Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Policy Veterans topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate bill would raise property‑tax exemptions for disabled veterans; advocates urge wider relief
Summary
SB 387 would increase property‑tax exemptions for disabled veterans and add a new means‑tested exemption for 100%‑rated disabled veterans. Sponsors said two existing exemption levels increase substantially and a new program would reimburse counties for 100%‑rated veteran exemptions; multiple veterans and representatives testified in support.
Senate Bill 387, presented to the Senate Committee on Veterans, Emergency Management, Federal and World Affairs on Jan. 28, would raise property‑tax exemptions for disabled veterans and add a new means‑tested exemption for veterans rated 100% disabled.
Senator Kim Thatcher, a prime sponsor, described the bill’s three financial elements. Two are changes to existing exemptions: for veterans rated 40% or more, the bill would raise the base exemption from the existing levels to $60,000 for one category and $65,000 for another, each with a 3% compound escalation. The bill’s new section would provide a $150,000 base exemption (also with a 3% compound escalation) to 100%‑rated disabled veterans who meet a means test: the exemption applies when property tax exceeds 14% of an annual household income for an unemployable 100% disabled veteran; surviving spouses would receive a 90% tax exemption.
Thatcher said elements one and two would continue to be funded by counties; element three—exemptions for the 100%‑rated veterans—would be reimbursed to counties by the state through an application process. She also said the exemption for surviving spouses would remain until remarriage.
Representative E. Warner Raschke and senators including David Brock Smith and Bart Smith spoke in favor of the bill. Anna Munson described her husband’s 100% disability and detailed the household costs associated with long‑term care and home modifications. “This tax break is more than a mere token for us and for other disabled veterans,” Munson said. Shannon Orrington, a veteran, urged broader outreach and noted the bill’s fiscal impact would be small relative to the state’s general fund “kicker,” while offering empirical estimates of the number of veteran households potentially affected.
Committee members asked procedural and fiscal questions. Senator Meek said he would consult counties on revenue impacts and noted a letter from Jackson County expressing concern. Committee members and sponsors said the state reimbursement for 100%‑rated exemptions should limit county burden. No committee action or vote was taken; the committee closed public testimony to continue work in future meetings.
