logo
Indiana property tax bill amended in House Ways and Means, advances to House

Indiana property tax bill amended in House Ways and Means, advances to House

Yahoo07-04-2025

The property relief bill was further amended to draw from components of three bills in the Indiana House Ways and Means committee Monday, which Democratic members voiced concern about and Republican members praised for its property tax relief.
A 368-page amendment to Senate Bill 1 was approved Monday. The amendment includes elements of the Senate amended Senate Bill 1, like allowing a county's fiscal body to set up a property tax deferment program, and Senate 518, which would require by 2027 that school corporations share referendum revenue with charter schools and by 2028 all school corporations begin sharing revenue from the school corporation's operations fund levy with charter schools.
Further, the amended Senate Bill 1 contains language from House Bill 1402, proposed by House Ways and Means committee chairman Jeff Thompson, which includes a 5-year phase-in of exemptions and deductions so that every parcel in the state hits the property tax cap.
The amended Senate Bill 1 states that the percentage cap used to determine the maximum levy growth quotient is 4% in 2026. Beginning in 2028, the maximum local income tax expenditure rate for all counties will be 2.9%, according to the amended bill.
Under the amended bill, approximately 93% of homeowners will see, on average, a decrease of $200 in their pay-2026 property tax bill, Thompson, R-Lizton, said.
Senate Bill 1 initially included language that Gov. Mike Braun campaigned on, a homestead standard deduction amount of 60% of the homestead's assessed value if the value is more than $125,000 or $48,000 plus 60% of the remaining assessed value if the homestead has an assessed value of $125,000 or less. That language was introduced in Senate Bill 1.
Braun's plan would cut $4.1 billion across the state between 2026 and 2028, including $1.9 billion from schools, $254 million from libraries, $890 million from cities and towns, and $765 million from counties.
The Senate amended Senate Bill 1 to remove Braun's language from the bill. The amended bill would shift the percentage cap used to determine the maximum levy growth quotient to 0% in 2026, 1% in 2027 and 2% in 2028; and allows a county fiscal body to establish a property tax payment deferral program, where up to $10,000 can be deferred and the deferment becomes a lien on the property.
The fiscal impact of the amended bill would cut $1.4 billion across the state between 2026 and 2025, including $370.9 million from schools, $67 million from libraries, $304.3 million from cities and towns, and $346.6 million from counties.
Last month, Thompson stripped Senate Bill 1 and inserted his House Bill 1402, which was not heard in committee in the first half of session.
Under Thompson's bill, phases down the homestead standard deduction over 5 years to 0 beginning for taxes due and payable in 2031; phases in an increase in the supplemental homestead deduction over 5 years to two this of the assessed value of the homestead; establishes a new local income tax expenditure tare for all counties to 2.9%; and phases in a total exemption for business personal property that is placed in service after Jan. 1, 2025.
The fiscal impact of Thompson's bill would cut $362.8 million across the state through 2028, including $76.7 million from counties, $147.2 million from cities and towns, $186.2 million from school corporations and $2.1 million from libraries.
Rep. Mike Andrade, D-Munster, said he had concerns with the amended bill because the local income tax change will negatively impact Lake County and because it prohibits the northern Indiana commuter transportation district – which runs in his district – from issuing new bonds after May 9 that are payable in whole or in part from amounts distributed from the commuter rail service fund.
'This is not in the perfect place that it needs to be,' Andrade said. 'It's concerning that we're shifting the burden still on local units of government while trying to give some relief to the homeowners.'
Rep. Ed DeLaney, D-Indianapolis, said the amended bill likely won't appeal to Gov. Braun because it goes 'nowhere near his goal' to lower property taxes. The Senate likely won't go for the bill, DeLaney said, because it amends its bill.
While he doesn't support school corporations sharing referendum dollars with charter schools, DeLaney said he does appreciate the charter school portion of the amended bill because it tones down the language in Senate Bill 518.
'I think we have a tough job getting this over the finish line,' DeLaney said.
Rep. Tonya Pfaff, D-Terre Haute, said while the legislature will be able to say that it decreased property taxes, the relief is only an average of $200 at the cost of funding police, fire, schools, library and other local services.
'To me, it's a wash,' Pfaff said.
Rep Chris Campbell, D-West Lafayette, said she opposed the bill because property taxes fund police, fire, schools and local municipal needs. Additionally, without a fiscal impact of the amendment, Campbell said she can't approve the amendment.
'Without a fiscal, we're asking this group of decision makers to write a blank check,' Campbell said. 'One size does not fit all.'
Rep. Danny Lopez, R-Carmel, said Thompson 'struck a great balance' in offering relief and ensuring municipalities still receive some funding.
'I know there's work that's left to be done. I appreciate your commitment to continue to work on this,' Lopez said.
Rep. J.D. Prescott, R-Union City, said he would 'like to see a lot more property tax relief across statewide for this.'
'This is not everything that I want from a property tax relief package, but a no vote would represent keeping the current law in place, with no relief; a yes vote does provide some relief,' Prescott said. 'I will vote yes because I think it's important that we provide relief moving forward. I will continue to push for more meaningful reforms in the future.'
Democratic members proposed five amendments, including a renter's deduction and local income tax match, which were voted down along party lines.
The amended bill passed in separate 15-8 votes, with all Republicans voting in favor and all Democrats voting against. The bill moves forward for consideration by the House.
akukulka@post-trib.com

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Nancy Mace said 'due process is for citizens.' Here's who it's really for
Nancy Mace said 'due process is for citizens.' Here's who it's really for

Yahoo

time23 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Nancy Mace said 'due process is for citizens.' Here's who it's really for

In early June 2025, Republican U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina wrote an X post (archived) that read: "Due process is for citizens." Her comment had been viewed more than 2.4 million times as of this writing and had amassed more than 6,500 likes. The same claim has appeared in multiple X posts. In a similar tone, in May 2025, another X user wrote: "Due process is for citizens, not invaders." (X user @NancyMace) In short, due process is the legal principle that the government must follow fair procedures before depriving a person of life, liberty or property. It serves as a safeguard against arbitrary actions by the state, ensuring that people are treated justly under the law. For a more detailed explanation, see our full breakdown in this article on former President Bill Clinton's 1996 immigration law. While Mace's post did not explicitly say that due process protections are, or should be, limited to only U.S. citizens, her replies below the post reinforced that interpretation. However, the U.S. Constitution protects all "persons," not just citizens, under the due-process clauses of the Fifth and 14th amendments. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that these protections apply to anyone physically present in the United States regardless of citizenship or immigration status. An MSNBC article on the topic similarly concluded that Mace's "implication … that noncitizens don't get that protection" was "incorrect." The South Carolina representative doubled down on her stance in the replies below her post, suggesting that noncitizens should not be entitled to due-process protections in the U.S. For example, when one X user wrote, "The Constitution doesn't say 'only citizens.' Due process applies to persons — that includes non-citizens. That's settled law," Mace replied by saying: "Skip due process coming in, don't expect it going out. Citizens first!" Other replies further suggested she believed only U.S. citizens should be entitled to such protections (archived, archived, archived). (X users @FJBIDEN_22 and @NancyMace) These exchanges were not the first time Mace commented on due process. In late May 2025, she weighed in on the principle in response to a federal judge's decision to block the deportation of eight noncitizens convicted of violent crimes. The day before U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy issued a 17-page order in which he emphasized that "the Court recognizes that the class members at issue here have criminal histories. But that does not change due process," Mace criticized the ruling, telling Fox News (archived): "They didn't want due process on their way in illegally, they shouldn't get due process on their way out." However, the representative's comments about due process contradicted remarks she made about the principle in the past. In February 2023, Mace wrote on X (archived): "Everyone deserves the right to due process. Even those we vehemently oppose." (X user @NancyMace) Snopes has reached out to Mace for comment on whether she maintains that due-process protections should apply only to U.S. citizens and how she reconciles that view with her 2023 statement. We will update this article if we receive a response. The U.S. Constitution's guarantee of due process appears in the Fifth and 14th amendments, both of which state that no person should be deprived "of life, liberty or property, without due process of law." As shown, the language uses "person," not "citizen," with regard to due-process protections. Further, the Supreme Court has repeatedly interpreted that due-process protections apply to everyone within U.S. borders regardless of citizenship or immigration status. In Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel Mezei (1953) the Court emphasized (Page 212) that "aliens who have once passed through [U.S.] gates, even illegally, may be expelled only after proceedings conforming to traditional standards of fairness-encompassed in due process of law." Similarly, in cases such as Zadvydas v. Davis (2001) and earlier decisions dating back more than a century, the Supreme Court made clear that the government cannot detain or deport people arbitrarily. In the 2001 case, the Court underscored that "the Due Process Clause applies to all persons within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent." In simple words, noncitizens must be given fair procedures, such as notice or a "credible fear interview," before being deprived of their liberty. The Supreme Court expressed the same view in the case of Reno v. Flores (1993), stating: "It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings." This was not the first time Snopes addressed a claim regarding Mace. For instance, in late May 2025, we investigated a rumor that she ordered staffers to create burner accounts to promote her online. Meanwhile, earlier in June 2025, we also fact-checked a rumor about whether the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, signed by Clinton, allowed deportation without due process. "327K Views · 15K Reactions | Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) Responds to Arguments That Illegal Immigrants Convicted of Heinous Crimes Deserve Due Process after a Judge Blocks a Deportation Flight to South Sudan | 'They Didn't Want Due Process on Their Way in Illegally, They Shouldn't Get Due Process on Their Way Out.' Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) Responds to Arguments... | by Fox News | Facebook." 2022, Accessed 6 June 2025. "U.S. Constitution - Fifth Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | | Library of Congress." 15 Dec. 1791, Constitution Annotated. "U.S. Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | | Library of Congress." 9 July 1868, Deng, Grace. "Did Nancy Mace Order Staffers to Create Burner Accounts to Promote Her Online? Here's What We Know." Snopes, 30 May 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. Dunbar, Marina. "Court Halts Trump Administration's Effort to Send Eight Men to South Sudan." The Guardian, The Guardian, 23 May 2025, Gabbatt, Adam. "Group Stranded with Ice in Djibouti Shipping Container after Removal from US." The Guardian, The Guardian, 6 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. " 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. "Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993)." Justia Law, Rubin, Jordan. "Due Process Is Not Limited to Citizens, Contrary to Nancy Mace's Claim." MSNBC, 4 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. Wrona, Aleksandra. "Bill Clinton Did Not Sign Law in 1996 Allowing Deportation without Due Process." Snopes, 5 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. "Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001)." Justia Law,

Senator Markey announces plans to file amendment on AI regulation
Senator Markey announces plans to file amendment on AI regulation

Yahoo

time23 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Senator Markey announces plans to file amendment on AI regulation

BOSTON (WWLP) – State Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.) has announced that he intends to file an amendment on AI regulation. Senator Markey said he plans to file an amendment to the Senate reconciliation bill to block Republicans' attempt to prevent states from regulating AI in the next ten years. Senators in both parties have expressed an interest in regulating artificial intelligence. Car dealership aids relief at Baystate Children's Hospital 'Despite the overwhelming opposition to their plan to block states from regulating artificial intelligence for the next decade, Republicans are refusing to back down on this irresponsible and short-sighted provision,' said Senator Markey. Last Tuesday, the senator delivered remarks on the Senate floor opposing the reconciliation bill passed in the House. He also took part in a virtual roundtable last week with advocates to discuss the ban's impact on communities throughout the United States. 'I plan to file an amendment to strip this dangerous provision from Republicans' 'Big Beautiful Bill,'' Markey said. 'Republicans should be prepared to vote on this outrageous policy and explain to their constituents why they are preventing their state leaders from responding to the harms caused by this new and evolving technology.' WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

David Hogg won't run again after DNC votes to redo vice chair elections
David Hogg won't run again after DNC votes to redo vice chair elections

Yahoo

time23 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

David Hogg won't run again after DNC votes to redo vice chair elections

David Hogg will not seek reelection to his Democratic National Committee leadership position after the party announced Wednesday that members had voted to redo the vice chair contests he and Malcolm Kenyatta won in February. 'Ultimately, I have decided to not run in this upcoming election so the party can focus on what really matters,' Hogg said in a statement. Hogg's decision not to run again ends a monthslong intraparty fight between the young gun control advocate and much of the national committee that has distracted from the party's efforts to rebuild after devastating 2024 election losses. The outgoing vice chair has accused party leaders of attempting to oust him from his position over frustration with his plan to primary 'ineffective' Democratic incumbents in safe seats through his PAC Leaders We Deserve. DNC members have argued that Hogg has mischaracterized the vote. The initial challenge to how the committee handled the February 1 vote for two vice chair positions was made in late February, months before Hogg announced his primary initiative. Still, members' feelings toward Hogg and his ongoing, public dispute with party leaders loomed large over the vote. The proposal to hold a new election passed 75% to 25% with 89% of DNC members participating. DNC chairman Ken Martin praised Hogg for his work on the committee. 'I commend David for his years of activism, organizing, and fighting for his generation, and while I continue to believe he is a powerful voice for this party, I respect his decision to step back from his post as Vice Chair,' Martin said in a statement. 'I have no doubt that he will remain an important advocate for Democrats across the map.' Had Hogg run again, he would have faced Kenyatta in an election for a position which, under the DNC's gender parity rules, must go to a man. 'I'm grateful to the overwhelming support I've received in this reelection from DNC members and I look forward to getting back to work electing Democrats up and down the ballot,' Kenyatta said in a statement. 'I wish David the best.' Voting for the other vice chair seat will run from Sunday morning through Tuesday afternoon. Three female candidates who were in the running in February will be eligible: Kalyn Free, an Oklahoma Democratic activist who filed the challenge, as well as Kansas state party chair Jeanna Repass and Washington state party chair Shasti Conrad. Separately, the DNC is also weighing a new proposal put forth by Martin that would officially require elected party leaders to stay neutral in primaries. The DNC is expected to vote on that measure at an August meeting. This story has been updated with additional details. CNN's Arlette Saenz contributed to this report.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store