Oregon's 'kicker' tax refund could be eliminated, altered as lawmakers seek reform
Oregon lawmakers are revisiting proposals that could eliminate or alter the state's unique surplus refund, better known as the "kicker."
Passed by lawmakers in 1979 and approved by voters in 1980, the kicker returns money to Oregonians when the state's revenue is at least 2% higher than forecasted.
Oregonians passed Measure 85 in 2012, diverting the corporate kicker revenue back into the general fund for public education. Since then, more than $3.5 billion has gone to K-12 schools, according to a Department of Revenue report. The corporate kicker for the 2021-23 biennium totaled $1.8 billion, the largest in state history and more than twice the previous record.
There's been a similar historic increase in personal kicker refunds since 2011. Oregonians received part of a record-breaking $5.6 billion kicker when they filed their 2023 tax return. State economists estimate taxpayers will see a $1.73 billion kicker in 2026, according to the latest revenue forecast.
Supporters of reforming the law argue that the excess tax revenue could be used to fund essential services, especially as lawmakers aim to address an ongoing housing and homelessness crisis and poor student outcomes. Opponents, however, are fiercely protective of the credit and have made clear they would challenge any changes to the personal kicker.
Here's where kicker reform stands at this point in the session:
Sen. Fred Girod, R-Stayton, is the chief sponsor of Senate Bill 399. The bill would require Oregon's Department of Revenue to issue kicker refunds in the form of a check instead of a tax credit. Checks were the refund mechanism from the mid-1990s until 2011, according to the Department of Revenue.
The bill currently sits in the Senate Committee on Finance and Revenue. It has not been scheduled for a public hearing or work session.
Girod sponsored an identical proposal in 2023, but it stalled in the Senate Committee on Finance and Revenue. Senate Republicans attempted to pull it out of committee and onto the floor in 2023 with a procedural motion to withdraw the bill from committee, but the motion failed 12-16.
Sen. Lew Frederick, D-Portland, is also bringing back a proposal he introduced in the 2023 legislative session: ending the kicker altogether.
Senate Bill 573 would discontinue returning excess revenue to taxpayers beginning at the start of the 2027 two-year budget. The bill would not take effect unless Senate Joint Resolution 15 also passes and is approved by voters during the November 2026.
"The kicker is a uniquely Oregon creature and it is a unique burden on our state and the people of our state," Frederick said in 2023. Improved revenue forecasts do not mean more revenue to use in programs but instead go "right back out the door," he said at the time. The bill drew hundreds of pieces of written testimony, largely in opposition, in 2023. After a public hearing, the bill died in committee.
Frederick was not immediately available to discuss his 2025 proposal.
The bill is currently in the Senate Committee on Rules and has not been scheduled for a hearing.
A proposal with more bipartisan support is centered around the corporate kicker rather than the personal refund. House Bill 3360 is scheduled for a public hearing Monday afternoon.
Rep. Courtney Neron, D-Wilsonville, and Rep. Zach Hudson, D-Troutdale, are the chief sponsors. Rep. Emily McIntire, R-Eagle Point, and Rep. Mark Owens, R-Crane, have signed on as regular sponsors.
The bill would redirect the corporate kicker to the School Facility Improvement Fund instead of the State School Fund, meaning the excess revenue would go solely into funding grants for school construction and maintenance projects and for infrastructure improvements.
"School infrastructure is a big problem for many of our districts," Hudson said in an interview with the Statesman Journal.
A similar proposal died in committee in 2023, though it generated testimony from school officials who shared stories of aging facilities and no funding to maintain them.
The way Oregon's school funding model works, money each biennium covers day-to-day costs and staff but cannot cover significant projects like HVAC system replacements or a new roof, Hudson explained. Districts turn instead to passing general obligation bonds, an expensive option that can often be struck down by voters.
According to bond and local option election data tracked by the Oregon School Boards Association, 54 of 100 school district, education service district and community college bonds were approved in the last four years. In Silverton School District, a bond to replace Silverton Middle School and cover other major repairs failed in 2023. The last bond the district passed was in 2006.
In the Gervais School District, voters approved a $28 million bond last year to replace heating and cooling, improve accessibility, replace the high school roof, and make other improvements. It was the ninth attempt at passing a school district bond and the school board warned that it would vote to close the district had the bond failed.
"If we can help districts out with these infrastructure asks, we really should," Hudson said.
Hudson noted that under the current corporate kicker system, the excess revenue goes first into the general fund before lawmakers allocate the rest of the state school fund, meaning it does not necessarily provide additional funding for education.
"I think that most voters, in wanting their money to go to education, would see school infrastructure as definitely within the intent behind that bill, but it just doesn't end up working out that way," Hudson said.
Because the kicker is unpredictable, it makes sense to use the corporate kicker as a pool of one-time funding set aside for infrastructure, Hudson added.
To be eligible for a grant, a school district must have submitted general obligation bonds during the last three years, failed to receive voter approval for general obligation bonds in the last 10 years and have reserves of less than 8% of its adopted budget.
Hudson also said that the bill presents another opportunity to move the needle in helping student achievement in Oregon get back on track.
"There's a lot of good evidence that school physical environment affects learning," Hudson said. "Students don't learn as well when they're too hot. Students don't learn as well when they don't have good quality air, and students don't learn well when the ceiling is moldy."
The window to submit written testimony for HB 3360 will close at 3 p.m. Wednesday.
Dianne Lugo covers the Oregon Legislature and equity issues. Reach her at dlugo@statesmanjournal.com or on X @DianneLugo.
This article originally appeared on Salem Statesman Journal: Oregon tax kicker refund under fire as lawmakers seek reform
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sending money to family in foreign countries may be taxed more
Jun. 9—Families hoping to send money to loved ones in other countries may be hit with additional fees from a tax and spending bill proposed by the Trump administration that would slap a 3.5% tax on remittances sent by anyone who is not a U.S. citizen. The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" passed through the House in May and is now being debated by the Senate. The budget bill has several proposed tax changes, which include taxing money sent from an estimated 40 million non-US citizens — including green card holders, temporary workers and undocumented immigrants — to family and friends in other countries. The bill had a 5% tax but was reduced to 3.5%. The bill is another way the Trump administration is hoping to dissuade immigrants, both documented and undocumented, from coming into the country and moving money out of the U.S. economy. Republicans believe the bill would increase the average take-home pay of U.S. citizens, while Democrats believe the bill and increased taxes are "a transfer of wealth from the working class to the rich," said Daniel Garcia, spokesperson for the Democratic Party of New Mexico. What is a remittance? Remittances refer to sending money from one person to another and is typically done between family members from one country to another. A person living and working in the U.S. would send money to family members typically living in a developing country, where this money is a source of income that contributes to the country's gross domestic product (GDP). Payments are typically sent using an electronic payment service or a money transfer app. Banks, credit unions and money transfer services charge a fee for processing remittances, and fees average 10%, according to the International Monetary Fund. Cryptocurrency exchanges are not as heavily regulated and can be a way to avoid additional taxes and surcharges. "Taxing remittances would amount to a form of double taxation, since migrants already pay taxes in the country where they work," Esteban Moctezuma Barragán, Mexican Ambassador, wrote in a statement. "Imposing a tax on these transfers would disproportionately affect those with the least, without accounting for their ability to pay," Barragán added. However, some believe the 3.5% tax fee would give financial support to public services and is the most "pro-worker, pro-family and pro-American legislation we've seen in decades," said Amy Barela, chairwoman of the Republican Party of New Mexico. "Let's be clear, this measure is not about targeting individuals," she wrote in a statement to the Journal. "It's about ensuring the 3.5% fee, although modest, would also have a very meaningful impact in helping offset costs associated with public services, border security, and community infrastructure — relieving some of the financial pressure on hardworking New Mexicans who continue to bear the burden of an imbalanced system." Crucial source of revenue Mexico is the second-largest receiver of personally wired money behind India, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In 2024, Latin America received $160.9 billion, with the U.S. accounting for 96.6% of all remittances to Mexico. They also make up 20-30% of GDP in countries like El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti and Honduras. "Remittance is a very important source of revenue in our government," said Patricia Pinzón, consul of Mexico. "This would affect Mexican families and the economy in general, but I would say the basic needs of Mexican families is the most worrying thing." However, "whatever happens in one economy will affect the other," said Pinzón. "Our economies are so interrelated that everything that happens here has a consequence in Mexico," she said. "Mexicans will not stop sending money; they'll just look for alternative ways to send it." Mexican migrant workers sent 16.7% of their labor income back to their families, and more than 80% of the income remains in the U.S. economy. The average amount of remittance sent to Mexico is roughly $350 every one to two months, which "could seem like nothing for the U.S., but it's money that a whole family lives on and covers their basics in Mexico," Pinzón said.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lopez: Why this overheated invasion of L.A. looks so ugly and feels so personal
I was driving while listening to the news Sunday when I heard House Speaker Mike Johnson justify President Trump's move to send National Guard troops to Los Angeles. 'We have to maintain the rule of law,' Johnson said. I almost swerved off the road. Maintain the rule of law? Trump pardoned the hooligans who ransacked the Capitol because he lost the 2020 presidential election. They clashed with police, destroyed property and threatened the lives of public officials, and to Trump, they're heroes. Maintain the rule of law? Trump is a 34-count felon who has defied judicial rulings, ignored laws that don't serve his interests, and turned his current presidency into an unprecedented adventure in self-dealing and graft. And now he's sending an invading army to Los Angeles, creating a crisis where there was none. Arresting undocumented immigrants with criminal records is one thing, but is that what this is about? Or is it about putting on a show, occupying commercial and residential neighborhoods and arresting people who are looking for — or on their way to — work. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth warned that U.S. Marines were on high alert and ready to roll, and in the latest of who knows how many escalations, hundreds are headed our way. What next, the Air Force? I'm not going to defend the vandalism and violence — which plays into Trump's hands—that followed ICE arrests in Los Angeles. I can see him sitting in front of the tube, letting out a cheer every time another "migrant criminal" flings a rock or a scooter at a patrol car. But I am going to defend Los Angeles and the way things work here. For starters, undocumented immigration is not the threat to public safety or the economy that Trump like to bloviate about. It's just that he knows he can score points on border bluster and on DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion), so he's going full gasbag on both, and now he's threatening to lock up Gov. Gavin Newsom. Read more: Reopen Alcatraz as a prison? Yes, but Trump shouldn't stop there To hear the rhetoric, you'd think every other undocumented immigrant is a gang member and that trans athletes will soon dominate youth sports if someone doesn't stand up to them. I can already read the mail that hasn't yet arrived, so let me say in advance that I do indeed understand that breaking immigration law means breaking the law, and I believe that President Biden didn't do enough to control the border, although it was Republicans who killed a border security bill early last year. I also acknowledge the cost of supporting undocumented immigrants is substantial when you factor in public education and, in California, medical care, which is running billions of dollars beyond original estimates. But the economic contributions of immigrants — regardless of legal status — are undeniably numerous, affecting the price we pay for everything from groceries to healthcare to domestic services to construction to landscaping. Last year, the Congressional Budget Office concluded that a surge in immigrants since 2021 — including refugees, asylum seekers and others, legal and illegal — had lifted the U.S. economy "by filling otherwise vacant jobs," as The Times reported, and "pumping millions of tax dollars into state, local and federal coffers." According to a seminal 2011 study by the Public Policy Institute of California, 'many illegal immigrants pay Social Security and other taxes but do not collect benefits, and they are not eligible for many government services." In addition, the report said: 'Political controversies aside, when illegal immigrants come, many U.S. employers are ready to hire them. The vast majority work. Estimates suggest that at least 75 percent of adult illegal immigrants are in the workforce.' Trump can rail against the lunatic radical left for the scourge of illegal immigration, but the statement that 'employers are ready to hire them' couldn't be more true. And those employers stand on both sides of the political aisle, as do lawmakers who for decades have allowed the steady flow of workers to industries that would suffer without them. Read more: What happened during three days of protests over immigration raids in downtown L.A. On Sunday, I had to pick up a couple of items at the Home Depot on San Fernando Road in Glendale, where dozens of day laborers often gather in search of work. But there were only a couple of men out there, given recent headlines. A shopper in the garden section said the report of federal troops marching on L.A. is "kind of ridiculous, right?" He said the characterization by Trump of "all these terrible people" and "gang members" on the loose was hard to square with the reality of day laborers all but begging for work. I found one of them in a far corner of the Home Depot lot, behind a fence. He told me he was from Honduras and was afraid to risk arrest by looking for work at a time when battalions of masked troops were on the move, but he's got a hungry family back home, including three kids. He said he was available for any kind of jobs, including painting, hauling and cleanup. Two men in a pickup truck told me they were undocumented too and available for construction jobs of any type. They said they were from Puebla, Mexico, but there wasn't enough work for them there. I've been to Puebla, a city known for its roughly 300 churches. I was passing through about 20 years ago on my way to a small nearby town where almost everyone on the street was female. Where were the men? I was told by a city official that the local economy was all about corn, but local growers couldn't compete with American farmers who had the benefit of federal subsidies. So the men had gone north for work. Another reason people head north is to escape the violence wrought by cartels armed with American-made weapons, competing to serve the huge American appetite for drugs. In these ways, and more, the flow of people across borders can be complicated. But generally speaking, it's simply about survival. People move to escape poverty or danger. They move in search of something better for themselves, or to be more accurate about it, for their children. The narratives of those journeys are woven into the fabric of Los Angeles. It's part of what's messy and splendid and complicated about this blended, imperfect corner of the world, where many of us know students or workers or families with temporary status, or none at all. That's why this overheated invasion looks so ugly and feels so personal. We're less suspicious of our neighbors and the people we encounter on our daily rounds than the hypocrites who would pardon insurrectionists, sow division and send an occupying army to haul away members of our community. 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.
Bloomberg
24 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
White House Pitches Texas GOP on US House Redistricting Gambit
Members of Texas' Republican congressional delegation met on Monday to discuss the prospect of redistricting to try and tilt the state further in the GOP's favor before the 2026 midterm elections. The lawmakers left the meeting not enthused about the prospect, according to a person familiar with their thinking. The New York Times reported earlier that the White House's political team had encouraged the delegation to consider such a measure.
