[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6322266,"mediaKeyId","2348164-5c3e2a658ed8d98ba817e78b03cd08aa","parentId",2348164,"title","Committee agrees to gather more information on tribal taxation language in House Bill 15 63","audioSeconds",375,"startMs",2502000,"endMs",2877000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2348164-5c3e2a658ed8d98ba817e78b03cd08aa&start=2502&end=2877","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2348164-5c3e2a658ed8d98ba817e78b03cd08aa/thumbnail_2502000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6322266/North-Dakota/Committee-agrees-to-gather-more-information-on-tribal-taxation-language-in-House-Bill-15-63","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6322266-3a9ab7d5ceb2aa13f17df3e4a73030cb/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191773&Signature=T8pMv2wpkGJucV5r~DoGGK-rPbX6XAnBwKM6QNBeTUkKyjWcQ4BSbvwEffXWL3tGLMHby-jJ1Pyl0~OVTKZz6Gt0tp3SEmDL93JlR7I4dNyXW4QnBnNdg-pVKgtrMYlT-xOZtYHKeeV2iOrreivMcGGI-2GSyZZQPrM2X19MplLNphYLn8rDfHUwHDpc2jkkQKaRphwptseSqqMRTiIOFc-bQmcqS2yQUi8KV0coTzRY0s6vFJTc0X5sbZX472kKBNl2C18GwsazcrTZdW6FmTF-wo68y7zumC0hiYShQY5PxCH2YmO9v4gpkSfji6h0l0ZTovmb4BuGEzFvzCt~5Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","North Dakota State Legislature","date","2025-02-19T00:00:00Z","article","Senators discussed House Bill 15 63, a bill addressing taxation of tribal and allotted lands, and decided to gather more information before taking committee action. The committee did not vote on the bill but agreed to meet with the sponsor, legislative counsel and stakeholders to clarify the bill's scope and whether statutory language should read \"shall consider\" or stronger language such as \"shall study.\"

Senator Marschley (bill carrier on the Senate side) and others said the current draft uses \"shall consider\" language. Members and the sponsor discussed the risk that changing the language to \"shall study\" could affect the bill's path (for example, potential conference actions) and possibly the bill's survival later in the process. Brad Hawk, identified in committee discussion as the Indian commissioner, volunteered space for meetings with legislative counsel and interested parties.

Committee members outlined topics a study might include: federal limits on tribal taxation, judicial decisions on tribal taxation authority, state property-tax exemptions for Native American property, and interactions between tribal sovereignty and state law. Several senators requested more specific issue framing before amending bill language.

No formal motion was recorded. The committee agreed Speaker sponsors and legislative counsel would meet and return to committee for a quick decision after the Senate floor adjourned.

Committee members flagged the need for clarity and stakeholder meetings; they did not adopt a formal recommendation during the meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Finance and Taxation Wednesday, Feb 19, 2025 8:59 AM - 9:49 AM","oneSentenceSummary","Members asked sponsors to clarify whether House Bill 15 63 should direct a study or require consideration of tribal-tax issues; committee deferred substantive action and planned follow-up meetings with legislative counsel and stakeholders.","taxTitle","Finance and Taxation, Senate, Legislative, North Dakota","taxId",28904,"location","North Dakota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6322271,"Panel approves amended House bill to lower communication service fee to 2.5%",304,2196000,2500000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2348164-5c3e2a658ed8d98ba817e78b03cd08aa&start=2196&end=2500","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2348164-5c3e2a658ed8d98ba817e78b03cd08aa/thumbnail_2196000.jpg","/articles/6322271/North-Dakota/Panel-approves-amended-House-bill-to-lower-communication-service-fee-to-25","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6322271-88bf16f00497e960184e2e806d33d55c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191773&Signature=QOMn3N3ViUt7G1XZuo5Jtofq1L4FyNg-jO9RJ6QvRv83v~K~lXZQTnXJOhmePqnES64O2-N5ZA3NDDZYSV7jNaTndKRrxtMB3WBUMTYCv3F7DE1CNVfS0~foPi2rRMlkOsT8iv4wZvtTxeEEMu7ts~G22fQdvhkUYCCkpNVLwNKxK4Lu2nPxtpAPoASi5WDUVreqak2rUHMbop4-Zx4e-oJKLrlooDI6MIJU6LVxiIInNd1TTcqog8bvicBBdREyZYuZQcipH5nuDHNF7GyOWArnXZ60Of5G3tL8liHmNmhN79l4eva1Q20fTRZmjhAug~TuhFA10iwk5qoIDrNIbw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Finance and Tax Committee voted to advance House Bill 10 96 in its amended form, setting a communications/service fee at 2.5 percent. Committee members discussed competing interests between large carriers and rural telephone cooperatives and accepted the House-amended compromise rate.

Senator Wallen urged keeping the amended 2.5% rate, noting rural telephone cooperatives receive modest administration revenue from the fee and that reducing the fee further would diminish funds for those entities. \"The rural telephone cooperatives are already under the 5% only getting about $100,000 a year. And if we drop it down to 2 and a half percent that gives them about $50,000 a year,\" Wallen said, adding that dividing that smaller amount among cooperatives reduces per-cooperative funding.

Committee members noted local variation in current fees: about 10 counties still collect a $1-per-line fee; others collect $1.50; the state adds an additional $0.50 in some structures. The House amendment proposing 2.5% was described to the committee as a compromise from an original 1% proposal.

Senator Wallen moved for approval of the House-amended bill; Senator Powers seconded. The clerk recorded the roll call: Chairman Weber — aye; Vice Chair Rummel — yes; Senator Marsauley — yes; Senator Patton — yes; Senator Powers — yes; Senator Wallen — yes. The motion carried and Senator Powers agreed to carry the bill.

Committee members asked carriers and county representatives to track administration revenues and noted the bill's fiscal impacts are concentrated on rural providers that rely on the fee to administer local programs.","The committee voted to advance House Bill 10 96 in its amended form, which sets the communications/service charge at 2.5%; supporters said the amendment strikes a balance for rural cooperatives.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6322275,"Senate panel rejects proposed homeschool income tax credit after brief debate",521,1672000,2193000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2348164-5c3e2a658ed8d98ba817e78b03cd08aa&start=1672&end=2193","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2348164-5c3e2a658ed8d98ba817e78b03cd08aa/thumbnail_1672000.jpg","/articles/6322275/North-Dakota/Senate-panel-rejects-proposed-homeschool-income-tax-credit-after-brief-debate","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6322275-6c86fd9a36550dafd3869b0e205d6b89/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191773&Signature=J-jyIAMpDE3SOsbEIeoOOlLSsSvDoFCcxi-JJ8KJeA3qj9jtFt-eIQxRb1dJWrVEs84dgGPYXU0Lt8lUP98agDKNtW2~svK7mKOMfwvvVhXbSIHGWotzmnZPeU-Zl2u~OkkOnoFjC5EOf4EwOmZPNX~w8zfdu44Y7hrhULbes-U1eIcCppMNCGkOqSyurMOXKXbUGH0w~2u73OCxJ7zgV9grkOGUED8PmyMo60iJGdMpfV3ifxQ~4EC~UR60QI6BO55kpI8NHSQeqzRJ64fGapZix4ycy~sbIGSRk5WLSSYHKFQ8FJrI6dm-o~ztxRccU3uoRAKfn8C0uDCjcAEfZg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Finance and Tax Committee voted to recommend \"do not pass\" on House Bill 12 44, a proposal to create an income tax credit for homeschooling expenses. The measure would have allowed a maximum credit of $1,000 per student for joint filers or $500 per student for married taxpayers filing separately, capped by actual homeschooling expenses.

Committee discussion focused on limited fiscal reach and eligibility. Chair Weber and several senators said the majority of residents have no state income tax liability and therefore could not use a nonrefundable credit. Linda Swihovic and other staff provided data that roughly 65% of residents have zero income tax liability; committee members said that fact sharply limits who would benefit.

Senator Wallen moved for a \"do pass\" after noting supporters' preference the credit not be linked to voucher or ESA programs; Senator Powers seconded. That motion failed on the roll call. Chairman Weber then moved a \"do not pass\" recommendation; Senator Rummel seconded. The committee recorded a 5–1 \"do not pass\": Jeremy Weber — yes; Vice Chair Romo — no; Senator Marsali — yes; Senator Patton — yes; Senator Powers — no; Senator Wallen — yes (committee recorded result as 5 to 1).

During debate Senator Patton said he opposed piecemeal tax benefits that detract from comprehensive tax-relief proposals and questioned the bill's value given the limited number of taxpayers who would be able to claim it. Senator Powers described the bill as a \"feel-good\" measure with narrow immediate impact but said proponents want a distinct option for homeschoolers that would not tie them to other school-choice programs.

Committee members also noted legal constraints. Chair Weber said legislative counsel advised that making the credit refundable could run afoul of the state's gifting restrictions; members indicated they were unwilling to pursue litigation to test that interpretation for a narrowly scoped benefit.

The committee recommended \"do not pass\"; members asked for no further committee action on this item and for carriers to decide whether to pursue the measure elsewhere.","The Senate Finance and Tax Committee voted 5–1 to recommend 'do not pass' on House Bill 12 44, which would have created a nonrefundable income tax credit for home-schooling expenses.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6322280,"Senate Finance and Tax Committee rejects two bills that would expand \"residential\" property classification",1146,435000,1581000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2348164-5c3e2a658ed8d98ba817e78b03cd08aa&start=435&end=1581","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2348164-5c3e2a658ed8d98ba817e78b03cd08aa/thumbnail_435000.jpg","/articles/6322280/North-Dakota/Senate-Finance-and-Tax-Committee-rejects-two-bills-that-would-expand-residential-property-classification","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6322280-fc6eee611130acefd474e099f381729b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771191773&Signature=FoTWyO0DivBtLCmExsYCmf8Fmq8b~dksXxaobNEI8E1zE9MvFLs9G2-DWJ~baCY55n7QxC6QofS3nxcbnlAaiA~yF7nTs7rKDMpUHFAGQZXhARIFYcWl3a0Hr8BCcowJ9hwgLDiBXWpJrBmoLpoVf2VRTMAGjOZG~1UoCTCqVtkycx0PIeLHIsOroFDTY6wMuB-rg1bQBI6hfDJXTj1Za~1JEJhgWO-VvcjYfTtghPlThHeRwsV9M-1TDh~J4D4X3~Hg0f1A3w~MDLMxBog3zCSCtnaOrQeLerGG5qzY3Ei6I8m1b-oASLOKcjwmK3BOhYEaqyZmoKXW0D~LaWV~XA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Finance and Tax Committee voted to recommend \"do not pass\" on House Bill 1152 and House Bill 1232, measures that sought to expand what the tax code counts as residential property. The committee action took place during a committee meeting of the Senate Finance and Tax Committee (date not specified).

The bills sought different changes to the Century Code residential classification. House Bill 12 32 (Representative Grenich) would expand the residential category to include certain undeveloped platted lots and small multi-unit mobile-home groupings, while House Bill 11 52 (Representative Porter) would treat accessory buildings such as a garage built before a home as residential for tax-classification purposes.

Why it matters: the bills would not change a property's underlying true-and-full value but would change the tax classification and therefore the factor applied to calculate taxable value. Linda Swihovic of the North Dakota Association of Counties told the committee that the change would likely reduce the taxable factor (for example, from 5% to about 4.5% in one illustration) and could lower a sample tax bill by roughly $50 on a $50,000 property.

Committee testimony explained the legal background. Bill Wilkin of the North Dakota League of Cities summarized the relevant Century Code language and said commercial property is a \"catchall\" category for anything not in agricultural, residential, railroad or centrally assessed classes. \"Commercial property means all property not included in the classes of property you find in sections 1, 4, 11 and 12,\" Wilkin said, and he explained that the two bills amend different parts of the same statutory definition.

Linda Swihovic said House Bill 12 32 \"would allow us to class vacant residential subdivisions as residential before they're developed,\" which she said inserts some subjectivity into current practice. She added that tax directors generally assess property with an eye to likely residential use when a lot is in a residential area but that the bills would formalize classifications in statute.

Senators asked how much tax revenue would change. Swihovic ran a quick example for a $50,000 property in Bismarck and said the annual difference would be about $4.68 versus $5.12 — roughly $50 a year at current levy rates. Committee members also discussed how zoning and property-tax classification differ: zoning establishes intended use set by a local political subdivision, while tax classification follows defined statutory rules in the Century Code.

After discussion, Senator Wallen moved a \"do not pass\" on House Bill 11 52; Senator Powers seconded. The committee roll call recorded the following votes: Chairman Weber — yes; Vice Chair Rommel — yes; Senator Marsali — yes; Senator Patton — yes; Senator Powers — yes; Senator Wallen — yes. The motion carried and the committee recorded a \"do not pass\" recommendation for HB 11 52.

Senator Wallen then moved a \"do not pass\" on House Bill 12 32; Senator Rummel seconded. The clerk recorded: Chairman Weber — yes; Vice Chair Rommel/Raul — yes; Senator Marsali — yes; Senator Patton — yes; Senator Powers — yes; Senator Wong — yes. The committee likewise issued a \"do not pass\" recommendation on HB 12 32.

The committee heard county and assessor perspectives that the change would introduce some subjectivity into classification decisions but would not typically change assessed value calculations. Members asked county tax directors to be available if further detail or consistent statewide guidance is needed.

The committee concluded both bills would not advance with the panel's recommendation and asked that the sponsors or carriers pick them up if they choose to pursue them further in the Legislature.","The Senate Finance and Tax Committee voted to give 'do not pass' recommendations to House Bills 1152 and 1232, which would have changed how some vacant lots and accessory buildings are classified for property tax purposes.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee agrees to gather more information on tribal taxation language in House Bill 15 63

Panel approves amended House bill to lower communication service fee to 2.5%

Senate panel rejects proposed homeschool income tax credit after brief debate

Senate Finance and Tax Committee rejects two bills that would expand "residential" property classification