Introduced
by
To increase the earmark of state use tax revenue authorized by a <a href=" http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billanalysis/Senate/pdf/2011-SFA-1065-N.pdf">2012 legislative package</a> enacted to distribute some revenue from this tax to local governments, as a replacement for revenue they lose due to reductions in the "personal property tax" imposed on business tools and equipment. The bill is part of a package comprised of Senate Bills 821 to 830, which essentially replace all of the foregone local government revenue from that 2012 personal property tax cut measure, instead of replacing most of it. For any of this to happen voters must approve related changes to the state “use tax” in an August, 2014 ballot initiative; this legislative package was negotiated to forestall local government opposition to that measure.
Referred to the Committee on Finance
Reported without amendment
With the recommendation that the bill pass.
Passed in the Senate 36 to 2 (details)
Referred to the Committee on Tax Policy
Reported without amendment
With the recommendation that the substitute (H-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered
The substitute passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To delegate the task of writing the 100-word ballot language people will see at the polls to the state elections bureau and board of canvassers (as is done for most ballot initiatives), rather than crafting the language in the legislature.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Passed in the House 104 to 5 (details)
To increase the earmark of state use tax revenue authorized by a <a href=" http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billanalysis/Senate/pdf/2011-SFA-1065-N.pdf">2012 legislative package</a> enacted to distribute some revenue from this tax to local governments, as a replacement for revenue they lose due to reductions in the "personal property tax" imposed on business tools and equipment. The bill is part of a package comprised of Senate Bills 821 to 830, which essentially replace all of the foregone local government revenue from that 2012 personal property tax cut measure, instead of replacing most of it. For any of this to happen voters must approve related changes to the state “use tax” in an August, 2014 ballot initiative; this legislative package was negotiated to forestall local government opposition to that measure.
Passed in the Senate 35 to 2 (details)
To concur with the House-passed version of the bill.
