Bill to improve transit for Mecklenburg County advances through the General Assembly
State senators voted Wednesday afternoon to pass HB 948, legislation that would allow voters to approve a new, one-cent sales tax in the county to fund transit initiatives.
'We're thrilled that the General Assembly has shown their support both in the House and the Senate for this bill. I think it goes to show that they understand that being able to continue to move efficiently is very important for any municipality in the state,' said Shannon Binns with Sustain Charlotte, a local nonprofit backing the tax.
PREVIOUS |
HB 948, also known as the P.A.V.E. Act, would enable the county to gather revenue to pay for a light rail expansion, improvements to roads throughout the county, and create new, faster bus routes. Legislators said 40 percent of revenue would go directly to municipalities, and 60 percent would go to a new, yet to be established, transit authority.
'This is what people in our area said they wanted, so we just are grateful they realized this is a local need,' said Binns.
The one-cent tax and related plan have a lot of support throughout the county, including from Charlotte and the Town of Davidson. But leaders in Matthews oppose the tax, frustrated that the town was not included in a planned light rail expansion, set to be named the Silver Line.
At Wednesday night's Metropolitan Transit Commission meeting, Charlotte Mayor Vi Lyles expressed her appreciation of the bill's authors, most of whom are from Mecklenburg County.
'We're very grateful to the relationships we've built, and the relationships that made this possible,' she said. 'I truly believe it is something that changes the way the city grows and the towns and the county doing something that we haven't had the funding to accomplish. We're really looking forward to the improvements to be made for all of our citizens.'
Supporters hope to have the tax before voters during the municipal elections set for November 2025.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
40 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Senate GOP removes tax on solar and wind energy but dismantles climate law passed by Democrats
WASHINGTON (AP) — The sprawling Republican budget bill approved by the Senate Tuesday removes a proposed tax on solar and wind energy projects but quickly phases out tax credits for wind, solar and other renewable energy. The Senate approved the bill 51-50 as President Donald Trump and GOP lawmakers move to dismantle the 2022 climate law passed by Democrats under former President Joe Biden. Vice President JD Vance broke a tie after three Republican senators voted no. The bill now moves to the House for final legislative approval. The excise tax on solar and wind generation projects was added to the Senate bill over the weekend, prompting bipartisan pushback from lawmakers as well as clean energy developers and advocates. The final bill removes the tax but mostly sticks with legislative language released late Friday night and would end incentives for clean energy sooner than a draft version unveiled two weeks ago. Some warn of spike in utility bills Democrats and environmental groups said the GOP plan would crush growth in the wind and solar industry and lead to a spike in Americans' utility bills. The measure jeopardizes hundreds of renewable energy projects slated to boost the nation's electric grid, they said. 'Despite limited improvements, this legislation undermines the very foundation of America's manufacturing comeback and global energy leadership,' said Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association. If the bill becomes law, 'families will face higher electric bills, factories will shut down, Americans will lose their jobs, and our electric grid will grow weaker,'' she said. The American Petroleum Institute, the top lobbying group for the oil and gas industry, applauded the bill's passage. 'This historic legislation will help usher in a new era of energy dominance by unlocking opportunities for investment, opening lease sales and expanding access to oil and natural gas development,'' said Mike Sommers, the group's president and CEO. While Democrats complained that the bill would make it harder to get renewable energy to the electric grid, Republicans said the measure represents historic savings for taxpayers and supports production of traditional energy sources such as oil, natural gas and coal, as well as nuclear power, increasing reliability. In a compromise approved overnight, the bill allows wind and solar projects that begin construction within a year of the law's enactment to get a full tax credit without a deadline for when the projects are 'placed in service,'' or plugged into the grid. Wind and solar projects that begin later must be placed in service by the end of 2027 to get a credit. The bill retains incentives for technologies such as advanced nuclear, geothermal and hydropower through 2032. Changes to the renewable energy language — including removal of the excise tax on wind and solar — were negotiated by a group of Republican senators, including Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Iowa Sens. Joni Ernst and Chuck Grassley. Iowa is a top producer of wind power, while Murkowski is a longtime supporter of renewable energy as crucial for achieving energy independence, particularly for isolated rural communities in Alaska. Murkowski, who voted in favor of the final bill, called her decision-making process 'agonizing.' 'I had to look on balance, because the people in my state are the ones that I put first,' she told reporters after Tuesday's vote. 'We do not have a perfect bill by any stretch of the imagination.' GOP bill said to be 'massively destructive' Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, the top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, called the bill a 'massively destructive piece of legislation' that 'increases costs for everyone by walloping the health care system, making families go hungry and sending utility bills through the roof.' The bill 'saddles our children and grandchildren with trillions and trillions of dollars in debt — all to serve giant corporations, fossil fuel polluters and billionaire Republican megadonors who are already among the richest people on the planet,' Whitehouse said. Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, a Republican and former chairman of the Senate Energy panel, hailed the bill for rescinding many elements of what he called the Biden administration's 'green new scam,' including electric vehicle tax credits that have allowed car owners to lower the purchase price of EVs by $7,500. The bill also blocks a first-ever fee on excess methane emissions from oil and gas production that industry groups fiercely opposed, increases oil and gas leases on public lands and revives coal leasing in Wyoming and other states. 'Today, the Senate moved President Trump's agenda forward,'' said West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, a Republican who chairs the Senate environment committee. Clean energy advocates were deeply disappointed by the bill, which they argue undoes much of the 2022 climate law approved by Democrats. 'By eliminating a number of clean energy incentives and slashing others, this bill represents a significant step backward for America's energy future,' said Nathaniel Keohane, president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, a nonprofit that seeks to accelerate the global transition to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions. ___ Associated Press writer Alexa St. John in Detroit contributed to this story.
Forbes
41 minutes ago
- Forbes
The Senate's $40,000 SALT Deduction Signals Tax Relief For Homeowners
Hands count dollars to buy a new house The Senate has narrowly passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act by a 50-50 vote, with Vice President Vance breaking the tie. The bill now moves to the Joint Conference Committee for reconciliation of differences. However, one expected difference between the House and Senate versions of the bill —the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction — appears to have already been rectified. While the SALT deduction can be used for any state and local income taxes paid, the taxes paid on a home tend to be among the largest for taxpayers, suggesting this higher cap will be a welcome relief for home owners. This article discusses the SALT deduction and what this reconciliation means, assuming the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is ultimately signed into law. SALT Deductions Before The Tax Cuts And Jobs Act of 2017 Before the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, the SALT deduction allowed taxpayers to claim unlimited itemized deductions for taxes paid to state and local governments. For instance, if the taxpayer paid $20,000 in taxes on their home during the year, they could then deduct the $20,000 from their income, thereby lowering their tax liability. Many taxpayers were limited on how much they could actually deduct due to complex alternative minimum tax rules that existed before 2017, as outlined by the Tax Foundation. However, the benefits were still very much present. SALT Deductions After The Tax Cuts And Jobs Act of 2017 The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 modified Section 164 of the Internal Revenue Code in two key ways, limiting the financial benefit of the SALT deduction. First, it capped the deduction at $10,000. This limit means that whether the taxpayer paid $10,000 or $100,000 in SALT, the deduction the taxpayer could take would only be $10,000. Second, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act increased the standard deduction from $13,000 in 2016 for married taxpayers to $24,000 in 2017. The combination of taxpayers having lower SALT deductions and a higher standard deduction resulted in far fewer taxpayers itemizing their taxes and utilizing the SALT deduction to their advantage. To illustrate the impacts, consider two different married taxpayers. The first has $15,000 in SALT paid and no other itemized deductions. For this taxpayer, the onset of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act represented a significant win, as they went from having $15,000 in itemized deductions to a $24,000 standard deduction. Assuming the taxpayer was at the 32% tax bracket, the extra $9,000 in deductions increased their after-tax income by $2,880. Now consider the second taxpayer, who has $50,000 in SALT deductions before 2017. If these deductions were now capped at $10,000 and they had no other itemized deductions, they would go from $50,000 in deductions to a $24,000 standard deduction. Assuming the same 32% tax bracket, the $26,000 in lost deductions increased their tax liability by $8,320. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act And A Larger SALT Tax Deduction A key issue with the $10,000 SALT deduction cap was that it asymmetrically impacted taxpayers in higher-cost-of-living locations versus others. For instance, consider a taxpayer in New York City, which has some of the most expensive real estate in the world. That taxpayer is paying more in taxes on their home than a taxpayer in other major cities (such as Chicago, Houston, and Philadelphia), medium-sized cities (like Charlotte, Kansas City, and Denver), or even more rural areas for a similarly sized home. However, they all have the same cap on their SALT deductions. This notion has led many members of Congress to request that the SALT deduction cap be increased in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. As I previously reported in Forbes, the House included a $40,000 deduction cap in its version of the bill, and this cap would increase annually to help offset the rising costs. However, the Senate introduced a version of the bill that would maintain a cap of $10,000. As I reported in a separate Forbesarticle, this was going to be a big sticking point during the Joint Conference Committee as the two sides appeared to be at odds with one another. However, in a surprising turn, the difference is no longer present. In the Senate's passage of the bill, they have agreed to raise the SALT deduction cap to $40,000, as reported by CNBC. Their version of the bill also allows for an annual increase in the deduction. Both versions also agree that the cap would begin to phase out among taxpayers who earn over $500,000 in income, meaning that ultrahigh earners would still be able to deduct only $10,000. In considering the two taxpayers from earlier, the first (which had $50,000 in SALT paid) would now be able to itemize their taxes again, utilizing the higher SALT deduction limit. The second (which had $15,000 in SALT paid) would continue benefiting from the higher standard deduction. Two Key Differences On The SALT Deduction To Be Resolved While it appears as though the two versions have converged, there are two key differences: (1) Expiration Date The Senate's version increases the SALT deduction cap for the years 2025 through 2028. In 2029 it will revert back to $10,000, at which time, Congress will need to decide to reenact the higher tax deduction. The House's version would extend several additional years through 2033. (2) Alternative Minimum Tax Rules The House's version of the bill includes provisions to limit tax deductions for ultrahigh earners, often referred to as the alternative minimum tax. The Senate version has a more taxpayer-friendly alternative minimum tax. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates that this difference makes the Senate version of the bill 67% more taxpayer-friendly than the House version, as the Senate version will result in $325 billion in additional tax outflows for the Federal government. In contrast, the House version will only result in $200 billion in additional tax outflows. While these differences can and will be addressed in the Joint Conference Committee, it is essential to note that the primary details appear to have been resolved. As the US taxpayers look forward to the prospects of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act being signed into law on the 4th of July, the most recent revelation and agreement between the two chambers of Congress should be a welcome sign for homeowners seeking to make better use of their SALT deductions this coming tax season.
Axios
42 minutes ago
- Axios
Johnson faces new GOP revolt on Trump's "big, beautiful bill"
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is facing an explosion of internal anger among his members over the Senate's changes to President Trump's " big, beautiful bill." Why it matters: The speaker has just days to pass the bill before Republicans' self-imposed July 4 deadline — which will require flipping dozens of "no" votes and overcoming numerous procedural hurdles. "Our bill has been completely changed ... It's a non-starter," Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) bemoaned to reporters on Tuesday, Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) said in a post on social media that he will introduce an amendment to the Senate bill that would delete all its text and replace it with the version passed by the House in May. One House Republican, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told Axios there are "well over 20" GOP lawmakers threatening to vote against the bill. State of play: The Senate voted 51-50 to pass their own version of the bill on Tuesday, with Vice President Vance serving as the tiebreaker. The bill would extend the 2017 Trump tax cuts and allocate funding for the president's immigration crackdown while cutting spending on Medicaid, food stamps and green energy subsidies. Zoom in: Right-wing House Republicans are upset that the Senate bill is projected to add more to the deficit than the House version would. "They're backing away from the spending cuts, the spending restraint. They're backing away from the reforms that we think makes the math work," Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said in a post on X. Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.) noted that Johnson previously committed not to hold a vote on a bill that increases the deficit over a certain threshold, adding that "members will have a decision to make." Between the lines: Johnson told conservative lawmakers earlier this year that they could try to remove him as speaker if he couldn't deliver $1.5 trillion in spending cuts in the final package. "I've never lied to any of my colleagues, and I was trying to emphasize the point," Johnson told Axios in an April interview. The bottom line: Johnson vowed in a statement after the Senate vote that the House will "work quickly" to pass the legislation and get it to Trump's desk by July 4.
