Guam Legislature debates multiple FY-26 budget amendments; GMH pharma fund amendment passes, BPT threshold and Simon Sanchez funding fail

The Guam Legislature considered several amendments to the Fiscal Year 2026 general fund appropriation during a session focused on Business Privilege Tax (BPT) treatment, the rainy‑day fund, withholding projections and specific appropriations for Guam Memorial Hospital and Simon Sanchez High School.

Senators approved an amendment to require that 6.19% of Business Privilege Tax receipts in excess of the budget’s adopted BPT projection be appropriated to Guam Memorial Hospital’s pharmaceutical fund for FY‑26 operations. The amendment was read into the record by the sponsor and, after floor discussion, the presiding officer declared the amendment passed without objection.

The body rejected a separate, detailed proposal to extend the 3% BPT treatment to businesses with gross receipts up to $2,000,000 (instead of the bill’s 500,000 threshold). The sponsor and several supporters said the change would provide targeted relief to smaller businesses and free up revenue that could fund priorities including school construction. Opponents said the amendment would unbalance the bill and leave no funding source for agency operations, citizens’ tax refunds and other priorities. A roll call on that amendment resulted in 5 yeas, 9 nays and 1 excused; the amendment failed.

The sponsor had bifurcated the tax‑threshold amendment so that a second piece would direct $16,377,125 for a leaseback or appropriation for Simon Sanchez High School. That second piece was considered separately but, because the tax amendment failed, the Simon Sanchez proposal lacked its identified funding source and also failed on a roll call of 5 yeas, 9 nays and 1 excused.

Other revenue and reserve measures were discussed but not enacted in the session excerpted here. A proposal to restore the statutory 2% general‑fund rainy‑day deposit (removing a suspension) was presented by the same sponsor but at one point was ruled out of order by the presiding officer because it would unbalance the FY‑26 budget as drafted; the sponsor asked that the section be bookmarked for possible reintroduction with offsets. A separate amendment to raise withholding tax projections by $7,000,000 (based on a Department of Administration estimate) was proffered and the presiding officer recalled Office of Finance and Budget (OFB) staff for verification before further consideration. A gas‑tax amendment was ruled to belong in miscellaneous provisions and was not considered at that time.

Key figures and figures quoted on the floor included the 6.19% pharmaceutical‑fund allocation for Guam Memorial Hospital; the sponsor’s estimate that extending the 3% BPT threshold to $2,000,000 would reduce projected general‑fund receipts by about $17,300,000 (and yield an additional $5,540,000 in some projection lines); an appropriation request of $16,377,125 for Simon Sanchez High School; and a proposed $7,000,000 upward adjustment to withholding‑tax revenue projections.

Votes at a glance - Guam Memorial Hospital pharmaceutical fund (6.19% of excess BPT to GMH for FY‑26 operations) — Sponsor: Senator Tulahi. Outcome: Passed (voice/consent on the floor; no roll call recorded in the excerpt). - BPT threshold amendment (extend 3% BPT threshold to businesses with gross receipts up to $2,000,000) — Sponsor: Senator Tulahi. Outcome: Failed (roll call: 5 yeas, 9 nays, 1 excused). - Simon Sanchez appropriation ($16,377,125; funding linked to the BPT amendment) — Sponsor: Senator Tulahi (bifurcated). Outcome: Failed (no funding source after BPT amendment failed; roll call: 5 yeas, 9 nays, 1 excused).

Why this matters The votes affect how the government of Guam directs Business Privilege Tax receipts and projected revenues for FY‑26. The adopted GMH amendment changes how excess BPT receipts will be routed to the hospital’s pharmaceutical fund; the failed BPT threshold change and the failed Simon Sanchez appropriation together show the legislature divided over using broad BPT relief as a funding lever for specific local priorities. Attempts to restore the rainy‑day deposit and to adjust withholding projections highlight continuing concern about budget balance, reserve levels and accuracy of revenue estimates ahead of final passage of the FY‑26 budget.

What happened on the floor Senator Tulahi introduced multiple amendments affecting chapter 1 of the budget bill, including the GMH pharmaceutical‑fund language (adding a subsection to section 7, page 13, appropriating “6.19% of funds in excess of the adopted business privilege tax levels … to the Guam Memorial Hospital for FY‑26 operations in accordance with 11 GCA chapter 26 section 26208,” as read into the record). After brief discussion and a formal call for objections, the presiding officer indicated there were none and the chair stated the amendment passed.

The sponsor then introduced a set of amendments changing BPT rates and thresholds (replacing a provision so that the first $2,000,000 of receipts would be taxed at 3% rather than only the first $500,000). Supporters, including Senators Parkinson, Barnett and Perez, said the change would provide targeted relief to small businesses and could free funds for priorities such as Simon Sanchez. Opponents, including other senators and the presiding officer in procedural remarks, said the change would unbalance the bill in the absence of identified offsets and could jeopardize tax refunds, agency funding and reserve levels. OFB staff were called to review the fiscal spreadsheet, and after roll call the amendment failed 5‑9‑1.

Because the sponsor had bifurcated the change so the second portion would provide $16,377,125 for Simon Sanchez, that appropriation lacked a funding source once the tax amendment failed and failed on a separate vote with the same 5‑9‑1 result. Other contested items — including striking a suspension of the 2% rainy‑day deposit and increasing withholding projections by $7,000,000 — were debated or proffered but either were ruled out of order or deferred for OFB verification. The presiding officer repeatedly emphasized that revenue‑increasing or revenue‑decreasing amendments must be accompanied by offsets that keep the FY‑26 budget balanced.

What’s next The body paused its amendment work for OFB consultation and scheduled further consideration of budget items. Several sponsors asked that specific sections be bookmarked so they can reintroduce balanced amendments if offsets or revenue adjustments are identified. Final disposition of the FY‑26 budget and any refiled or new amendments will depend on subsequent floor action and OFB verification of revenue and spending changes.

(Article compiled from the certified transcript of the legislative session.)