[{"_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",6107040,"mediaKeyId","2779060-36fcf0303efe60eeb4a2745dc232c3c4","parentId",2779060,"title","Panel hears bill to raise cigarette tax by $1 per pack; supporters cite health benefits, retailers warn of smuggling and lost sales","audioSeconds",2466,"startMs",3359000,"endMs",5825000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2779060-36fcf0303efe60eeb4a2745dc232c3c4&start=3359&end=5825","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2779060-36fcf0303efe60eeb4a2745dc232c3c4/thumbnail_3359000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6107040/Montana/Panel-hears-bill-to-raise-cigarette-tax-by-1-per-pack-supporters-cite-health-benefits-retailers-warn-of-smuggling-and-lost-sales","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6107040-7aafd884e57a7985f4a3ae881f844981/orig.mp4?Expires=1771172192&Signature=kwFZfZPTCppOA~wp0B~Vu-ly6Gb1UAVMEcYZ0MZ6ONEteaJvO371ZgNwtdtdUKgXSVx~aCAb7eHmgBlu3A1Tt2yAK0WARGxw3WWAix4SV~1O9gVCMawzi1R56ZPACgVDQ9d0Tf~ZPZHIz2-r6VZs1-TcCLi830KKRbIPacqJ~1ZKBtSBK2tsNGEsTp0ABMFVsxy9FMO98NesCthooHsbDfaQdlMQvZENfGkkCh9OI3ZaPeQeGPGwNA~o~Xl7aVwTeDsZCH93UsU-3CgbbJE-BgXfieXfrJeeh64phylAiN4Vt-aWUbQ~4xEuCGK-2g~eRPFm1s3-t6nXnC2NecKyWw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Montana Legislature","date","2025-03-26T00:00:00Z","article","Representative Melody Cunningham opened the hearing on House Bill 826, proposing a $1 per-pack increase in the state cigarette tax — the first such increase in 21 years, she said. Cunningham cited public‑health and fiscal figures for support, including an estimate that smoking costs Montanans about $511 million per year in health-care-related costs and that Medicaid spends about $87.2 million annually on smoking-related care.

A wide range of health and youth advocates testified in favor. Students from Powell County testified that higher prices deter youth initiation; Jackie Semmens of the American Heart Association said tobacco taxes reduce use, help fund cessation services and lower health-care costs; Lauren Wilson, a pediatrician and past president of the Montana chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, cited research tying price increases to decreased smoking and lower rates among pregnant women. Amanda Cahill, with Montana Kids vs. Big Tobacco, noted the current allocation of cigarette-tax receipts: she said roughly 44 percent goes to health initiatives, 8.3 percent to veterans’ nursing homes and 2.6 percent to long-range planning.

The American Lung Association, the Montana Medical Association and the Alliance for Healthy Montana supported the increase, arguing the state tax has not kept pace with inflation and that a modest per-pack increase would strengthen prevention and cessation work.

Opponents — led by the Montana Retail Association, convenience-store operators and petroleum‑marketer groups — argued a dollar increase would make Montana’s tax rate well above neighboring states, encourage cross‑border purchases and smuggling, and hurt small, locally owned retailers. Brad Griffin of the Montana Retail Association and multiple store owners warned of lost secondary sales (fuel, snacks, drinks) and increased theft; convenience-store operators said cigarette revenue supports many small employers and employee hours.

Retail and petroleum-industry witnesses pointed to surrounding-state tax differentials (Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota) and noted Montana’s existing tax share on cigarettes already generates sizeable revenue. Several opponents also cited studies of smuggling and cross-border avoidance and argued the fiscal note was uncertain given potential declines in in‑state sales.

Department of Public Health and Human Services staff (informational witness Nicole Aune) and the Department of Revenue’s cigarette-tax administrator (Cindy Bacheberg) were available for technical questions on prevalence data, the quit line and how tax and stamp systems operate. Cunningham closed by saying she framed the bill on public‑health grounds and asked for committee consideration.

Why it matters: The proposed increase would change a long‑standing tax rate and has direct budget and public‑health implications; supporters emphasized reduced smoking and lower health costs, opponents warned of economic harm to retailers and cross‑border tax avoidance.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Taxation - Wednesday, Mar 26, 2025 08:55 - 11:48","oneSentenceSummary","Rep. Melody Cunningham asked the House Taxation Committee to approve a $1 per‑pack increase in Montana’s cigarette tax, citing health benefits and the tax’s long absence of adjustment.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature MT, Montana","taxId",77694,"location","Montana","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},6107045,"Committee hears paired proposals to reserve any statewide sales tax for education property-tax relief",1508,440000,1948000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2779060-36fcf0303efe60eeb4a2745dc232c3c4&start=440&end=1948","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2779060-36fcf0303efe60eeb4a2745dc232c3c4/thumbnail_440000.jpg","/articles/6107045/Montana/Committee-hears-paired-proposals-to-reserve-any-statewide-sales-tax-for-education-property-tax-relief","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6107045-64f74cf4e7a322a0501e640419d7770d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771172192&Signature=epcE54tQdS4Rbn~JyKT71Gfryg6ynyLmHtN-nevMrdfa4iqvQdEWEb~M6YcE~J8GBsPwFRSQFku9iuL4pooDI1R1PSqZGu7OMAsrUxHzPZX99CnUry3Mb1Y4i4pYMAlT5uMcVF4MPs8edF0wqCUcDktTx6UK7EZKfnyoTPurADScJb9wvDZyoiiagkm15av9Vgi4DgGHRpvMB6EQvL-uutREcStDpxxgEv8gAezO6KMrgYSAdBH5QBcv4NdhbwHQ15x4cf9~8tjZYmFcjBHQJW83knYW3Mh8OdIqCDhM5NObtePdQIwFUyCILWEW0GiVKIDhzUU39eeoA2BFLEVdpw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Brad Barker, sponsor of House Bills 841 and 842, told the House Taxation Committee that the proposals would constrain any future statewide sales tax so its revenue could be used only to reduce the property-tax mills that fund public education and the Montana University System.

\"This is not a sales tax. It's a further restriction on sales tax,\" Barker said, adding the constitutional amendment in HB 841 would require voter approval and the statutory measure in HB 842 would ask voters whether the Legislature should be authorized to consider a sales tax not to exceed 4 percent, with a set of exemptions for basic necessities.

Proponents told the committee the pairing is a way to give Montana voters a mechanism to reduce property taxes that largely fund education. Bob Story of the Montana Taxpayers Association said a sales-tax revenue stream collected in retail centers could be spread statewide through the state’s education funding system. Lance Melton of the Montana School Boards Association said a capped sales tax could be calibrated to replace specific levies — for example, he said roughly 1.5 percent could eliminate the state’s 95 mills under current estimates — and added that a statewide approach would ease administration and equalize funding.

Support also came from local-government and farm organizations. Prairie County Commissioner Todd Devlin and Ross Butcher (local government interests) testified in favor, and Nicole Rolfe of the Montana Farm Bureau Federation said farmers and ranchers support exploring broader-based revenue for education.

Opponents warned of regressivity and volatility. Rose Bender of the Montana Budget and Policy Center said replacing property tax with a retail sales tax would shift tax burdens onto lower- and middle-income households and make school funding dependent on a more cyclical revenue source. Amanda Curtis of the Montana Federation of Public Employees and Amanda Frickle of the Montana AFL‑CIO urged the committee not to put the substitution question to voters, arguing it creates a false dichotomy between funding schools and protecting taxpayers. Jasmine Krotkov of the Montana Farmers Union said voters will see any ballot question as a referendum on a sales tax and that rural households could be disproportionately affected.

The hotel and hospitality sector sought a technical fix. A representative of the Montana Lodging and Hospitality Association raised concerns that existing lodging and facility-use taxes could be swept into a new statewide restriction; Barker handed out an amendment to add the words \"general statewide\" to the constitutional language and said the change was intended to make the restriction apply only to a general statewide sales tax.

Barker told committee members HB 842 was intentionally written at a high level, using \"may\" to make it a voter survey of whether the Legislature should be empowered to consider a capped sales tax. He said exclusions in the bill (lines 14–20) are intended to exempt basic necessities and to avoid \"pyramidization\" (taxing business inputs). Department of Revenue tax-policy analyst Finn McMichael appeared as an informational witness and was available to answer technical questions.

During committee questioning, members probed how exemptions would treat new-home construction, online purchases, business inputs and appliances; Barker repeatedly said detailed definitions would be part of implementing legislation if voters approved a sales-tax authority. Representative Thane asked why the sponsor did not run both measures at once; Barker answered that ballot-law constraints limit combining constitutional and statutory issues and that the two bills are separate steps to send questions to voters.

The committee closed the hearings on HB 841 and HB 842 and moved on to the next agenda items. No committee votes on either bill were recorded in the transcript portion provided.

Why it matters: the pair of measures would change how Montana balances reliance on property tax for schools by creating a constitutionally protected route to use retail sales tax revenue solely for education property-tax relief. Supporters say it equalizes funding; opponents say it risks shifting tax burden to lower-income households and relying on a volatile revenue source.","Representative Brad Barker asked the House Taxation Committee to send two measures to voters that would restrict any future statewide sales tax so revenue could be used only to buy down property-tax mills that fund K‑12 schools and the Montana University System.",{"_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},6107030,"House Taxation Committee executive actions: HB836 passes narrowly; HB839 tabled; HB844 fails then is tabled",736,8356000,9092000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2779060-36fcf0303efe60eeb4a2745dc232c3c4&start=8356&end=9092","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2779060-36fcf0303efe60eeb4a2745dc232c3c4/thumbnail_8356000.jpg","/articles/6107030/Montana/House-Taxation-Committee-executive-actions-HB836-passes-narrowly-HB839-tabled-HB844-fails-then-is-tabled","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6107030-eb980caf66aa2a5169e952aa2434366e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771172192&Signature=D2D73N0X5ggWTQfdAxixDBfMh~kAqd9uOESA6GzCGRjKzzncY~elwUGNx0xBhVRRmMH4KS0AEggcmoN~zsMGmunRvy3AsJk29UMAu7jUn4jQYX8cDNyqgNRLSowWceNOE-bWpv6bAN~446AcesMwFw1X75olr4eOAkW7VnnXkPNwEMUFgszP13pMwMYqjs9Uh5DLm5~hKLEkWrgrpqxgZYx5tVjU5Sqz08Ll~hkk~MK-S8~0INE9AaTDVmpdv8o3mZLhwwiodjLa4f6ARYWUu44jNR-GlUWoDHjPj~yBUBep8Iqj-KKepDGszu524TJApqIOiwigHeB6VTdGddRcDA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Taxation Committee returned from recess for executive action and recorded formal committee outcomes on three bills.

House Bill 836 — motion to pass: Representative Thane moved that HB836 \"do pass.\" After discussion, committee members took a roll‑call vote. The committee report recorded an 11–10 vote in favor; the transcript shows the clerk announcing the final tally, \"11 to 10,\" and the chair declaring HB836 passed by the committee.

House Bill 839 — motion to table: Members voted to table HB839. The chair called a voice vote on the motion to table, and the clerk recorded 21 votes in favor and 0 opposed; the transcript records \"21 have voted aye. 0 voted no.\" The committee therefore tabled HB839.

House Bill 844 — two formal actions: Committee members considered HB844 and conducted at least two recorded actions. On an initial vote to pass, the committee recorded a 7–14 result (7 yes, 14 no), and the motion to pass failed. Committee members then voted on a motion to table HB844; the clerk announced the final tally as 20–1 in favor of tabling. The transcript records both outcomes and the chair announced the bill was tabled.

Why it matters: Committee executive actions determine which bills the full House will consider and whether bills are advanced, delayed or effectively set aside. The narrow margin on HB836 and the tabling of HB839 and HB844 show how contested tax policy proposals are being handled at the committee level.

Note on available record: The transcript includes roll-call announcements and proxy votes referenced during the executive session; the committee clerk’s announcements were used to compile the tallies below.","During executive session the committee recorded multiple formal outcomes: HB836 passed on an 11–10 vote; members tabled House Bill 839 by voice vote (21–0 recorded); House Bill 844 first failed a do‑pass motion (7–14) and was subsequently tabled by a 20–1 tally.",{"_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},6107035,"Committee hears bill to raise Social Security income thresholds for Montana tax subtraction; proponents call it targeted relief",645,5988000,6633000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2779060-36fcf0303efe60eeb4a2745dc232c3c4&start=5988&end=6633","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2779060-36fcf0303efe60eeb4a2745dc232c3c4/thumbnail_5988000.jpg","/articles/6107035/Montana/Committee-hears-bill-to-raise-Social-Security-income-thresholds-for-Montana-tax-subtraction-proponents-call-it-targeted-relief","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6107035-3dd55ee811b64db2c86199fd7d49b63f/orig.mp4?Expires=1771172192&Signature=LzEFH3HIgj78lvYKM2f1aL97~zbTjHDbitXEq0Dciw~xECyE-lw4DvJSQeVfqYBl~2LOL5LPCvH-REh5I5V~NmNNK2ef2eurfkHh7dCjp1mqkh6fYywgEP~LbqVuGAs7m~Mt0AK2x16k8gvrwZ8HMdj0PmKUQs68LF4AWXSEql-GJGK3DoF~3DufhXKlpXkvkLupmcY7XtA6RIRN67W1gV7-4FtgpgmXJiy6~yNAfnp5Xbl9lI4g~XNdvYluQhZTFOyNkyAYoyDlcq21nAZ-QOjctfBPuLhkM1k6jIra39~stp0oaknG2H~nJrvGiiBSpp2a3CkC8BweHcAuRHLnCQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Melody Cunningham opened House Bill 827 by saying she heard Social Security income tax concerns while campaigning and proposed a measured approach to reduce the tax burden on many retirees by changing Montana’s subtraction rules for Social Security and tier‑1 railroad benefits.

Cunningham said the bill amends Montana Code Annotated 15‑30‑120 to exclude a larger portion of Social Security from state taxable income by raising the adjusted‑income thresholds (she cited increases for various filing statuses, e.g., raising joint thresholds to $77,000). She described the change as a narrower alternative to proposals that would fully exempt Social Security income and noted the fiscal note will be a consideration.

Proponents included Margie McDonald of Big Sky 55 Plus, Brian Thompson of the Association of Montana Retired Public Employees and Tim Summers of AARP Montana. They described HB 827 as a \"Goldilocks\" approach that would give relief to many retirees without the much larger price tag of a full exemption; proponents said fully exempting Social Security could shift costs to other state programs and jeopardize services older Montanans rely on.

Rose Bender of the Montana Budget and Policy Center expressed soft opposition, noting concerns about cumulative revenue impacts from multiple tax-cut bills this session and the long‑term effects on state revenues.

Department of Revenue income-tax specialists Brian Olson and Aaron McNay appeared as informational witnesses. Committee members asked technical questions about how the federal calculation ties to the state and how the 50% and 85% inclusion thresholds work; Olson explained the bill would create a deviation from current federal‑linked treatment by changing the state thresholds that determine when 50 percent or 85 percent of Social Security becomes part of taxable income. Olson and McNay offered to provide example calculations for committee members.

Why it matters: Montana is one of a small number of states that tax Social Security income; raising the thresholds would reduce state tax on retirement income for many filers but carries a multi‑year fiscal impact noted in the bill’s fiscal analysis.","Rep. Melody Cunningham’s House Bill 827 would increase the adjusted-income thresholds that determine how much Social Security is included in Montana taxable income. Advocates for older Montanans said the bill balances fiscal responsibility with relief on fixed incomes; budget analysts warned of a significant fiscal note.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Panel hears bill to raise cigarette tax by $1 per pack; supporters cite health benefits, retailers warn of smuggling and lost sales

Committee hears paired proposals to reserve any statewide sales tax for education property-tax relief

House Taxation Committee executive actions: HB836 passes narrowly; HB839 tabled; HB844 fails then is tabled

Committee hears bill to raise Social Security income thresholds for Montana tax subtraction; proponents call it targeted relief