[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-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],{"_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",6073174,"mediaKeyId","2995166-546ef9c887134dc24f99fa33996fd4d3","parentId",2995166,"title","Senate concurs with major property-tax package after hours of debate; vote 27-22","audioSeconds",8498,"startMs",5612000,"endMs",14110000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2995166-546ef9c887134dc24f99fa33996fd4d3&start=5612&end=14110","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2995166-546ef9c887134dc24f99fa33996fd4d3/thumbnail_5612000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6073174/Indiana/Senate-concurs-with-major-property-tax-package-after-hours-of-debate-vote-27-22","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6073174-392ba171e9a577a4f3ad772404db055c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771167890&Signature=gR8mLP8Rgf-~aLCdNW0Lk8w6CRkSt0O6LnZDV298SzX4Oov83uriLKfXxiZqCmRcLTVBQFGb7Lq~53dzJVIJ33YLTPtqsYH60W8ibsDwdH7UheZcDKAQ2bbNOV17ky4kC7AEYPo4H-hNj9x8vp6DQg-tNo85Y~FzSxB3-RZJGAKA2qepeoxKUbPfKw-IUZ0l8UEu2w6-vnS-mTHIrqmyzKQPfo7e7GFvcdLKbN5SKjXpUcGvWygwtK1lecze5Z339Vbi63tO6jQ2myWkjpIswUd2xcq6bAumGA9ne9x-KKYs-a533qjwz4B3iQ-77ucQwgeZ7ky-L3gB7VFFNbbJGw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Indiana Legislature","date","2025-04-14T00:00:00Z","article","INDIANAPOLIS — After extended floor debate, the Indiana Senate voted 27-22 on April 14 to concur with the House on Senate Bill 1, a sweeping property-tax and local revenue reform package that sponsors said will reduce many homeowners’ tax bills while critics warned the measure shifts costs to local governments and could harm public services.

Senate sponsor Senator Ryan Holman told colleagues that \"two thirds of homeowners in 2026 will receive a bill less than they receive in 2025,\" and that the bill provides layered relief including a new 10% \"final\" property tax credit (capped at $300) applied after circuit-breaker credits. Holman summarized several major elements of the bill on the floor:
- A phased two‑thirds reduction (by assessed value) for homestead property beginning in pay 2026 and completing by pay 2031 with a schedule of stepped deductions.
- Transforming current 65-and-older and veteran homestead deductions into stackable property-tax credits (e.g., a $150 credit for seniors who meet income thresholds; higher credits for disabled veterans).
- Increasing the de minimis business personal property exemption (80,000 to $150,000 in 2026; $1,000,000 in 2027; $2,000,000 in later years for property placed in service after Jan. 1, 2025).
- Changes to local income-tax rules, including lowering the county maximum lit rate cap in the new framework while allowing certain local allocations; creating a county option property-deferral program.
- Several education and local-government provisions, including phased property-tax revenue sharing with eligible charter schools beginning in 2028 for specified school corporations and the statutory dissolution of a small Union school corporation effective July 1, 2027.

Opponents delivered lengthy floor speeches warning of unintended consequences. Senator Taylor said the bill effectively forces local leaders to choose between cutting services and raising local income taxes, and predicted political consequences for officials who try to raise local levies. Senator Yoder and others described the package as a \"mixed bag\" that could reduce county, township and municipal capacity to respond to local needs. \"This bill cuts nearly $700,000,000 from local revenues,\" Yoder said on the floor, urging colleagues to reject the concurrence.

Senator Rogers and other supporters said the package provides meaningful homeowner relief without collapsing local budgets across the state in the short term; floor analysis presented by sponsors indicated many local units would still see year‑over‑year revenue increases in the near term though not as large as under current law.

The clerk recorded the concurrence vote 27 ayes and 22 noes. Sponsors said they would monitor implementation and adjust in future sessions as needed; opponents vowed to press for changes and to track local budget impacts. Lawmakers also requested follow-up study and reporting on key elements, including the fiscal effect on school corporations and local units beginning in 2028, when several provisions phase in.

Senate leaders directed that some provisions will be tracked as agencies implement reporting and that members of both chambers will continue conference work where necessary. The motion to concur passed; the Secretary was instructed to notify the House.

The vote capped a long day of floor amendments and debate; senators on both sides urged constituents to follow the enrollment and implementation steps as the bill moves toward final enactment.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Indiana Senate Legislative Session Apr 14 2025 Part 2","oneSentenceSummary","The Indiana Senate voted 27-22 to concur with a broad property-tax package that phases in homestead relief, converts several deductions to credits for seniors and veterans, raises business-personal-property de minimis thresholds and changes local income-tax rules; critics warned of risks to local governments and schools.","taxTitle","2025 Senate Legislative Sessions, 2025 Legislature IN, Indiana","taxId",77717,"location","Indiana","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},6073179,"Senate approves hospital-pricing study and reporting changes after heated debate over possible price controls",74,343000,417000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2995166-546ef9c887134dc24f99fa33996fd4d3&start=343&end=417","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2995166-546ef9c887134dc24f99fa33996fd4d3/thumbnail_343000.jpg","/articles/6073179/Indiana/Senate-approves-hospital-pricing-study-and-reporting-changes-after-heated-debate-over-possible-price-controls","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6073179-2626d008a930807613407187c0fac377/orig.mp4?Expires=1771167890&Signature=eGrx-2DX4drx5O2KPs6nEwZSgWSlDhhfnYtPlSxfpYjpk6fxEGJTS82G0Lj21fIRBqDPhyp1NNPnRX76p~UCMND5psLI3R0zAzg03YAWNqhicBJFrMndyJ~CACeCQ~2u2awounpByQoOBXCbKUreKqRrTGLd0EM8jJ8uwXj-zLN4ItJrwDpoBKPUeNYOaBsQqDth0G92q0OLzS-FanuntyyYhNSawR-ldfM1oPosu-4mM20UWHjo6j1HY1deLToE~eNuy2ZlaDXGHOYBclk-PwjmlyodNImCJgUStz7OUiO07s4zYI1f5n3-PTtoPKw~lO7L92adrstQqzl609JXLQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","INDIANAPOLIS — The Indiana Senate adopted a contentious amendment to House Bill 1004 that strips proposed price caps and penalties from the bill and instead directs the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to conduct a statewide hospital-pricing study.

Sponsor Senator Erin Garten described Amendment 23 as a compromise that removes the bill’s earlier price-limit provisions and creates a data-driven study to determine a statewide aggregate average of inpatient and outpatient hospital prices based on at least 85% of paid claims. Garten said the study would be completed by June 30, 2026, and would calculate a statewide average price expressed as a percentage of Medicare that could be used for future policy discussions.

\"What it does is it puts a hospital pricing study under the Office of Management and Budget,\" Garten said on the floor. \"If you want to remain a nonprofit, then you should act like it and you should be competitive in your pricing with the average in the state.\" Garten emphasized the amendment does not set a statutory price ceiling but would instead produce data for policymakers and review market impacts.

Senator Brown strongly opposed the approach as written, saying the amendment in practice would set a cap on nonprofit hospitals and risk unintended consequences for rural care and the community services hospitals provide. Brown outlined concerns about rural access, community benefits hospitals provide (including school nursing, clinics and residency programs), and the operational challenges if a large nonprofit system converted to for‑profit status. \"It's a cap. You can call it say it's something else, but it's a cap,\" Brown said during floor remarks.

Other provisions adopted as part of the amendment package included increased transparency for broker and third‑party administrator (TPA) compensation. The amendment requires agents and TPAs to provide signed quotes listing commissions and fees at the time of sale for group health policies and requires insurance companies and TPAs to report commissions paid to the state’s all‑payer claims database.

A division vote followed the floor debate. The clerk reported 34 ayes and 12 nos; the amendment passed. Sponsors said the study-based approach gives the legislature time to assess market effects and to revisit policy changes based on standardized data rather than imposing immediate statutory price limits.

The bill also received further amendments addressing pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) transparency and rebate disclosure; senators described these as complementary measures intended to reduce hidden costs in prescription pricing and to return more rebate value to consumers. Those PBM- and rebate-related amendments were adopted by voice vote. After the amendment votes, the bill was ordered to engrossment.

Supporters said the OMB study and the reporting requirements would create more public data on hospital prices and insurer/TPA compensation; opponents argued the language could pressure nonprofit hospitals’ tax statuses and agreed to watch implementation closely.

Senator Garten and other sponsors said they will monitor OMB’s study results and the new reporting filings to determine whether future legislative steps are warranted.","Senators approved Amendment 23 to House Bill 1004, directing the Office of Management and Budget to study hospital pricing statewide and requiring insurers and TPAs to report commissions to the all-payer claims database; the amendment passed after a roll-call division, 34-12.",{"_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},6073183,"Senate adopts series of amendments to health coverage bill to clarify billing, imaging and prior-authorization rules",111,68000,179000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2995166-546ef9c887134dc24f99fa33996fd4d3&start=68&end=179","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2995166-546ef9c887134dc24f99fa33996fd4d3/thumbnail_68000.jpg","/articles/6073183/Indiana/Senate-adopts-series-of-amendments-to-health-coverage-bill-to-clarify-billing-imaging-and-prior-authorization-rules","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6073183-443f6ea3e9911e1fb79cb02cae7c910f/orig.mp4?Expires=1771167890&Signature=nbi2c8cFQtT1x2gYXxcSWWhO2jXykJGjUMvDy5YIaiYfO9B5Vit2KJqtTszm0cyQyD0s5P6khgw2ke1kZQvihp5CN6KbdKCFhwhnHuxzrg6O9Cs0Pztyn8zH6jAJrWky3xzVbZGm9NLyPeiGmAS0PYrf18BuFzLqSgqJV1TQSHzScKpN3Jx8IeVuWt6SjjPehVNq7Tjin~knR2kmwICL2ARfrsteSDHfhQ~oPiOuZZ-tYsoUe1pZg6My8CPd2Eo9WE4AiET4c4Rjw4Vf9cGTNhT8IIlAu6E2jvntcDVUWc6Jl4WetvpBoG~1aDBvL4sUYY4FH5ckqLRLJ~rMTpMtqg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","INDIANAPOLIS — The Indiana Senate voted on a string of amendments to House Bill 1003 on April 14, approving changes intended to limit hospital-site billing practices and to clarify definitions for diagnostic imaging and laboratory services.

Supporters said the amendments restore earlier statutory language and narrow the bill so it affects billing tied to true hospital settings while preserving dispute-resolution options for prior authorization.

Senator Charbonneau opened the bill’s second reading and yielded to Senator Sarah Johnson, who presented several amendments. Johnson said one amendment \"really deals with the amendment that was added in appropriations on section 43\" and that sponsors had worked to revert language \"back to the language that it was originally before the bill and the way law is now.\" She said additional changes were intended to \"streamline\" how places of service are defined so routine office procedures are not reclassified as hospital visits. \"I'd be happy to take any questions and appreciate your support,\" Johnson said after outlining the revisions.

Lawmakers approved a package of Johnson's amendments by voice vote. Key changes included:
- Restoring language on site-of-service codes and narrowing the bill's reach to avoid classifying office visits as hospital services.
- Refining the diagnostic imaging definition and adding a requirement that carriers include, at minimum, a maximum negotiated charge in addition to discounted cash price information for certain imaging services.
- Mirroring imaging changes for laboratory services and directing the state insurance department to identify a list of \"shoppable\" lab services.
- Removing broad prior-authorization language from the underlying bill while retaining a dispute-resolution process so providers and payers can contest prior-authorization denials.
- Deleting a proposed law‑enforcement investigator role and leaving fraud investigations with the Indiana State Police and Attorney General as appropriate.

Senator Brown pressed for caution about any provision that could be read as imposing price caps on providers. Brown argued that some language could have consequences for nonprofit hospitals and rural access, and urged colleagues to consider market impacts before enacting any mandatory price limits. Other senators, including sponsors, responded with data-driven examples of hospital finances and said the amendments were intended to improve transparency rather than set price ceilings.

All contested amendments described in the session were adopted by voice vote or unanimous voice consent as recorded on the floor. No formal roll-call tallies were recorded in the transcript for those amendment votes. The bill was ordered to engrossment for further processing.

The measure now reflects the sponsors’ stated goal of tightening billing definitions and increasing transparency on negotiated charges for specific imaging and lab services while preserving a path for prior-authorization dispute resolution.","The Indiana Senate approved several amendments to House Bill 1003 aimed at clarifying site-of-service billing, diagnostic imaging and lab definitions, and prior-authorization procedures after presenters said the changes restore prior law and reduce unwanted billing at hospital settings.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate concurs with major property-tax package after hours of debate; vote 27-22

Senate approves hospital-pricing study and reporting changes after heated debate over possible price controls

Senate adopts series of amendments to health coverage bill to clarify billing, imaging and prior-authorization rules