Introduced by Sen. John J. H. Schwarz (R) on February 28, 2002, to permanently change to July for all taxpayers the payment date for the six-mill state school property tax. Approximately half of all property owners now pay half the tax in July and half in December; the other property owners either pay the entire bill in December only or in July only. To compensate for the accelerated expense incurred by approximately 75 percent of taxpayers, in 2003-only the tax rate would be reduced to five-mills. The House Fiscal Agency reports that the owner of house with a $75,000 taxable value will have a one-year savings of $75 in 2003 only. However, in all successive years those who now pay all or part of the tax in December will incur an ongoing opportunity cost for the time-value of money paid earlier each year. The change in date is part of a package of measures intended to close a deficit in the FY 2002-2003 school aid budget (see Senate Bill 1107). It is projected to accelerate $490 million in tax collections forward to FY 2002-2003, including the one-year, one-mill discount. This bill amends the state education tax act to accommodate the date change. See also Senate Bill 1165.
Referred to the Senate Finance Committee on February 28, 2002.
Substitute offered in the Senate on March 14, 2002, to replace the previous version of the bill with a version with one that reimburses local governments which do not now collect summer taxes $2 per parcel for the extra expense of having to collect summer taxes. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on March 14, 2002.
Passed 35 to 0 in the Senate on March 14, 2002, to permanently change to July for all taxpayers the payment date for the six-mill state school property tax. Approximately half of all property owners now pay half the tax in July and half in December; the other property owners either pay the entire bill in December only or in July only. To compensate for the accelerated expense which will be incurred by approximately 75 percent of taxpayers, in 2003-only the tax rate would be reduced to five-mills. The House Fiscal Agency reports that the owner of house with a $75,000 taxable value will have a one-year savings of $75. However, those who now pay all or part of the tax in December will incur an ongoing opportunity cost for the time-value of money paid earlier each year. Local governments which do not now collect summer taxes will receive $2 per parcel from the state for the extra expense of having to collect summer taxes, or may allow the state to collect the tax. The change in date is part of a package of measures intended to close a deficit in the FY 2002-2003 school aid budget (see Senate Bill 1107). It is projected to accelerate $490 million in tax collections forward to FY 2002-2003, including the one-year, one-mill discount. This bill amends the state education tax act to accommodate the date change. Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Received in the House on March 14, 2002, to permanently change to July for all taxpayers the payment date for the six-mill state school property tax. Approximately half of all property owners now pay half the tax in July and half in December; the other property owners either pay the entire bill in December only or in July only. To compensate for the accelerated expense which will be incurred by approximately 75 percent of taxpayers, in 2003-only the tax rate would be reduced to five-mills. The House Fiscal Agency reports that the owner of house with a $75,000 taxable value will have a one-year savings of $75. However, those who now pay all or part of the tax in December will incur an ongoing opportunity cost for the time-value of money paid earlier each year. Local governments which do not now collect summer taxes will receive $2 per parcel from the state for the extra expense of having to collect summer taxes, or may allow the state to collect the tax. The change in date is part of a package of measures intended to close a deficit in the FY 2002-2003 school aid budget (see Senate Bill 1107). It is projected to accelerate $490 million in tax collections forward to FY 2002-2003, including the one-year, one-mill discount. This bill amends the state education tax act to accommodate the date change.
Amendment offered by Rep. Tom Meyer (R) on March 21, 2002, to increase the reimbursement to local governments which do not now collect summer taxes from $2 to $2.50 per parcel, to compensate for the extra expense of having to collect summer taxes. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on March 21, 2002.
Amendment offered by Rep. Nancy Cassis (R) on March 21, 2002, to require that counties which have chosen to collect the state school tax appropriate sufficient funds to do so. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on March 21, 2002.
Amendment offered by Rep. Randy Richardville (R) on March 21, 2002, to allow local governments that have chosen to let the state collect the school property tax change their mind later, and collect it themselves. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on March 21, 2002.
Amendment offered by Rep. Steve Vear (R) on March 21, 2002, to increase the reimbursement to local counties to an amount suffficient to cover the actual cost of collecting the state school taxes. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on March 21, 2002.
Amendment offered by Rep. Steve Vear (R) on March 21, 2002, to increase the reimbursement to local governments which do not now collect summer taxes from $2 to $3 per parcel, to compensate for the extra expense of having to collect summer taxes. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on March 21, 2002.
Amendment offered by Rep. Steve Vear (R) on March 21, 2002, to exempt agricultural land from the earlier tax collection date. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on March 21, 2002.
Amendment offered by Rep. Bruce Patterson (R) on March 21, 2002, to reduce by 50-percent the one-time, one-mill tax cut included in the plan to compensate for the accelerated expense which will be incurred by approximately 75 percent of taxpayers. The school tax would be 5.5 mills, not 5 mills in 2003. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on March 21, 2002.
Amendment offered by Rep. Alexander Lipsey (D) on March 21, 2002, to make provision for the collection by a city of delinquent property taxes. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on March 21, 2002.
Passed 92 to 11 in the House on March 21, 2002, to permanently change to July for all taxpayers the payment date for the six-mill state school property tax. Approximately half of all property owners now pay half the tax in July and half in December; the other property owners either pay the entire bill in December only or in July only. To compensate for the accelerated expense which will be incurred by approximately 75 percent of taxpayers, in 2003-only the tax rate would be reduced to five-mills. The House Fiscal Agency reports that the owner of house with a $75,000 taxable value will have a one-year savings of $75. However, those who now pay all or part of the tax in December will incur an ongoing opportunity cost for the time-value of money paid earlier each year. Local governments which do not now collect summer taxes will receive $2.50 per parcel from the state for the extra expense of having to collect summer taxes, or may allow the state to collect the tax. The change in date is part of a package of measures intended to close a deficit in the FY 2002-2003 school aid budget (see Senate Bill 1107). It is projected to accelerate $490 million in tax collections forward to FY 2002-2003, including the one-year, one-mill discount. This bill amends the state education tax act to accommodate the date change. Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Received in the Senate on March 21, 2002, to permanently change to July for all taxpayers the payment date for the six-mill state school property tax. Approximately half of all property owners now pay half the tax in July and half in December; the other property owners either pay the entire bill in December only or in July only. To compensate for the accelerated expense which will be incurred by approximately 75 percent of taxpayers, in 2003-only the tax rate would be reduced to five-mills. The House Fiscal Agency reports that the owner of house with a $75,000 taxable value will have a one-year savings of $75. However, those who now pay all or part of the tax in December will incur an ongoing opportunity cost for the time-value of money paid earlier each year. Local governments which do not now collect summer taxes will receive $2.50 per parcel from the state for the extra expense of having to collect summer taxes, or may allow the state to collect the tax. The change in date is part of a package of measures intended to close a deficit in the FY 2002-2003 school aid budget (see Senate Bill 1107). It is projected to accelerate $490 million in tax collections forward to FY 2002-2003, including the one-year, one-mill discount. This bill amends the state education tax act to accommodate the date change.
1) Rep. Woodward's "no vote explanation" by Admin002 on March 28, 2002 "Mr. Speaker and members of the House:
I voted no on Senate Bills 1165 and 1166 because they are a short-sighted attempt to balance the state's budget on our future. This kind of economics is not good for an individual, and it is not good for Michigan. I have always supported the highest funding for our public schools possible, but this is a short-time fix that is going to result in a long-term shortage in the School Aid Fund. There are other ways to fulfill the upcoming Education's budget than balancing it on the backs of students in the future. I strongly believe in increasing the minimum foundation per pupil allowance to $6,700, and there are many other alternatives we could have employed to make this happen. Poor management of our state dollars has helped create this problem, a long-term strategy needs to be implemented to fully fund our state priorities- namely education. Worst yet, is that working families and seniors that live in Royal Oak, Madison Heights, and Hazel Park on limited and fixed incomes are going to pay more taxes in a shorter amount of time. When many people I represent are living month-to-month and struggling to make current ends meet, this bill speeds up the time that you have to pay their school taxes. This has the initial effect of a tax increase on those who are least able to afford it. What are those who are struggling to afford food, prescription drugs, and other needs going to have to give up in order to pay their taxes six months early?In the end, this bill eliminates $250 million in future School Aid Funding, and creates a potential $500 million deficit in the 2003-04 school budget. The people of Michigan deserve more than a temporary quick fix for a long-term problem." Reply
2) No Vote Explanation by Admin002 on March 28, 2002 Reps. Waters and Dennis made the following statement:
"Mr. Speaker and members of the House:
I voted no on Senate Bills 1165 and 1166 because I believe it is a temporary solution to a long-term problem. Although this bill provides an ingenious fix to raise K-12 education foundation grants to $6700 per pupil, it mortgages our future to pay for today's budget crisis. In fiscal year 2003-04, this change will create a deficit in the School Aid budget of almost $500 million. In addition, by cutting the State Education Tax rate from 6 mills to 5, this bill eliminates over $250 million in School Aid funding. This is Enron style fiscal irresponsibility, particularly in today's tenuous economic situation. Rather than continuing to rely on short-term fixes, Michigan needs to correct its structural budget flaws so that we can fully fund priorities such as education." Reply
3) No Vote Explanation by Admin002 on March 28, 2002 Reps. Reeves, Hardman, Garza, Clark, Bogardus and Dennis made the following statement:
"Mr. Speaker and members of the House:
I voted no on Senate Bills 1165 and 1166 because I believe it is a temporary solution to a long-term problem. Although this bill provides a creative fix to raise K-12 education foundation grants to $6700 per pupil, it mortgages our future to pay for today's budget crisis. In fiscal year 2003-04, this change will create a deficit in the School Aid budget of almost $500 million. In addition, by cutting the State Education Tax rate from 6 mills to 5, this bill eliminates over $250 million in School Aid funding. This is Enron style fiscal irresponsibility, particularly in today's tenuous economic situation. Rather than continuing to rely on short-term fixes, Michigan needs to correct its structural budget flaws so that we can fully fund priorities such as education." Reply