[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6277061,"mediaKeyId","2657802-25865996f2146e048f6c0f1694363f28","parentId",2657802,"title","Committee debates SB92 to tax oil & gas S‑corporations; tax manager and CPA present fiscal modeling as public commenters weigh in","audioSeconds",1369,"startMs",1375000,"endMs",5170,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2657802-25865996f2146e048f6c0f1694363f28&start=1375&end=5","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2657802-25865996f2146e048f6c0f1694363f28/thumbnail_1375000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6277061/Alaska/Committee-debates-SB92-to-tax-oil-gas-Scorporations-tax-manager-and-CPA-present-fiscal-modeling-as-public-commenters-weigh-in","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6277061-c5f0d8fad82a1a3adf08ab2144531e56/orig.mp4?Expires=1776567974&Signature=e2dmG5MNUQOwSibDg-EnH~O0Jha7SWOMVH56KSUgG~PG1teqReks0qC2TDaHXrYDavxcVYaAk7CDRx-Ng8uzrzRZmnM47yQaUNvkX2z2G1XvwJCrqTaqkRI0iJQcHyixZM41abOWI3ybT7gAUM0Sm9SzdZYDa0LLvrGMGkItPSVH2Wya2W8BZoL4xfioCCQWdlUK2ySv~jtPx6E0kwAw6wVyKwphcOB~kVVAHytvb7q46jpTm0wUriuTYEpAoqqe54dCPsS0jg31k4U-BKGpK3BifF~ojx640yTN-k8Ss8lEt9vqzgdcZq62tlUnc-0o4SjUDcO2sr3OShY3oPZvog__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Alaska Legislature","date","2025-03-14T00:00:00Z","article","Senate Bill 92, proposing a corporate income tax on oil and gas entities that file as S corporations, was the second major item at the Senate Resources Committee meeting on March 14. Committee staff presented definitions, statutory context and draft bracket proposals; invited CPA John Letourneau walked the committee through hypothetical calculations. Department of Revenue tax staff participated online to answer technical questions. Public testimony included both opposition from an Anchorage supplier and broad public support from callers urging the committee to close what they described as an unfair loophole.

What the bill would do: As presented, SB92 would apply a corporate tax schedule to qualifying oil and gas S corporations, separate from the existing C‑corporation structure. Under the draft shown in committee, S corporations that qualified as oil and gas producers would be taxed on taxable income above an initial exemption amount (the presentation used a $5,000,000 threshold in examples), with a top marginal rate illustrated at 9.4% above the top bracket.

Technical clarifications from staff: Intimail Harbison (staff to Senator Giesel) reviewed entity definitions (C corporation, S corporation, LLC) and quoted state sources showing approximately 11,700 S corporations and around 67,133 active LLCs registered in the state (Department of Community, Commerce, and Economic Development figures cited). Department of Revenue staff joined online; Michael Williams, corporate tax manager, confirmed that “the tax is net income. So it's income less expenses and the taxable income is on the net.”

Invited analysis: John Letourneau, a certified public accountant, presented a set of hypothetical calculations using $50 million in gross receipts and $40 million in deductions (net taxable income $10 million). His slides compared the illustrative total tax burden under current law for a C corporation and an S corporation and then recalculated after applying the draft S‑corp entity tax in SB92. Using the hypothetical, he estimated that an S‑corporation entity tax with a $5 million exemption would reduce the state tax liability to about $470,000 for the entity in the example, and he walked the committee through federal tax interactions (including discussion of section 199A benefits at the federal level). Letourneau noted the figures were illustrative and that deductions and federal rules can materially change outcomes.

Members’ concerns and questions: Senators pressed on the choice of bracket thresholds and whether the bill produces parity with the C‑corporation structure. Senator Myers asked about parity with C‑corp brackets; Senator Willikowski said matching brackets might be reasonable and could increase revenues modestly. Senator Hughes asked staff to follow up on whether oil‑and‑gas–specific deductions (intangible drilling costs and depletion) apply differently to S corporations; Letourneau said the analysis had assumed comparable deductions but acknowledged he had not fully modeled each industry‑specific tax item and agreed to follow up upon request.

Public testimony: The committee heard short two‑minute calls. Jerry Weber (president, Little Red Services, North Slope supplier) testified in opposition, saying SB92 “strongly threatens Alaska’s oil and gas industry and also local companies by substantially raising oil and gas taxes” and warning of higher energy costs and job loss for Alaska suppliers if taxes rise. Multiple callers urged passage: former Senator Hollis French, Bob Schaevelson (Homer), Maddie Halloran (Anchorage), Ben Betzger (Cook Inletkeeper media specialist), Sarah Fuhrman (Fairbanks), Natalie Kylie Bergen (Alaska Public Interest Research Group), and Georgia Hood (Fairbanks) all voiced support, calling the bill a fairness measure that could produce significant state revenue. Callers and presenters referenced polling (Data for Progress) and estimates of potential revenue (the committee cited a fiscal‑note estimate around $126.5 million in FY27, recognizing FY26 includes a partial year effect).

Requests and follow up: Committee members directed staff to gather additional data: breakdowns of S‑corporation and LLC registrations by in‑state versus out‑of‑state ownership, C‑corporation counts, and a more detailed analysis of how industry‑specific deductions affect parity between entity types. The chair said legislative research is working to confirm how other states tax S corporations and that Gaffney Klein was asked to model fiscal impacts. The committee left public testimony open for further written submissions and scheduled follow‑up modeling for a later hearing.

Ending: No committee vote was taken on SB92 during the March 14 meeting; the chair left public testimony open and asked staff and outside modelers for additional information before future action.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","03/14/2025 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES","oneSentenceSummary","Senate Bill 92, which would levy a corporate tax on oil and gas entities that file as S corporations, was discussed at length March 14; staff and an invited CPA presented hypothetical tax models, Department of Revenue staff clarified the tax would apply to net income after deductions, and a mix of industry and public callers provided opposing and supporting testimony.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature Alaska, Alaska","taxId",78559,"location","Alaska","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6277067,"Senate Resources Committee votes SB97 out 5-2 after rejecting amendment that would limit permit transfers",1499,296000,1795000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2657802-25865996f2146e048f6c0f1694363f28&start=296&end=1795","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2657802-25865996f2146e048f6c0f1694363f28/thumbnail_296000.jpg","/articles/6277067/Alaska/Senate-Resources-Committee-votes-SB97-out-5-2-after-rejecting-amendment-that-would-limit-permit-transfers","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6277067-2cae86ac5eff5ae9313cfd11f074b333/orig.mp4?Expires=1776567974&Signature=JwC5j0avjTfwc50jTiZh5v1Ujyu8G3UaO4QnLhA3BqQOAXor1fQijcN~ugqoN8cwmM9aDPaAwQPoe3zwLv1WWq0UX5dDCintgsjnbV8ejBKR7He~c-3x5gMiNfsfNmEWSTrWQkhMF6Lc77SRvMpQxGZycfAEhXfDriklbbyN5fw1LS3ftEUrWItrFEiU4MPjDxwuytArDsSSkBhyB1zURPviYHb9wp2UD6uYtu6K6zTjLkON2Jfyca1bAO~52sLIkCnDbDWTF73eiFHRWo36PqwiUiir0x16jBtsGPwwTMFcvBWV8nGkjCW71J0s77jAQOQXpkQL9yMNC2Tfcjb8NA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Resources Committee voted 5–2 on March 14 to report Senate Bill 97, a bill to establish the proposed big game commercial services permitting program, out of committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes.

Senators rejected a substantive amendment proposed by Senator Cindy Myers (A1) that would have removed permit-transfer language and instead required the Big Game Commercial Services Board to recommend to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) that a permit be pulled and a new permit process be opened immediately when a guide vacates a ten‑year permit. The amendment failed on a roll call following floor discussion about preserving open competition and avoiding effectively permanent permits: the vote on amendment A1 was 1 yea, 6 nays.

The committee then considered the underlying bill and, after procedural discussion and the withdrawal of several other proposed amendments by Myers, Senator Willikowski moved to report SB97 out of committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. The motion passed 5 yeas and 2 nays. The committee recorded that legislative legal staff may make technical and conforming changes to the bill language before transmittal.

Why it matters: supporters of Myers's amendment argued that ten‑year concession permits can become de facto lifetime allocations if the renewal or transfer process is perfunctory, and they sought to ensure public access by forcing an immediate open application process when a permit area becomes available. Opponents and the committee’s legal counsel cautioned that altering the bill’s text could complicate a pending court challenge to prior, related legislation and might defeat the committee’s aim of producing a clean bill that could moot the lawsuit.

What the amendment would have done: Senator Myers told the committee that amendment A1 would “remove the transfer portion” and instead require the Big Game Commercial Services Board to recommend to the DNR commissioner that a permit be pulled and, after public notice, a new permit process be opened right away. Myers said the change was aimed at preventing a small group of guides from privatizing access through informal transfers.

Legal counsel’s view: Sonia Kawasaki, Senate majority legal counsel, advised the body that if the committee’s purpose was to try to moot an ongoing lawsuit related to prior enactments (identified in committee as SB 189), the safest path is to keep the text substantially identical to the law that is being litigated. Kawasaki said: “I would recommend that if the body wishes to aim for mooting the lawsuit that the substantive provisions of the SB 189 that is the subject of the lawsuit not deviate far from what was enacted by SB 189.” She added that a clean reenactment is more likely to avoid additional litigation over whether the new text is the same as the challenged law.

Roll calls and procedural notes: the amendment A1 was moved by Senator Myers and was defeated on a roll call (A1: 1 yea, 6 nays). The committee later voted to report SB97 out of committee on a motion moved by Senator Willikowski; the final tally to move the bill was 5 yeas (Senators Dunbar, Hughes, Willikowski, Clayman, and Giesel) and 2 nays (Senators Kawasaki and Myers). Several additional amendments proposed by Myers (A2, A3, A5) were introduced to put issues on the record but withdrawn during the hearing.

Next steps: the committee signaled it will remain after adjournment to sign transmittal documents. Legislative Legal was authorized to make technical and conforming changes to the reported version of the bill.

Ending: The committee’s action moves SB97 to the next step in the Legislature’s process; debate in the hearing emphasized competing goals of preserving open permit access for guides and avoiding changes that could complicate ongoing litigation related to previous legislation.","The Senate Resources Committee voted 5–2 on March 14 to report SB97 (big game commercial permits) out of committee after rejecting an amendment that would restrict permit transfers and require immediate re‑advertisement when a ten‑year guide concession becomes vacant.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee debates SB92 to tax oil & gas S‑corporations; tax manager and CPA present fiscal modeling as public commenters weigh in

Senate Resources Committee votes SB97 out 5-2 after rejecting amendment that would limit permit transfers