Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Taxation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears SB 93 to expand military retirement income subtraction
Summary
Senate Bill 93 would broaden eligibility for Montana's military retirement income exemption by moving the residency date to Sept. 11, 2001, removing a five-year cap and eliminating the expiration; veterans' groups supported the change and DOR staff explained administration of the fiscal note.
Get email alerts on the Taxation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sen. John Fuller introduced Senate Bill 93 as a targeted change to Montana's military retirement income exemption, saying it amends MCA sections to change the residency qualification date to Sept. 11, 2001, removes a five-year residency limitation and eliminates the sunset. "This is a simple amendment to the military retirement income exemption," Fuller said, and he urged members to consider its workforce and recruitment effects.
Proponents included veterans and veterans'service organizations. Mike Talia, a Helena attorney and veteran, said the exemption is a modest incentive that could encourage military retirees to choose Montana as a place to settle and start businesses. Duane Cunningham (American Legion) and Dan Brooks (Billings Chamber of Commerce) also testified in favor, arguing the provision supports local economies and workforce development.
Department of Revenue witnesses (Aaron McNay and Rachel Milne) answered technical questions about the fiscal note and how the residency/date provisions would operate administratively. McNay explained the two-part residency qualification and how changing the date alters which retirees who moved to Montana after beginning to receive military retirement income would qualify.
Questions from committee members addressed whether the change primarily rewards residents already here or recruits retirees to move to Montana, how different retirement systems (active duty versus National Guard/reserve) affect timing of pension payments, and the estimated fiscal effects. No opponents testified during the hearing.
Sen. Fuller closed citing constitutional language allowing special consideration for veterans and reiterating the bill's modest scope and intent. The committee concluded the hearing; no committee vote was recorded in the transcript.
