Comments on this legislation    Post new comment    Text and Analysis    Add to Watch List 
  Previous   Next 

• Introduced by Rep. Richard LeBlanc (D) on January 27, 2009, to repeal the 21.99 percent Michigan Business Tax surcharge imposed on businesses as part of a $1.4 billion tax hike passed in 2007, and repeal certain tax credits against the surcharge authorized subsequent to it which benefit particular interests. Note: This provision was stripped out when the bill became a "vehicle" for auto supplier subsidies.
  • Referred to the House Tax Policy Committee on January 27, 2009.
    • Reported in the House on March 25, 2009, a version of the bill that removes the MBT tax cut for all firms, and instead gives $250 million in tax breaks/subsidies to auto industry supplyers selected by state officials.
  • Substitute offered in the House on March 26, 2009, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that uses this as a legislative "vehicle" for up to $250 million in subsidies to auto industry suppliers. This version was subsequently superseded by another substitute revising details of the subsidies. The substitute failed by voice vote in the House on March 26, 2009.
  • Substitute offered by Rep. Richard LeBlanc (D) on March 26, 2009, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that uses this as a legislative "vehicle" for up to $250 million in subsidies to auto industry suppliers. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on March 26, 2009.
  • Amendment offered by Rep. Richard LeBlanc (D) on March 26, 2009, to tie-bar the bill to House Bills 4716 to 4720, meaning this bill cannot become law unless that one does also. Those bills contain additional details of the proposed subsidies. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on March 26, 2009.
• Passed 106 to 3 in the House on March 26, 2009, to authorize up to $250 million in Michigan Business Tax credits for auto manufacturing suppliers that enter job retention agreements with the state. Several future years worth of credits could be claimed all at once by a company, meaning that the state would be writing checks to them. The bill authorizes "clawbacks" if the firms don't meet the job retention goals, but if a firm went bankrupt then presumably the state would be in line with other creditors for a piece of whatever assets remain.
  Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
• Received in the Senate on March 31, 2009.
  • Referred to the Senate Finance Committee on March 31, 2009.