|
|
PUBLIC
HEARING: HB 2023, HB 2185, BILL
INTRODUCTION: LC 1708, LC 2243 TAPE
21-22, A |
JANUARY 29,
2003 8:30 AM STATE CAPITOL BUILDING
Members Present: Representative Lane Shetterly, Chair
Representative
Wayne Scott, Vice Chair
Representative
Joanne Verger, Vice Chair
Representative
Phil Barnhart
Representative
Vicki Berger
Representative
Pat Farr
Representative
Mark Hass
Representative
Elaine Hopson
Representative
Max Williams
Invited Testimony: Debra Buchanan, Department of
Revenue
Witness Present: Tom Linhares, Columbia County
Assessor,
representing The Oregon State Association of County
Assessors.
J.L.
Wilson, NFIB
Gil
Riddell, Association of Oregon Counties
John
Phillips, Department of Revenue
Staff Present: Paul
Warner, Legislative Revenue Officer
Lizbeth
Martin-Mahar
Kathy
Tooley, Committee Assistant
TAPE 21, SIDE A
|
004 |
Chair Shetterly |
Calls meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. |
|
023 |
Lizbeth Mahar |
Presented and summarized “Measure 28
Unofficial Vote Count” preliminary statewide county results. (Exhibit 1, Page
1) Questions and discussion
interspersed. |
|
083 98 110 |
Martin-Mahar Martin-Mahar Martin-Mahar |
Presented a fiscal survey of 24
states and their actions, “NASBO (National Association of State Budget
Offices) Fiscal Survey of States: November 2002”, Exhibit 2, Discussed Table 7 “Enacted Fiscal
2003 Revenue Actions by Type of Revenue and Net Increase or Decrease”, (Page
2, Exhibit 2); Discussed Table A-11, “Enacted
Revenue Changes by Type of Revenue Fiscal 2003”, (Pages 3-8, Exhibit 2). Both reports are useful as a tool for
different ways to look at budget shortfalls. Questions and discussion
interspersed. |
|
205 |
Debra Buchanan |
Discussed “Important Notice About
the State Employee Withholding Tax Tables”, Exhibit 3. This notice went to
employers last week in the event Measure 28 passed or failed. New tables will be going out reflecting
the phase in of Measure 88, employers should have and be ready to implement new
tables with March 1, 2003 payrolls. |
PUBLIC HEARING ON HB 2023
|
250 |
Chair Shetterly |
Opened hearing on HB 2023. |
|
264 |
Martin-Mahar |
Provided a description of HB 2023
and discussed its background. Discussed
the (-1) amendment (Exhibit 4), including revenue impact and staff measure
summary (Exhibit 5). The (-1)
amendment allows the county board of property tax appeals to waive the
penalty that is associated with a failure to file, or late filing late of
personal property taxes if the taxpayer can show that this was the first year
the taxpayer had not filed taxes in a timely manner. Applies to appeals after the effective
date of this act. Minimum negative
impact on local property tax revenues and no fiscal impact. |
|
330 359 |
Tom Linhares Chair Shetterly |
Gave testimony in favor of HB 2023. The
bill is meant to streamline the property tax system and make it easier for
owners and assessors to administrate the tax system. Asked Linhares how he felt about the
-1 amendments? |
|
365 |
Linhares |
Would have no problem with it,
pointed out that a new business owner should know that business licenses and
building permits, personal property returned to the county assessor, but some
are not aware. The business owner
would still have to file appeal with the Board of Property Tax Appeals to
waive the penalty, but the bill adds additional criteria for the board when
making its determination. |
|
380 |
Chair Shetterly |
Does it have anything to do with
canceling the tax liability? |
|
381 |
Linhares |
No, assuming the filer had $12,500
in personal property. |
|
390 |
Rep. Barnhart |
This would require a waiver for a
taxpayer who had filed returns in a timely fashion over a period of time and
then missed one, in addition for first time taxpayers that had never filed a
return before. Is that correct? |
|
399 |
Linhares |
Cited law for waiving a late filing
penalty requires showing “good and sufficient cause” and Revenue Department
Administrative Rules define “good and sufficient cause.” |
|
420 |
Rep. Barnhart |
Applies only to a first time return? |
|
422 |
Linhares |
Did not know. |
|
427 |
Rep. Barnhart |
Should a person who has been filing
returns and then misses filing, without good cause, be allowed a waiver? |
|
431 |
Linhares |
Current taxpayers are held to “good
and sufficient cause” standard under current law, and the penalty would not
be waived. |
TAPE 22, SIDE A
|
000 |
J.L. Wilson |
Spoke in favor of HB 2023. The intention of this bill is to alleviate
the penalties for first-time filers who may not be aware of their obligation
to keep inventory of personal property and pay taxes on it. The waiver is important now because of the
large amount of start up businesses expected during a recession. |
|
031 |
Chair Shetterly |
Requested staff work with LC to
change the language to “shall waive liability for the penalty on a showing
that the year for which the return was due was the first year for which a
return was due and was not timely”.
The current bill indicates that the penalty applies if this is the
first time taxes have not been filed on time. Your intent is that this should be for first time filers? |
|
043 |
Wilson |
Agreed with revised language from
the Chair. |
|
050 |
Gil Riddell |
Expressed concern, because he has
not seen data on the affect of this bill.
Urged Committee to keep in mind that business owners must keep
inventory for state and federal income tax purposes. Pointed out that some new business owners
would not understand that they have property tax liability on personal
property. Asked the Committee to consider alternative language rather than
“shall waive”, suggests directing the Board of Property Tax Appeals to
exercise their discretion to give particular consideration to mistakes of
first time filers. |
|
060 |
Chair Shetterly |
Suggested bill needed further
discussion to avoid automatically waiving the penalty for those who miss
filing for the first time. |
|
070 |
Rep. Williams |
Asked Gil Riddell if he would be the
person supplying the Committee with the information about possible impact. |
|
075 |
Riddell |
Replied that he could do a survey of
other County Assessors and find out, but that he was not familiar with the
new language. |
|
079 |
Rep. Williams |
“I think that data would have to
come from you, because we would not have it short of you surveying your
counties and in providing it.” |
|
080 |
Chair Shetterly |
Directed staff to work with J.L
Wilson and the Counties on language and concept on HB 2023. |
|
086 |
John Phillips |
Asked the Committee to consider a
possible scenario of a first time filer, who missed the first five years of
filing, when the return is filed, it could include the four missing
years. Should there be a late filing
penalty on the first year missed or is there culpability with five years in a
row? |
|
109 |
Chair Shetterly |
Closed the public hearing on HB 2023 |
PUBLIC HEARING ON HB 2185
|
108 |
Martin-Mahar |
Provided a description of HB 2185
and discussed its background. Provided fiscal and revenue impact statements,
(Exhibit 8), and staff summary (Exhibit 9). |
|
150 |
Chair Shetterly |
Inquired if there was an error in
the staff summary in the section entitled “What the bill does” estimates a
date, should it be “establishes?” |
|
153 |
Martin-Mahar |
Affirmed that there was. |
|
153 |
Buchanan |
Provided a problem/solution
statement from the Revenue Department “House Revenue Committee HB 2185
Summary”. |
|
164 |
Chair Shetterly |
Was this something in advertently
overlooked in 1999 changes? |
|
168 |
Buchanan |
Replied affirmatively. The provision
in 1999 was retroactive, there was a special time period for filing the
refund claim which overrode the general rule establishing a three year time
period, the result is a person could, in 10-20 years, file a refund claim. |
|
170 |
Chair Shetterly |
Clarified, residents are currently
limited to three years, this bill makes the time limitation also applicable
to foreign non-residents. |
|
174 |
Rep. Barnhart |
Asked if the Revenue Department
would like to close its books on whole years? |
|
175 |
Buchanan |
Yes. |
|
172 |
Chair Shetterly |
Closed public hearing on HB 2185. |
OPENED WORK SESSION ON HB 2185
|
106 |
Rep. Williams |
MOTION: MOVED HB 2185 TO THE HOUSE
FLOOR WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION. |
|
188 200 |
Chair Shetterly |
ROLL CALL VOTE: MOTION PASSED
9-0-0. REPRESENTATIVES VOTING
AYE: Barnhart, Berger, Farr, Hass,
Hopson, Scott, Verger, Williams, Chair Shetterly. Rep. Farr will carry the bill. Closed the work session on HB 2185. |
|
207 214 |
Chair Shetterly Chair Shetterly Chair Shetterly |
Directed Members’ attention to LC 1708
requested by the Association of Oregon Community Development Organizations,
and LC 2243 requested by Chair Shetterly for Committee Bill introduction. MOTION: MOVES INTRODUCTION OF
LC 1708 (Exhibit 11) AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSOCIATION OF OREGON COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS, AND THE INTRODUCTION OF LC 2243 AS A COMMITTEE
BILL (Exhibit 12). ORDER: THERE BEING NO
OBJECTION, THE CHAIR SO ORDERS. Members present: Representatives
Barnhart, Berger, Farr, Hass, Hopson, Scott, Verger, Williams, Chair
Shetterly. |
|
236 |
Chair Shetterly |
Meeting adjourned at 9:15 a.m. |
Tape Log Submitted by,
Kathy Tooley, Committee Assistant Reviewed
by Kim Taylor James
Exhibit Summary:
1.
Martin-Mahar, “Measure 28 Unofficial
Vote Count”, 1 page.
2.
Martin-Mahar, “NASBO Fiscal Survey of
Sates: November 2002, Fiscal 2003
Revenue Actions by Type of Revenue”, 8 pages.
3.
Buchanan, “Important Notice About the
State Employer Withholding Tax Tables”, 1 page.
4.
Martin-Mahar, HB 2023-1, 2 pages.
5.
Martin-Mahar, “Revenue Impact of
Proposed Legislation”, HB 2023, 1 page.
6.
Martin-Mahar, “Staff Measure Summary”,
HB 2023”, 1 page.
7.
Wilson, Testimony, “HB 2023”, 1 page
8.
Martin-Mahar, “Staff Measure Summary,
HB 2185”, 1 page.
9.
Martin-Mahar, “Revenue Impact of
Proposed Legislation”, HB 2185, 1 page.
10. Buchanan, “House Revenue Committee HB 2185 Summary”, 1 page.
11. Chair Shetterly, LC 1708, 1 page.
12. Chair Shetterly, LC 2243, 1 page.