Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Media Support topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local Publishers and Rebuild Local News Back Advertising Tax Credit; DRA Flags Administrative Ambiguities
Summary
HB 14‑20 would create a three‑year tax credit (80% of qualifying local advertising up to $3,000) to steer ad dollars to New Hampshire news outlets. Supporters said the modest credit would bolster local journalism and the local ad ecosystem; DRA raised several technical and administrative concerns, including ambiguous cap language and likely need for appropriations or third‑party verification.
Representative Christine Perez introduced HB 14‑20, a proposal to create a limited advertising tax credit for New Hampshire small businesses that advertise with qualified local news outlets. The bill would allow eligible businesses to claim 80% of qualifying local advertising expenditures — up to $3,000 — and set an annual program cap (the draft referenced $5 million) with the program scheduled as a three‑year pilot.
Laurie Henson of Rebuild Local News and a slate of local publishers and editors told the committee the credit is a bi‑local approach: it returns advertising dollars to local outlets that in turn fund reporting and community coverage. Henson cited national data showing a decade of newsroom job loss and argued local outlets provide civic functions — legal notices, public‑service information and voter coverage — that benefit communities and government operations.
Local publishers described the economics of community papers: production and postage are significant costs, subscription and ad revenue are thin margins, and the influx of local ad dollars can be decisive for continuing coverage in small towns. "This tax credit incentivizes small businesses to advertise more with local news… those advertising dollars are spent locally," said Henson.
Lauren O’Sullivan, senior financial analyst at DRA, said the department does not take a position but raised multiple technical and administrative issues. DRA flagged ambiguous language about whether the $3,000 figure limits the credit or the underlying expenditure, inconsistencies about per‑business and per‑program caps, and the statutory tests the department would use to determine whether a media outlet qualifies as local news. DRA said administrability would likely require additional appropriation for staffing or procurement of a third‑party verifier to assess qualifying outlets, and suggested tightened statutory definitions and application procedures to reduce audit burden and recapture risk.
Committee members expressed sympathy for preserving local journalism but pressed sponsors to resolve the DRA’s technical questions, to consider whether the program might unintentionally favor certain outlets, and to identify whether program caps or carryforward/refund language would require fiscal adjustments. Several members asked for additional detail on how the department would administer a pilot and for data estimating uptake. Sponsors and witnesses said they would provide follow‑up materials and that the pilot could be adapted after evaluation.
