. 'We have found exactly the way to defeat organized money, which is organized people. We're speaking about a scale of a campaign that we haven't seen in this city in a long time,' Mamdani said. 'And ultimately, we believe in a politics of no translation, one that is both direct to the struggles of working people's lives and also delivered directly. And there is nothing more direct than a New Yorker knocking on another New Yorker's door.' Mamdani's victory means he will be the Democratic party's nominee in the mayoral election, and given the heavy Democratic slant of New York City voters it is often the case that the party nominee also wins the mayoralty. But Cuomo has signalled he may run as an independent, despite his loss this week. And the current mayor, Eric Adams, who won as a Democrat, will also run as an independent, after his popularity within the party plummeted due in part to allegations of corruption and his newfound closeness with Trump. Including the Republican party candidate, Curtis Sliwa, the rightwing podcaster who founded the Guardian Angels charitable organization focused on street safety, it sets up a likely four-way race in November. Mamdani nevertheless remains the favorite to win, which would make him New York's first Muslim mayor and solidify his place at 33 years old as a bright new star of the Democratic party.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘This is not a luxury': Families in Trump states agonize over GOP's proposed Medicaid cuts
Courtney Leader has been closely following the contentious tax-and-spending debate in Washington – not that she cares much for politics, but because she believes the proposed Medicaid cuts are a matter of life or death for her daughter. 'This is not a luxury. I do not have my daughter enrolled on Medicaid so we can have fancy things,' Leader said. 'I have my daughter enrolled in Medicaid so we can keep her alive and keep her at home, which I think is the best option for her.' As the Senate grinds closer to a vote on a Republican bill containing President Donald Trump's domestic agenda, the real-world implications are playing out across the country at kitchen tables of parents like Leader, whose 9-year-old daughter with brain damage and cerebral palsy relies on Medicaid benefits for daily care and weekly therapy. She wrote to Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, hoping to put a face on the Medicaid debate. She explained that her husband works as a carpenter, whose private insurance provides health coverage for the couple and their four other children. She said costly medical bills for their daughter, Cyrina, were too much for any household to bear. 'Without Medicaid,' Leader told her senator, 'we would lose everything – our home, our vehicles and, eventually, our daughter.' Hawley did not identify Leader by name, but he shared her family's story in a New York Times essay last month as he first emerged as a rare Republican warning his party against cutting Medicaid for some of the 70 million low-income and disabled Americans who rely on the program. He called such a move 'morally wrong and politically suicidal,' and has pushed for proposed changes to the bill to avoid what he believes would be a devastating blow to rural hospitals. It's a pivotal moment in the tug-of-war over Trump's priorities, the centerpiece of which is a sweeping package to extend tax cuts to some of the wealthiest Americans, while reducing social safety-net programs for health care, food assistance and rural hospitals. The president has pledged not to cut Medicaid, even though the current version of the measure would do just that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, and add more than $2 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. A visit to Missouri, where at least one in five residents depend on Medicaid for health coverage, offered a snapshot of the potential fallout from the sprawling legislation the president and Republicans have branded as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. 'I know that they're saying they're not planning to cut Medicaid, right?' said Leader, 36. 'But I reached out, concerned that if any changes are made, there will be this trickle-down effect that will impact families like mine.' As she stood in her kitchen, getting ready to drive Cyrina to a morning therapy session about 30 minutes away, Leader ticked through the costs to sustain her daughter, who was shaken by a caregiver when she was four months old, leading to her condition. She has a complex web of medical and developmental challenges, but can stay in their home because of a nurse and weekly therapy appointments, the co-pays of which are paid by Medicaid, along with a feeding tube, formula and a litany of other supplies. 'The formula that is delivered through a tube in her stomach costs more than my mortgage,' Leader said. 'It costs more than my entire food budget for our family and in that alone, there is no way that we could come up with that $1,500 to be able to feed her.' While the legislation does not directly call for cutting benefits for medically complex cases, Leader believes that some existing services are still at risk, particularly in-home care that keeps her daughter out of a nursing home. She must recertify for coverage every year – on Cyrina's birthday in May – and believes any significant changes to programs administered by the state will add another layer of bureaucracy that she and other parents routinely endure. 'Who's going to protect us when they can't get paperwork done in time and we lose coverage for a month or two?' Leader said, her voice rising with emotion as she raised concerns about state-level backlogs. 'I'm worried that the red tape is going to affect our Medicaid because of just the oversight burdens and that as a result, I'm going to lose my daughter because she's lost coverage before.' The Senate version of the bill had been poised to make even deeper cuts to Medicaid than the measure the House narrowly passed last month. Hawley and other senators have threatened to withhold support for the legislation unless Republican leaders make significant changes, particularly to funding rural hospitals, which has complicated Trump's plea to sign the bill into law before July 4. Republicans were dealt a major setback on Thursday when a key Medicaid change they were counting on to pay for the legislation was ruled in violation of Senate rules. But party leaders have vowed to push forward with new workarounds, with Trump rallying support for the megabill during an afternoon White House event. 'Senate leadership needs to fix this,' Hawley told reporters this week. 'It's going to close rural hospitals.' More than 1,000 miles away from Washington, inside the bright hallways of Golden Valley Memorial Healthcare in Clinton, Missouri, a sense of anxiety over the Medicaid debate was evident on a recent afternoon. The 50-bed hospital is not only a critical piece of the economy as the largest employer in Henry County, but also the only maternity ward and emergency room for about an hour's drive in each direction across this stretch of western Missouri. 'We are paying very close attention because we want to make sure that those Medicaid benefits are preserved so our patients can continue to access care that they need,' said Craig Thompson, CEO of Golden Valley Memorial. 'For rural hospitals like ours, it's ranchers, it's farmers, it's small business owners and it's a whole lot of kids.' About four out of five patients admitted to the hospital, he said, depend on Medicaid, the health care program for lower-income Americans, or Medicare, the program for seniors. Severe cuts to Medicaid, he said, would unnecessarily send more people to the emergency room and have devastating effects on his and other rural hospitals across the state. Last fall, Trump carried this rural county with 76% of the vote, which was 17 points higher than his Missouri victory. Yet the politics of health care is complicated, even here in Trump country, where voters also approved a statewide Medicaid expansion measure four years earlier. Before that vote, Medicaid in the state was largely restricted to the elderly, disabled or pregnant. The expansion vote allowed about 340,000 Missourians to enroll in the program, according to the Missouri Foundation for Health, the funding of which is now uncertain, amid new work requirements and a long list of provisions. 'I think there's a perception that Medicaid beneficiaries are respondent or even lazy, for lack of a better term,' Thompson said. 'That's simply not what we see on a daily basis.' Dr. Jennifer Blair, who grew up about 45 miles away in the small Missouri town of Peculiar, said she fears maternity wards at hospitals like Golden Valley are at risk if some of the deep Medicaid cuts are realized. 'We are surrounded by several maternity care deserts, which is defined as a county that has no or very limited access to obstetric services for their patients,' Blair said. 'If we were to lose that access to the birthing center here at Golden Valley, our patients would have to travel more than 60 miles.' Long before the House passed nearly $300 billion in cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, once known as food stamps, signs of increasing need have been clear at Ozarks Food Harvest, a 100,000-square-foot warehouse on the edge of Springfield. It serves about 30 million meals every year across one-third of Missouri. 'The demand for food is quite a bit higher than it was even at the height of the Covid crisis,' said Bart Brown, president and CEO of the non-profit food program. 'We are seeing lots of new families that we've never seen before.' The SNAP program has always been solely funded by the federal government. The House measure called for passing along considerable costs to state governments, which are already facing difficult choices and balanced-budget requirements. The move would have saved the federal government more than $128 billion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office, which House Republicans hoped to use to help cover the costs of extending the tax cuts. The Senate parliamentarian removed the provision on procedural grounds, making it one of the key differences the Senate and House must reconcile before passing the legislation. June Owens isn't closely following the back-and-forth of the debate in Washington. She arrived in a strip mall parking lot in nearby Marshfield shortly after 6 a.m. on a recent rainy morning, so she could get a spot near the front of a long and winding line of cars and trucks. She rolled down the window of her green Mercury to talk for a moment, waiting for the outdoor pantry to open at 9 a.m. 'Life wasn't always this way with us. My husband got hurt a few years ago and it changed our whole life,' said Owens, 77, a retired bookkeeper. 'We were in the process of getting all of our ducks in a row for retirement and it just upside-downed everything, so food pantries have helped us through the situation.' At Ozarks Food Harvest, seniors are the fastest growing segment of people who ask for food assistance, Brown said, citing their 'fixed incomes and inflation.' He is carefully watching the tax-and-spending debate in Congress, mindful that whatever the president ultimately signs into law will impact the lives of people in Springfield and across the southern Missouri region his organization serves with a mission statement of 'transforming hunger into hope.' 'Anytime that there's a change in federal benefits that results in a net loss, people have to meet that gap somewhere,' Brown said, walking through his cavernous warehouse. 'They're going to turn to food pantries and we're stretched thin anyway.' CNN's Jeff Simon and Leonel Mendez contributed to this report.
