Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House approves tax clarifications and a child tax credit; sponsors combine repatriation, NOL and dependent credit into substitute
Summary
During the special session the House passed a package of tax‑code clarifications: HB 2002 (repatriation tax clarification), HB 2003 (income tax amendments including net operating loss conformity and a child tax credit as part of a second substitute). Sponsors said the repatriation item clarifies a 50% deduction and an eight‑year payment window; HB 2002 passed 65–5 and the substitute HB 2003 passed 67–3.
The Utah House moved quickly through a group of tax cleanups and clarifications during the special session, voting to clarify corporate repatriation tax treatment and to adopt a substituted income‑tax bill that includes net operating loss (NOL) conformity and a nondiscretionary child tax credit.
Representative Eliason (sponsor of HB 2002 and co‑sponsor of related measures) said HB 2002 removes ambiguity created by new IRS guidance after federal tax reform. The bill clarifies that repatriated foreign income is eligible for a 50% reduction for Utah tax purposes and allows corporations up to eight years to remit any tax owed — a change sponsors said is consistent with historical Utah policy going back about 25 years. Eliason and others framed the measure as a one‑time clarification that addresses past tax years rather than creating a new ongoing tax.
Lawmakers debated whether to consider HB 2002 and HB 2003 on their own or to 'circle' (hold) them while a substitute combining repatriation language, NOL changes and a dependent/child tax credit was drafted. Sponsors argued that combining the measures in a substitute (first and then second substitute HB 2003) produced a single vehicle that reflects negotiations and produces a policy package for families and corporations. Opponents said combining bills reduces transparency; supporters said staff produced substitute language under time pressure and the substitute encompassed already discussed policy choices.
The second substitute for HB 2003, which passed the House 67–3, adds a child tax credit with a smaller fiscal note than an earlier proposal and conforms state NOL carryforward/carryback rules with federal changes (allowing unlimited carryforward but limited to 80% of taxable income). Sponsors said the child credit helps working families who were negatively impacted by federal tax reform and that these changes will provide administrative clarity to the Tax Commission.
Representative Eliason and other members repeatedly noted the bills' fiscal‑note treatment: repatriation revenue is treated as largely one‑time money spread over several years and would be counted in education funds where applicable. Members pressed sponsors about state competitiveness and whether taxing repatriated foreign income makes Utah an outlier; sponsors replied that the measures apply to past repatriation and that many variables (single sales factor, rate, apportionment) affect businesses’ location decisions.
Both HB 2002 (65–5) and the substituted HB 2003 (67–3) passed the House and will be transmitted to the Senate for consideration.
