Tag Archives: house

Short Session Starts With a Flurry of Activity

Posted on by
Reply

The Governor and General Assembly have continually heard from Hoosier employers on the need for a skilled workforce – and better aligning state programs with job demand. The good news is bills are being introduced to address those concerns. While only a handful of measures have been released to date, we are seeing legislation related to training tax credits and grants, as well as efforts to streamline current workforce programs. We anticipate a comprehensive workforce bill (1002) will be introduced in the House later next week.

The Governor’s computer science bill (SB 172) requires all public schools to offer a one-semester elective computer science course at least once each school year to high school students. We expect a hearing on this measure in the next two weeks. Both this and the workforce efforts are 2018 Indiana Chamber legislative priorities.

Senate Bill 257 has been introduced by Sen. Travis Holdman (R-Markle) to serve as the beginning of discussions on clarifying the exempt status of computer software sold as a service (SaaS) – a Chamber priority. Holdman is also authoring another major piece of tax legislation, SB 242, which contains a variety of tax matters. The House bills are coming in too, with a good number already filed addressing local tax issues.

Speaking of local matters, the Chamber is very pleased to see that the House Republican agenda includes a bill that will make township government more effective and efficient by the merging of townships (approximately 300) where less than 1,200 people reside. Such local government reform has been a longstanding Chamber goal.

In addition to SB 257, other technology-related bills include Rep. Ed Soliday’s (R-Valparaiso) autonomous vehicle (AV) proposal to position Indiana to safely test and implement AV technology with automobiles. The bill also will address truck platooning, which uses GPS and WiFi technology to allow trucks to more closely follow each other for greater efficiency, on Indiana roads.

Rural broadband, high-speed internet and small cell wireless structures technology all will be topics for the Legislature to debate. Certified technology parks also will be discussed with the idea to have an additional capture of sales and income tax revenue for those complexes that perform well.

In health care, enabling employers to ask prospective employees if they are smokers not only heads the Chamber’s wish list but also appears to be gaining traction this go-round. Eliminating the special protections (currently in state statute) for smokers is found in SB 23 and will be guided by Sen. Liz Brown (R-Fort Wayne). The bill has a pretty good chance of getting a hearing in the Senate – which would be a first. Previously, a measure was taken up in a joint hearing in the House.

Increasing the tobacco tax and raising the legal age for smokers to 21 are policies that likely will be included in a bill to be introduced by Rep. Charlie Brown (D-Gary). The Indiana Chamber is supportive of both.

Nine utility-related bills are on our radar screen at this point. They range from tweaks of last year’s big legislation (like SB 309, which addressed rising energy costs and a long-standing struggle between the investor-owned electric utilities and larger consumers of energy) to compulsory sewer connection, excavation for infrastructure, regulation of solar energy systems in homeowners’ associations and new water legislation. Separately, Sen. David Niezgodski (D-South Bend) has a proposed ban on coal tar pavement sealer, which we oppose.

There are also a number of bills proposing changes to Indiana’s alcohol laws including: Sunday sales, cold beer sales by grocery and convenience stores, and increases in fees and penalties.

The Chamber will be providing more details on all of these bills as the session progresses.

For anyone who wants a refresher about how legislation becomes law, the Chamber has a handy guide free of charge. It includes a diagram of the bill process, a glossary of often-used terms and a look at where bills commonly get tripped up.

Additionally, the Chamber will be providing updates and issuing pertinent documents throughout the session at www.indianachamber.com/legislative.

Tracking How a Bill Becomes Law

Posted on by
Reply

For anyone who wants to learn more about how legislation turns into law in the Hoosier state, the Indiana Chamber has a handy guide free of charge.

Among what’s included: a diagram of the bill process, a glossary of often-used terms and a look at where bills commonly get tripped up. We encourage you to download the 11-pager and follow along with what’s going on at the Indiana General Assembly.

The Indiana Chamber will be providing updates and issuing pertinent documents throughout the session at www.indianachamber.com/legislative.

 

Many Business Provisions Still Being Reconciled in Federal Tax Reform

Posted on by
Reply

We’re almost there. Tax reform has passed both the House and Senate. It now seems very possible that the President will have a bill to sign by Christmas. As some have described: All they need to do now is “sand the rough edges”. But another saying is equally applicable to the business tax components: “The devil is in the details”. Specifically, details directly relating to the taxation of both C-corporations and pass-through entities. Terms that will impact those who do business here and those who do business around the globe. In other words, details that will significantly affect big businesses, small businesses and everybody in between.

The process for reconciling the two versions of tax reform is already underway as the House and Senate name members to the conference committee that will determine exactly what will be in the package before it is voted on one last time. Indications are that majority leaders want to have a committee report for their respective bodies to act on by the end of next week. So while the details still have to be worked out, both bodies are very engaged and they’ve passed legislation that defines the general parameters.

There will continue to be debate, in public and in private, over the deficit, how much growth tax reform will generate, who benefits and who doesn’t, but the House and Senate are effectively committed to getting something done at this point. On the individual income tax side, they will need to find agreement regarding the limits on the deductibility of state and local taxes (SALT), as well as mortgage interest. These items are important to individuals, important to the numbers and important politically. But the two sides really aren’t that far apart. A $10,000 SALT deduction of some kind and a healthy mortgage interest deduction will almost certainly remain in the final product.

But where they land on many items critical to business is harder to predict; a lot is up in the air. Let’s start with the corporate rate itself. While both plans call for a 20% rate, the President hinted it could still change slightly. That appears unlikely, however, but the rate is tied closely to the fiscal projections. And the fiscal projections are why the Senate delayed the effective date for corporate rate change to 2019, to reduce the cost of the bill. So when exactly the change goes into effect is at issue.

Similarly, the taxation of pass-through income is also unsettled. The House limits the pass-through rate at 25%. The Senate approach was to give a deduction to pass-throughs to keep their tax down. Effectively, the different approaches would not have drastically different bottom line impacts for most pass-through income recipients. The real complications come via provisions directed at guarding against individuals in higher brackets from categorizing personal income as business/pass-through income.

What about the issues of interest to multinationals who conduct huge volumes of business activity around the globe? The House and Senate agree that the U.S. must move to a territorial system and companies shouldn’t be taxed here on income they earn overseas. But beyond that basic principle, how multinationals and their foreign-sourced income is handled is anything but clear right now. Both the House and Senate have included forms of supplemental taxes intended to prevent their perception of “base erosion” and to discourage what they view as corporations “gaming the system”.

Likewise, they are still working through how best to address the repatriation of foreign-earned profits and are looking at special, one-time tax provisions to encourage companies to bring those assets back to the U.S.  Another item important to many businesses of all types and sizes is how quickly, to what extent and for how long will they be able to claim deductions for capital expenditures/investments. Two final differences to note: (1) The Senate preserves the corporate alternative minimum tax; the House repeals it; (2) the House and Senate versions both limit the interest expense deduction, but in materially different ways. (A good summary of all the differences can be found in this report from the Tax Foundation.)

Of course, there are many, many other pending issues wrapped up in this legislation for the tax folks in Washington to resolve in short order. They include the health care mandate, estate tax, exemptions for educational institutions and nonprofits, and the list goes on. Tax reform appears close. Let’s hope good solutions are close too.

House Off to Fast Tech Start

Posted on by
Reply

A brief update on some tech/innovation legislation at the federal level, courtesy of the Chamber Technology Engagement Center.

Women will play an important role in the 21st century workforce. Congress recognized that this week when it passed the INSPIRE Women Act (H.R. 321) to recruit women into STEM fields and encourage their research and work in technology.

With the HALOS Act (H.R. 79), the House removed an important burden to allow for angel investors to support start-ups – a huge growth sector in our economy.

Thanks to the Modernizing Government Travel Act (H.R. 274), government employees will soon be able to travel smarter and more cost effectively, saving taxpayer money thanks to a bill modernizing work travel.

Lastly, with the Support for Rapid Innovation Act of 2017 (H.R. 239), the Department of Homeland Security is now a few steps closer to being able to utilize the best and brightest within agencies and industries to help combat the ever-growing cyber security threats to both government and business.

Business Movement Grows to Support Transportation Infrastructure

Posted on by
Reply

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce sent a letter to Congress on January 23 encouraging it to support investment in the nation’s surface transportation infrastructure. The letter had around 1,000 signatories from the business community, as most feel enhanced transportation infrastructure (better bridges, public transportation, etc.) will make America a better place to do business. Congress has until March 31 to reauthorize the current funding law: 

TO THE MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE AND SENATE:

As Congress embarks on a new legislative session, we, the undersigned companies and organizations, urge you to Make Transportation Job #1 in 2012 and pass federal highway, transit and safety legislation before the current law expires on March 31. The long-delayed reauthorization of federal highway and public transportation programs is a major piece of unfinished business that can provide a meaningful boost to the U.S. economy and its workers and already has broad-based support.

To grow, the United States must invest. There are few federal efforts that rival the potential of critical transportation infrastructure investments for sustaining and creating jobs and economic activity over the short term.

Maintaining at 2011 levels—and ideally increasing—federal funding for road, bridge, public transportation and safety investments can sustain and create jobs and economic activity in the short-term, and improve America’s export and travel infrastructure, offer new economic growth opportunities, and make the nation more competitive over the long-term. Program reform would make the dollars stretch even further: reducing the time it takes transportation projects to get from start to finish, encouraging public-private partnerships and use of private capital, increasing accountability for using federal funds to address the highest priority needs, and spurring innovation and technology deployment.

We recognize there are challenges in finding the resources necessary to adequately fund such a measure. However, with the economic opportunities that a well-crafted measure could afford and emerging political consensus for advancing such an effort, we believe it is time for all involved parties to come together and craft a final product.

In 2011, political leaders—Republican and Democrat, House, Senate and the Administration — stated a multi-year surface transportation bill is important for job creation and economic recovery. We urge you to follow words with action: Make Transportation Job #1 and move legislation immediately in the House and Senate to invest in the roads, bridges, transit systems that are the backbone of the U.S. economy, its businesses large and small, and communities of all sizes.

 

Oh, Congress: They Really Just Can’t Agree on Much of Anything

Posted on by
Reply

While some might say the lack of activity in Congress in 2011 is a good thing (the no action, no harm mentality), the numbers certainly back up the feeling that Congress has been largely missing in action when it comes to proactively enacting laws to better our country.

No political fights here about who is to blame. Just some statistics from The Washington Post that demonstrate the depth of what has not taken place.

Through Nov. 30, the House had passed 326 bills, the fewest in at least 10 non-election years, according to annual tallies in the Congressional Record. The Senate had approved 368 measures, the fewest since 1995.

By comparison, the House approved 970 bills in 2009 and 1,127 in 2007. The Senate totals for those years were 478 and 621, respectively. (Both chambers are expected to pass more bills before adjourning this month, but probably not enough to change the overall picture.)

And the White House need not fear an ink shortage — Obama had signed only 62 bills into law through November. The last time there was a new Republican majority in the House and a Democrat in the White House, 1995, President Bill Clinton signed 88 measures.

James Thurber, the director of American University’s Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies, called the overall numbers “Exhibit A in showing how dysfunctional the Congress has become.”

In particular, Thurber noted that Congress has spent significant time and political effort this year squabbling over a series of short-term spending bills and raising the debt ceiling.

“The failure of the appropriations process has limited their ability to do other things,” Thurber said.

As for bills becoming law, split control of Congress has obviously played a role in the relatively low number; the House and Senate have had difficulty agreeing on anything this year.

The last comparable dynamic came in 2001, when Republicans controlled the White House and the House and Democrats held the Senate after May, when Sen. James Jeffords (Vt.) left the GOP. President George W. Bush signed 136 bills into law that year. 

Who’s Representing You?

Posted on by
Reply

As a part of the decennial census and as required by law, the Indiana General Assembly recently passed new legislative district maps for Indiana’s state house, state senate and congressional districts. If you haven’t already seen the new maps you can do so at these links: House, Senate, Congress.

While the timeline to drawing these maps were very similar, when they are actually implemented is a whole other issue. The Terre Haute Tribune-Star brought to light this fact in a recent article.

So who are your current legislators? The Indiana House and Congress are following the standard model. For example, even if your home has been drawn into a new legislative district your current representation in the Indiana House and Congress would remain the same prior to the redistricting until after the 2012 Election when you have had a chance to vote on your new representative.

The Indiana Senate is different. Here, your state senator might change based on the new Indiana Senate district map with the decision to go ahead and implement those changes prior to the next election. The reason for this is because only half of the Indiana Senate is elected at any given election. The Senate believes that enacting those changes now will avoid confusion later.

Got it? If not, use the new Indiana Senate district map and compare it to the list of Indiana senators here to see who’s representing you.

Where Our Legislators Got Their Degrees

Posted on by
Reply

In terms of college education, do state legislators accurately represent their constituents? The Chronicle of Higher Education wanted to know the answer and researched the degrees – or lack thereof – of more than 7,000 lawmakers. An interactive map has a state-by-state breakdown.

According to the map, IU and Purdue’s main campuses account for 68 of our legislators’ degrees, and the vast majority were educated right here in the state. Although, five of our representatives sought higher education in California and just two were educated in New York (state). It also indicates 13% of our legislators did not attend college, while 35% gained advanced degrees.

See the map for yourself to find out how many legislators went to your alma mater.

 

Never Ending Campaign: Keep ‘Em in Office — Longer?

Posted on by
1

Legislative term limits have experienced a pendulum ride over the past two decades. Limiting lawmakers’ time in office was all the rage at one point before some of the states backed away from that initiative.

Florida falls in that latter category, wanting to extend the ability to serve from eight to 12 years. But it also is looking at a new angle — extending the terms themselves. In other words, state reps would be up for election every four years instead of two with senators in office for six years instead of four. Voters would have the final decision if the legislature passes the language.

One representative is quoted as saying that the continual campaigning is "not what I think legislators’ primary focus should be. It should be on legislation and good policy and moving the state forward."

Something worth considering. The seemingly non-stop "running for re-election" does often appear to do a disservice to key topics and issues.

Your thoughts?