Latest news with #SenateBill113
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Alaska Legislature overrides Gov. Dunleavy's veto of public school funding bill
Rep. Neal Foster, D-Nome, votes in favor of overriding Gov. Mike Dunleavy's veto of House Bill 57 on Tuesday, May 20, 2025. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon) For the first time since 2002, the Alaska Legislature has overridden the veto of a sitting governor. With a 46-14 vote, lawmakers enacted a significant increase to Alaska's per-student public funding formula, overriding Gov. Mike Dunleavy's decision to reject House Bill 57. Forty votes were needed for an override. It was the third time in two years that the governor vetoed a significant education funding bill; lawmakers failed by a single vote to override the governor last year. A second veto earlier this year was sustained by a larger margin. Tuesday's vote may be the first chapter in a longer struggle between the governor and the Legislature. HB 57 prescribes an increase to the state's public school funding formula, but that formula is subject to appropriations in the annual state budget. To use an analogy: If the formula is a bucket, the budget fills that bucket. Dunleavy has previously said he may veto some education money from the state budget, leaving the formula only partially funded. In addition, parts of HB 57 are contingent upon the enactment of Senate Bill 113, a bill adjusting the state's corporate income taxes. On Monday, Dunleavy implied that he will veto SB 113. Overriding either a funding veto or a veto of SB 113 would require 45 votes. Some legislators who voted to override the governor on Monday declined to confirm that they would override vetoes on the two funding mechanisms. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Gov. Mike Dunleavy opposes tax bills and urges creation of joint fiscal plan group after session ends
May 9—JUNEAU — Gov. Mike Dunleavy wants the Alaska Legislature to form a "joint team" with his administration to forge a long-term fiscal plan for the state. The Legislature is grappling this year with a substantial deficit and a dire fiscal outlook due to diminished oil revenue. The Senate approved an austere budget this week ahead of final negotiations with the House. Lawmakers have warned the state's fiscal outlook likely will be even more dire next year. On Friday, Dunleavy also issued an administrative order that seeks to limit state spending. The order would implement a statewide hiring freeze for public sector workers and a freeze on out-of-state travel with some exemptions for public safety and other positions. Dunleavy said that was needed with oil prices falling and tightening fiscal conditions. However, Dunleavy in a Friday letter made clear that he opposed several tax proposals being considered by lawmakers this year. In recent years, legislators have discussed countless proposals intended to balance the state's budget for the long term. Measures have been considered to change the state's Permanent Fund dividend formula; institute a tighter legislative spending cap; and impose new taxes to raise revenue. But virtually all of those measures have been rejected by the Legislature. Members of the bipartisan Senate majority introduced a new dividend formula bill that would pay a $1,400 PFD this year, but it has failed to advance. The Senate this year has supported a $1,000 PFD, but some senators have said they hope Alaska's finances improve to pay the larger dividend figure in the future. Senate majority members have also favored new revenue-raising measures to balance the budget, but the House has shown little appetite for bills that would hike oil taxes. The Legislature did broadly approve Senate Bill 113 this week, which would raise revenue by taxing out-of-state businesses online. Dunleavy on Wednesday sent a letter to legislative leaders, saying that he opposed "standalone tax measures." He said that a "tax-and-spend" approach would not lead to a long-term, sustainable fiscal plan for Alaska. "As I have consistently stated since my first term, a truly durable fiscal plan must include revenues, but it also requires clear guardrails: spending limits, statutory and regulatory reviews, and policies that make Alaska the most competitive state in the nation for investment and new business growth," Dunleavy said in his Wednesday letter. Dunleavy formally requested that legislators establish "a joint team" with his administration after the legislative session ends later in May to "develop a comprehensive, sustainable long-term fiscal plan that ensures stability and fosters economic growth." Kodiak Republican Senate President Gary Stevens on Friday said Dunleavy's proposal had not been discussed yet by the bipartisan Senate majority caucus. But Stevens said it was "a reasonable idea." He compared it to a legislative task force that worked last year to make recommendations to aid the ailing Alaska seafood industry. However, Stevens said he was "sorry" to hear Dunleavy opposed tax bills being considered by lawmakers this year. Those revenue-raising measures include: —SB 113, which has been estimated to raise between $25 million and $65 million per year for the state treasury. The revenue raised from that bill has been earmarked to fund reading incentive grants and career and technical education. The Legislature approved the measure this week on a combined 42-18 vote. But Dunleavy has opposed it, telling school superintendents that he was against tying revenue raised from that bill to education funding. —Senate Bill 92 would impose the same corporate income tax rate on privately held oil companies as those paid by public corporations. The tax would apply to Hilcorp, which operates the Prudhoe Bay oil field and produces the vast majority of natural gas from Cook Inlet. The Senate is set to hold a final vote on that measure next week, but lawmakers say it could face long odds of being approved by the House. The measure is estimated to raise up to $150 million per year. —Senate Bill 112 would reduce tax credits available for oil companies from $8 to $5 per barrel. Senators say they don't expect the measure will be approved by the Legislature this year. The tax credit change has been estimated to raise between $100 million and $300 million annually. Anchorage Republican Rep. Mia Costello, the House minority leader, voted for the tax on Outside businesses that operate online. Costello said that she would have "a conversation" with Dunleavy if he chose to veto SB 113. But she did not say Friday if she would vote to override. Costello said that prior efforts to forge a long-term fiscal plan have failed because "not everybody likes" the various proposals being offered. She applauded the governor for trying again, and said that "the discussion is very important to have." Lawmakers have said that Dunleavy has largely been absent from fiscal policy debates and discussions about new revenue measures. In 2021, he announced support for a new dividend formula, but he has since kept proposing dividends following the 1982 formula in state statute. In 2023, Dunleavy said that he would introduce a statewide sales tax proposal, but he never did. In a brief Friday interview, House Speaker Bryce Edgmon, a Dillingham independent, declined to comment on Dunleavy's opposition to revenue-raising bills. He said of Dunleavy's plan for a joint fiscal policy team that, "We could have used it a long time ago." Lawmakers have previously attempted to forge a durable fiscal plan during Dunleavy's tenure as governor. In 2021, a bipartisan and bicameral working group devised a framework intended to make the state's finances sustainable for the long-term. The policies were pitched as a package that could attract support across the political spectrum, but none have been approved by the Legislature. Wasilla GOP Sen. Mike Shower, the Senate minority leader, said that the state's gloomy fiscal outlook means the Legislature needs to act soon. He said that "if we don't do something, this problem only gets worse for us." Shower was a member of the 2021 fiscal policy working group. He welcomed Dunleavy's request for another attempt to craft a bipartisan solution. But he was opposed to simply studying the fiscal problems facing the state. "We study and study and study and never do anything. And I think that's a frustration for everybody, probably in this building, including the governor on down. I am, frankly, tired of studying and not acting," he said.
Yahoo
08-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Alaska Legislature approves corporate tax for online business in Alaska, tied to education funding
The Alaska State Capitol is seen in partial morning sun on May 10, 2024. (Photo by Claire Stremple/Alaska Beacon) The Alaska Legislature has approved what would be the first state measure to raise significant new revenue in a decade and in the process has unlocked a key section of its own education-funding bill. On Wednesday, the Alaska House voted 26 to 14, to update the corporate income tax for companies doing business over the internet. The revenue measure is tied to pay for part of House Bill 57, a bipartisan education funding measure awaiting Gov. Dunleavy's verdict. HOW THEY VOTED In favor Robyn Niayuq Burke, D-Utqiagvik Jeremy Bynum, R-Ketchikan Ashley Carrick, D-Fairbanks Mia Costello, R-Anchorage Maxine Dibert, D-Fairbanks Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham Ted Eischeid, D-Anchorage Zack Fields, D-Anchorage Neal Foster, D-Nome Alyse Galvin, I-Anchorage Andrew Gray, D-Anchorage Carolyn Hall, D-Anchorage Sara Hannan, D-Juneau Rebecca Himschoot, I-Sitka Ky Holland, I-Anchorage Nellie Unangiq Jimmie, D-Bethel Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage Chuck Kopp, R-Anchorage Donna Mears, D-Anchorage Elexie Moore, R-Wasilla Genevieve Mina, D-Anchorage Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage Will Stapp, R-Fairbanks Andi Story, D-Juneau Louise Stutes, R-Kodiak Against Jamie Allard, R-Eagle River Julie Coulombe, R-Anchorage Bill Elam, R-Nikiski DeLena Johnson, R-Palmer Kevin McCabe, R-Big Lake David Nelson, R-Anchorage Mike Prax, R-North Pole George Rauscher, R-Sutton Dan Saddler, R-Eagle River Rebecca Schwanke, R-Glennallen Cathy Tilton, R-Wasilla Frank Tomaszewski, R-Fairbanks Jubilee Underwood, R-Wasilla Sarah Vance, R-Homer 'It's great news,' said Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, sponsor of the legislation on Wednesday following the vote. 'This is a critically needed bill. It can generate some much needed revenue for education funding, and it is not going to result in any new taxes on Alaskans.' Senate Bill 113 would clarify that businesses that do at least 50% of sales of goods or services online, in Alaska or delivered to Alaska customers, must pay a state tax. Currently, businesses can argue a sale is taking place out-of-state at a company server farm or warehouse, not subject to Alaska taxation. But companies are still subject to taxes in those states where they're located, so supporters of the bill argue the update to 'market-based sourcing' will bring that tax revenue to Alaska. Wielechowski argued it's an issue of fairness for Alaskans. 'When a sale is made over the internet, they often use our state-funded broadband. When a product is shipped, it comes into our state-funded airports or Port of Alaska. It's trucked over our state-funded roads, and across our state-funded bridges,' he told the House Finance Committee on Friday. 'And who pays for all this? The people of Alaska,' he said. 'While the out of state corporation pays very little, or likely nothing in the case of highly digitized businesses, … this bill fixes this inequity.' The bill also garnered support from some more conservative Republican legislators, including Sen. Rob Yundt, R-Wasilla, who penned an op-ed published in the Anchorage Daily News. 'Today, highly digitized businesses can rake in hundreds of millions of dollars from Alaskans without ever setting foot in our state. They compete directly with our local retailers, undercutting prices and displacing local jobs,' he wrote. 'Because double taxation is illegal, if Alaska exercises its rightful authority to tax companies like Amazon on the income they earn here, they will not be taxed on that income again. This means the tax is already included in the company's budgets, and prices will not be changed for the seller or consumer.' The Alaska House voted 26-14 to pass Senate Bill 113, the first significant revenue measure in over a decade, on May 7, 2025. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon) Under federal tax law, businesses are taxed based on apportionment, or a formula based on revenue from a company's property, payroll and sales. Under the legislation, only the sales in Alaska would be factored in for companies that are deemed 'highly digitized,' which means more than 50% of their business is done online. The legislation does not change Alaska's corporate income tax rates or brackets. Other Republicans, like Rep. Jamie Allard, R-Eagle River, opposed the tax, raising concerns businesses would shift the cost of the tax and raise prices on consumers. 'I think it's going to impact people greatly,' she said in the House Finance Committee meeting on Friday. 'I feel like this is a hidden cost to Alaskans.' Wielechowski said prices are usually set nationally, and pointed to at least 36 states that already have some form of this locally based corporate income tax. 'So the extent that we think our implementing this is going to somehow outweigh the impacts of California doing it and New York doing it — and North Carolina doing it, and Ohio doing it, and Oregon doing it, and all those other states — I know we like to think very highly of ourselves,' he said, to laughs from the committee, 'but I just don't think we have that sort of market impact.' By updating the law to capture these corporate sales, the bill could generate $25 million to $65 million each year at full implementation, according to a state estimate. It would cost more than $250,000 to administer, the state Department of Revenue said. Lawmakers have tied the revenue to pay for part of House Bill 57, an education funding bill for next year, which is waiting for a decision from Dunleavy. Legislators passed the bill in late April, with an estimated $22 million earmarked for reading improvement grants, and $10 million for career and technical education programs — both policy items sought by Dunleavy. But lawmakers made that contingent on Senate Bill 113 also passing. House Speaker Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, said the legislation would generate much needed revenue for the state. 'I don't think it's lost on a lot of members in the Legislature that we're now entering an era where we're going to have to look at other revenue measures. And you can interpret this as a first step in that direction,' he said, 'whether the governor approves it or not. But overall, I think for other legislators it's kind of considered low-hanging fruit.' The last time the Legislature approved a significant revenue measure was in 2015, when lawmakers voted to add a 0.95-cent-per-gallon surcharge to the state's fuel tax in order to fund spill response and prevention. The education funding bill is now with Dunleavy, who has until May 17 to sign it, veto it or let it become law without his signature. If he vetoes it, majority leaders say they believe they have the votes to override it. In the days leading up to the House vote on SB 113, lawmakers complained that Dunleavy's staff with the Department of Revenue declined to answer questions about the legislation. 'When you have a whole department that's just saying we're not going to help you with a piece of legislation, I've never experienced that in my time here,' Wielechowski said on Tuesday, ahead of the vote. SB 113 now goes back to the Senate chamber and then will be transmitted to the governor's office.
Yahoo
17-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Corporate tax update, passed by Alaska Senate, could generate millions for dividends, services
Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, speaks Tuesday, April 15, 2025, on the floor of the Alaska Senate. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon) A change to Alaska's corporate income tax structure is expected to add as much as $65 million per year to the state treasury by diverting money from other states. The Alaska Senate voted 16-4 on Tuesday to approve Senate Bill 113, which clarifies that online sales to Alaskans amount to business activity within the state. If passed by the House and approved by Gov. Mike Dunleavy, it would be the state's first new revenue-generating law in years. Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage and the sponsor of the bill, said that without the change, businesses can say that the location of an online sale is a server farm or warehouse outside of the state, making it ineligible for Alaska taxation. Passing the bill is a step toward resolving a major budget deficit, he said, adding that the change won't have an impact on Alaskans and isn't a tax increase. Thirty-six other states have adopted similar tax rules. 'It's about as close as you can get to a unicorn bill to raise money for the state of Alaska,' he said during a news conference on Tuesday. 'It's a bill that doesn't raise taxes on Alaskans, doesn't raise taxes on Alaskan businesses. It's not going to cost any more simply changing the structure of our corporate income tax. It will probably, quite frankly, shift money from other states to the state of Alaska, and so it'll be a unicorn. It's kind of a rarity. There's probably not too many of these out there,' Wielechowski said. Sen. Matt Claman, D-Anchorage, said the bill is necessary to modernize the state's tax system. 'You can get pretty much anything online and it comes to your door, and many of these companies that are doing business here in Alaska pay a little or no corporate income tax due due to what has become, I think, an outdated structure for how we assess companies that are primarily located out of state,' he said. Opposition came from four Republican members of the Senate minority, including Sen. Shelley Hughes, R-Palmer, who said she believes it is inappropriate to pass a new revenue measure without also considering changes to the state's spending cap. Senate Minority Leader Mike Shower, R-Wasilla, also voted against the bill, saying he doubts Wielechowski's claims and believes costs will be passed to Alaskans. 'Somewhere, somebody's paying more money if we're raising taxes. The businesses are not charities,' he said. SB 113 has been referred to the House Finance Committee for further hearings. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Forbes
16-04-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Indiana Senate Republicans Reject Cannabis Legalization Bid
The Indiana Senate has rejected an amendment to a budget bill that would have legalized recreational ... More and medical cannabis. Republicans in the Indiana Senate this week rejected a move by a Democratic colleague to legalize cannabis in the Hoosier State. On Monday, the GOP-led Senate considered several amendments to a two-year budget bill. One of the amendments, from Democratic Sen. Rodney Pol, would have legalized cannabis for recreational and medical use. During deliberations on the proposal, Pol said that he finds it 'frustrating' to see Indiana 'lose on an opportunity to keep our dollars in our state and provide relief to those individuals that are dealing with cancer, PTSD, chronic pain and other ailments that prefer cannabis for needed relief, as opposed to pharmaceuticals.' 'We have hundreds of people in the hallway that are concerned about money that we are spending,' he said. 'And this is an easy way to turn what is in an illicit market that is funding more crime right now into a regulated and safe taxed market that we reap the benefits of.' The Indiana Statehouse. Pol's amendment was similar to a stand-alone cannabis legalization bill he filed in January, online news source Marijuana Moment reported on Tuesday. Had it succeeded, the legislation (Senate Bill 113) would have created a regulatory and taxation framework for marijuana. The bill also would have established the Indiana Cannabis Commission (ICC) and Advisory Committee to oversee the program. The bill also contains provisions to expunge past convictions for offenses legalized by the measure. The legislation would also provide for research into cannabis. The legalization of cannabis under Senate Bill 113 would generate 'between $46.6 million and $92.6 million in FY 2026 and $50.8 million and $101.7 million in FY 2027 from Sales and Excise Taxes and permit fees,' according to a fiscal note from the state's Legislative Services Agency (LSA). Pol's amendment was rejected by the Republican Senate majority in a voice vote, continuing Indiana's prohibition of cannabis. Indiana is one of a handful of states that have yet to legalize marijuana for medical purposes or for recreational use by adults. But some signs point to potential change in 2025. In January, Indiana Republican Gov. Mike Braun, who took office this year, said it is 'probably time' to legalize medical cannabis, Marijuana Moment reported at the time. While speaking on television news about his 'freedom and opportunity agenda,' Braun said that Indiana should consider cannabis policy reform. 'It's probably time for it to have found its way to Indiana—on the medical side,' he said. Republican legislators have also indicated some support for cannabis policy reform. Earlier this month, Senate Pro Tempore Rodric Bray, who has opposed legalizing both medical and recreational cannabis in the past, said he is aware that marijuana legalization is 'becoming more and more popular, of course, across the state of Indiana, and also in this building.' 'We can't exist in a vacuum,' Bray added. 'More than 30 states have legalized marijuana in some capacity, including those states around us.' While noting he was speaking for himself and not the Republican Party, Bray said marijuana decriminalization may be a better option than more comprehensive cannabis policy reform. 'I think that it would be a smart move, based on where we are in that space right now, that we decriminalize small amounts of marijuana. I don't think that needs to be criminal at this point,' he said. 'Maybe it's an infraction or something like that, because people are obviously buying it legally in other parts of the country [and] can't possess it when you come back here. But should that be a jailable offense at this point? Maybe not.'
