[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-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",[32,76,88,100],{"_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",6083127,"mediaKeyId","2935346-d6871c8eee3012e69387320dc9744f31","parentId",2935346,"title","Committee hears broad election‑reform package including ballot curing and removal of witness signature (SB64); bill set aside","audioSeconds",3010,"startMs",1450000,"endMs",4460000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2935346-d6871c8eee3012e69387320dc9744f31&start=1450&end=4460","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2935346-d6871c8eee3012e69387320dc9744f31/thumbnail_1450000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6083127/Alaska/Committee-hears-broad-electionreform-package-including-ballot-curing-and-removal-of-witness-signature-SB64-bill-set-aside","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6083127-833aab44a7e84588979a70019924f46c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771151334&Signature=a4PdfQRHigu-5-wq4X58u8N-svaD2AmaZgLB4kx-PjjT~6m4D6c9emqVSeVX5K7s89KYCNQe6XfoQjFh1UuacF54QXotSEtyxu~Kz8l0a0BERoYD0a1bV3g4czp~-iCBIy6aX-BUjq-gWGPEjGA-Zhjq2ZlJYmT0VnezyzZEJajTFIXxASY4q9CoC4jA3MxG7x--36nnMC-ZHt34DS~zXRhcPj8MTf1xeVxrUSu8tZT2tS~bqpy-x89xk8lrHbmBcHvlgO5jVmEfHTtPM~O5TktqePdgDVpkxYaQwzNd7s3fAyuqfg8SUKWVzVN5GubW72W7npboEK4nwTJt6FHQ0w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Alaska Legislature","date","2025-04-09T00:00:00Z","article","Juneau — The Senate Finance Committee on April 9 held the first Finance hearing on Senate Bill 64, a comprehensive elections package that includes ballot curing, repeal of the absentee witness signature requirement, ballot tracking, regional ballot drop boxes, and measures intended to speed reporting of results.

\"Senate Bill 64 is a comprehensive package of reforms aimed at removing barriers to voting, cleaning up our voter rolls, reporting election results faster, and making other needed changes to Alaska's election laws,\" State Senator Bill Wilkowski, the bill's prime sponsor, told the committee. Wilkowski said the bill combines provisions from previous proposals and the governor, and listed specific elements including a ballot‑curing process, removing the witness requirement for mail ballots and new rules to clean up the voter rolls.

Sponsor staff described several technical provisions: clarifying the definition of residency, reducing required notices for inactive voters from two notices to one in some cases, directing periodic consultant reviews of the voter roll, and exempting automatic Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) registrations from being treated as \"contacted\" for roll‑cleanup purposes. Legal counsel Sonia Kawasaki told the committee the bill would require a person absent from Alaska to have a \"reasonable and articulable plan to return\" to preserve residency for voting purposes.

Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher told the committee that, under the bill, each of Alaska's five regions would be required to have at least one drop box. She also summarized signature verification practice: the division compares registration signatures to Department of Motor Vehicles records and, if necessary, uses other identifiers. Beecher told senators the initial purchase cost for the five drop boxes is about $23,000, with total initial and shipping/moving costs likely near $30,000; the division's fiscal note showed an FY27 cost of $338,800 (all unrestricted general funds) and a levelized annual cost of about $290,100 in out years, including one full‑time position and temporary staff in certain years.

Public and invited testimony on SB64 included election‑security and access groups who supported the measures. Tom Stewart of Secure Democracy USA praised ballot tracking and a uniform cure process as measures that \"will bolster election security\" while also increasing voter confidence. Kendra Foster of the Alaska Federation of Natives urged caution about repealing automatic voter registration via the PFD and said AFN supports provisions such as prepaid postage, rural liaisons, language assistance, and permanent absentee ballots. Mike Garvey of the ACLU of Alaska called the witness signature a leading reason absentee ballots are rejected and urged enactment of a cure process. Barbara Smith Warner of the National Vote at Home Institute also supported mail‑ballot practices and permanent absentee (single sign‑up) as best practices.

Not all witnesses supported the bill as written. Public testifier Randy Rudnick argued the residency language and elimination of witness signatures could disenfranchise some voters, calling the residency fix \"not a solution\" and warning it could force some people \"off the voter rolls.\" Several senators asked for more data and regional breakdowns of envelope rejection rates; Kendra Foster agreed to provide a regional rejection breakdown to the committee.

Why it matters: SB64 blends access and administrative reforms: supporters say the measures will reduce rejected ballots and speed transparent reporting, while critics warned some language changes (residency definition, automatic registration treatment) could have unintended consequences for voter lists and turnout in some communities.

Next steps: Senators set SB64 aside after the hearing; staff will finalize and circulate the fiscal note and members indicated follow‑up questions for the Division of Elections and sponsor staff.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","04/09/2025 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE","oneSentenceSummary","Senate Bill 64, a broad elections reform package that would add ballot curing, remove the witness signature requirement for absentee ballots, require regional drop boxes and speed reporting, was heard in the Senate Finance Committee on April 9 in Juneau.","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},6083131,"Finance committee adopts CS and advances payday‑loan reform imposing 36% APR cap (SB39)",598,812000,1410000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2935346-d6871c8eee3012e69387320dc9744f31&start=812&end=1410","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2935346-d6871c8eee3012e69387320dc9744f31/thumbnail_812000.jpg","/articles/6083131/Alaska/Finance-committee-adopts-CS-and-advances-paydayloan-reform-imposing-36-APR-cap-SB39","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6083131-7d1233b9846adca8895fef4bf39b1cfc/orig.mp4?Expires=1771151334&Signature=m49PwLfMfMHQkilVBJNt4O8xDvVrpuEs-GWcnByNha7shGP0EfA8F68PKGpQLOSf~NNdVNYQgSnmztWGl0O5Z2Oowdx4s6tQ1cxB586Nvkk90Ku1WlVQ1dHiwdOmm~dxA14gjOwZLRF0y-8Qh3UfACUK3cHzn5USnlNEqik-8i500lHVGhWqvhustsEPDwqqlyKq2Hl5~QJMGvIcGIDL29mhMFAg2l4JMpyfCroo44Utxor7B4VPxb7vS-q2Jz3kWJ7IBikrLozOYBQNtskJi--kGa1ItpLU2SY6YDp0s9H1wqrdqNGqDif2ylQL7hvDp7G62hrU9AbHSDI~A39CzA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Juneau — The Alaska Senate Finance Committee on April 9 adopted a committee substitute for Senate Bill 39 and reported the measure from committee. The bill would regulate small‑dollar loans under $25,000 by imposing a 36% annual percentage rate cap and removing a current exemption for payday‑loan businesses.

\"Senate Bill 39 involves regulations for payday lending businesses imposing a 36% cap and removing the current exemption that exists for them in our typical laws,\" said Senator Forrest Dunbar, the bill's prime sponsor. Dunbar told the committee that passage would bring Alaska in line with roughly 19 other states that have similar caps and that a federal law prevents targeting service members for predatory loans.

Liz Harpold, a Senate Finance Committee aide, explained the changes rolled into the committee substitute (CS): pawnbroker activities unrelated to payday lending are exempt and mutual savings banks are not affected because they are governed by existing statute. Senator Stedman moved to adopt the CS; the committee adopted it by unanimous consent. Senator Kiel later moved the CS from committee and the chair said, \"Seeing none, that bill passes from committee.\"

Committee members asked whether a 36% cap would restrict access to larger small‑business or consumer loans in the $10,000–$25,000 range, with concerns that traditional banks might not serve that market. Dunbar and committee counsel pointed to experience in other states where traditional lenders have filled some of that demand and to research suggesting high default and bankruptcy rates among borrowers who take out high‑cost roll‑over loans.

Why it matters: The CS would extend consumer protections to a broader set of small loans and remove a statutory exemption; supporters said the cap reduces harmful rollover borrowing, while some members sought further data on market impacts for middle‑range loans.

Next steps: The committee reported SB39 from committee with an attached fiscal note and recommendations; staff signed the committee report and the bill proceeds to further legislative consideration.

","The committee adopted a committee substitute for SB39 and moved the bill from committee. The substitute imposes a 36% APR cap on small‑dollar loans under $25,000, removes an existing exemption, and clarifies that pawnbroking and mutual savings banks are not covered.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6083136,"Senate committee advances bill changing corporate apportionment for out‑of‑state businesses",323,378000,701000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2935346-d6871c8eee3012e69387320dc9744f31&start=378&end=701","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2935346-d6871c8eee3012e69387320dc9744f31/thumbnail_378000.jpg","/articles/6083136/Alaska/Senate-committee-advances-bill-changing-corporate-apportionment-for-outofstate-businesses","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6083136-c5c945a1102868cca5bb8db200a26baf/orig.mp4?Expires=1771151334&Signature=KWPW3tEulA2Cth2qjQO74LfH6Afh0FluVEDAruNp5IaTZZxGwLgHbMVh-dnU0GS4KVZVsaTACTqdCFmkx-z4jBAecfVV6YLzwefHIDAbk9P2-hl6AG4F5OWMP1ngDT1ywTF28btrS5X-I52E9B9cd4dIAkmzDFR~qEozXj3bD-d8ena4XYNXMIFF60ipKpFTOOcWADYWBVbc50Cbiy7S1OdQWcwtVPSKAmUbcUaJcUMJrkbELjrdHhIE-fG7YMS6FrBGhQ6UcB8Ht7ROOmPzrkQbfgxJGALHSA8yDKmB3Hk1aPjRweCMKVHMVs4Wkjpt0lfdT8tKqLFqqUP3-xLvPQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Juneau — The Alaska Senate Finance Committee on April 9 voted to report Senate Bill 113 from committee, a measure the bill sponsor described as an adjustment to how corporate income from out‑of‑state businesses is apportioned for Alaska tax purposes.

State Senator Bill Wilkowski, the bill's prime sponsor, told the committee that \"Senate Bill 113 changes Alaska's corporate tax apportion system to tax outside corporations similarly to in state corporations. I want to emphasize this does not raise corporations at all.\" The committee, by unanimous consent, directed the bill out of committee with an attached fiscal note and individual recommendations.

The bill would revise how multistate corporations allocate taxable income to Alaska; Wilkowski and supporters characterized the change as aligning Alaska with apportionment rules used by many other states. At the hearing, Senator Kaufman said he feared the change could raise costs for Alaska consumers, asking \"how do we know that these taxes won't just become additive to the cost that these, sellers are sending to Alaska\" and warning the change could act as a backdoor sales tax on residents.

Committee discussion was limited; Senator Kiel moved the committee report, and the committee chair said, \"Seeing none, that bill will pass from committee.\" The committee took a brief at‑ease so members could sign the report.

Why it matters: The committee action advances a structural tax change that, if later passed by the Legislature, would alter how income from multistate businesses is assigned to Alaska for corporation income tax purposes. Supporters say it closes a longstanding gap in apportionment; opponents cautioned about secondary effects on prices paid by Alaskans.

Next steps: SB 113 has been reported out of the Senate Finance Committee with a fiscal note and recommendations and will proceed through the legislative process for further consideration.

","The Senate Finance Committee on April 9 moved Senate Bill 113 out of committee. The bill would change Alaska's corporate tax apportionment to treat many out‑of‑state corporations the same as in‑state firms; sponsors say it is an apportionment change, opponents warned of potential pass‑through costs to Alaska consumers.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6083122,"Senate hears bill to tax oil‑and‑gas S‑corporations; industry groups urge opposition (SB92)",2617,4645000,7262000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2935346-d6871c8eee3012e69387320dc9744f31&start=4645&end=7262","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2935346-d6871c8eee3012e69387320dc9744f31/thumbnail_4645000.jpg","/articles/6083122/Alaska/Senate-hears-bill-to-tax-oilandgas-Scorporations-industry-groups-urge-opposition-SB92","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6083122-899e827bc74f73fd66ff973c1a0d8e30/orig.mp4?Expires=1771151334&Signature=MVLET3Iymkv2CjaiB6v0plwrwioZKPQuqegmyEX8Pm9upO1kQKMONGGM5G-6W1Qpd0vDkekLpnE4tC6s0L9q7i2omShxbMqeb3NT4UG9try7qMFYkaPBnsW8n3ibHKIFeeYyl36nMDkBQdMyE3EWO9M-cdj1T20bh6Ltet9N48aN7YDSJdOjV3gnfFBJfP2A66f5sxN4R5ZIzt83stZ8ZjB08u5cTTmD6whZiJQniFC5QZE1cKOopwY8P24maX-KAaIrMODxLZ9~djaUjYbGxCKy84nLq7zQ5-a66M3Gm4E3VfwAMKTMtM1GUOe-qLygmIfrOdbQXj11-KZ3UtwhvA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Juneau — The Senate Finance Committee heard Senate Bill 92 on April 9, a proposal to expand Alaska's corporate income tax to S corporations and other pass‑through entities engaged in oil and gas activity. Sponsor Senator Kathy Giesel said the measure is an update to tax law rather than a new tax and described it as a means to tax pass‑through oil‑and‑gas income more like traditional C corporations.

\"This would put in place an updated S corporation tax structure for Alaska,\" Senator Kathy Giesel said in her presentation. \"I will emphasize this is not a new tax.\" The bill would apply to pass‑through entities that produce or transport oil and gas in the state and includes a roughly $5,000,000 exemption/deduction threshold in the sponsor's presentation before higher rate brackets apply.

Sponsor materials cited prior state reviews recommending closure of the pass‑through gap; a January 2021 indirect expenditure report recommended action and a 2021 fiscal working group estimated a first‑year revenue effect in the tens of millions of dollars. Giesel and staff cautioned they do not have access to taxpayer‑specific Department of Revenue data because of confidentiality rules, so the number of affected entities is not publicly known.

John Letourneau, a certified public accountant who provided invited testimony, illustrated a hypothetical: using a $1 billion taxable‑income example, a similarly situated C corporation would pay roughly $94 million under current law, while an S corporation under current Alaska law would pay zero; under the sponsor's proposed structure for pass‑through oil and gas entities, that same hypothetical S corporation would pay an amount close to the C corporation level after accounting for the proposed exemption threshold.

Industry groups testified in opposition. Kara Moriarty, president and CEO of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association (AOGA), said SB92 \"imposes a new discriminatory and retroactive income tax on a select group of firms in the oil and gas industry,\" warned of investor confidence and competitiveness effects, and urged the committee to set the bill aside. Leila Kimbrell of the Resource Development Council also urged opposition, calling the measure \"targeted, discriminatory, and retroactive\" and arguing it would deter investment and reduce production and associated state revenue.

Public comment included support from Doug Woodby, who said the bill \"honors the Alaska Constitution\" by seeking additional public benefit from resource development and that Alaska needs revenue to support public services.

Why it matters: SB92 would change how pass‑through oil and gas entities are taxed in Alaska and could raise state revenue if enacted; opponents argue it is a targeted, retroactive tax that would undermine investment and production.

Next steps: The committee closed the initial public hearing on SB92 and set the bill aside for future hearings; senators and stakeholders flagged the need for further modeling and fiscal analysis and raised constitutional and competitiveness concerns.

","Senate Bill 92 would update Alaska's tax treatment of S corporations and other pass‑through entities in the oil and gas sector, applying a structure that proponents say closes a gap and opponents call targeted and retroactive. The committee heard testimony from the sponsor, a CPA modeler and multiple industry groups and set the bill aside for a","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears broad election‑reform package including ballot curing and removal of witness signature (SB64); bill set aside

Finance committee adopts CS and advances payday‑loan reform imposing 36% APR cap (SB39)

Senate committee advances bill changing corporate apportionment for out‑of‑state businesses

Senate hears bill to tax oil‑and‑gas S‑corporations; industry groups urge opposition (SB92)