Citizen Portal
Sign In

Georgia panel hears bill to extend and expand conservation tax credit

House Ways & Means Committee (including subcommittees) · February 24, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Representative Chaz Cannon told the Ways & Means subcommittee HB 11486 would reauthorize Georgia’s conservation tax credit through 2031, raise the credit to 50% of fair-market value for permanently restricted land and set aggregate annual credits at $30 million; the committee advanced the matter after brief questions about appraisals and administration.

Representative Chaz Cannon asked the Income Tax Subcommittee to reauthorize the Georgia conservation tax credit in House Bill 11486 and described several changes he said would increase conservation incentives.

"It extends the credit for another 5 years through 2031," Cannon said, adding the substitute raises the credit from 25% to 50% of fair-market value for lands placed under permanent restriction and caps individual credits at $500,000 and partnership credits at $1 million. He said the bill would set an aggregate annual credit limit of $30 million.

Cannon said the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) will manage applications and that language in the substitute assigns appraisal oversight and disciplinary authority to the Georgia Real Estate Commission. "We removed the State Properties Commission from the review process to allow for a more streamlined application procedure," he said.

Committee members asked whether easements would be permanent and how appraisal disputes would be handled. Cannon and a DNR representative responded that easements are perpetual once recorded and that DNR may refer disputed appraisals to an independent reviewer and pursue disciplinary action where warranted.

After discussion, the committee recorded a motion and a voice vote; the chair reported the motion carried unanimously at this stage.

The bill was presented as a second hearing; committee members signaled willingness to consider the named aggregate cap but asked staff and DNR to refine administration and oversight language before a subsequent vote.