Introduced
by
To authorize giving up to $250 million of state revenue to certain developers and business owners selected by political appointees on the board of a state Strategic Fund agency. Owners of selected firms would get cash subsidies for up to 10 years based on the amount of state income tax paid by their employees. See also Senate Bills 111 to 115, 243 and 244.
Referred to the Committee on Economic Development and International Investment
Reported without amendment
With the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Passed in the Senate 32 to 5 (details)
Referred to the Committee on Tax Policy
Reported without amendment
Amendment offered
To cap the proposed payouts to corporations at $200 million, and revise details of the payout formula and process for granting sudsidies to a particular firm.
The amendment passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To use a wage formula in calculating the proposed subsidies that excludes the highest and lowest paid employees.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To tie-bar the bill to House Bill 4550, meaning this bill cannot become law unless that one does also. HB 4550 would require drug testing for business executives whose firms receive subsidies from the state.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To tie-bar the bill to House Bill 4645, meaning this bill cannot become law unless that one does also. HB 4645 would end the practice of allowing the state agency in charge of selectively granting favors to certain businesses to automatically collect revenue paid to the state through Indian casino gaming compacts and other "off budget" sources.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To require more detailed online reporting of state business subsidies. This is intended to close a loophole by which the state business subsidy granting agency asserts that cash payments to corporations that are styled as "refundable tax credits" are subject to the same tax return confidentiality provisions that apply to regular individual or business tax payers.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To require drug testing for business executives whose firms receive subsidies from the state.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To end the practice of allowing the state agency in charge of selectively granting favors to certain businesses to automatically collect revenue paid to the state through Indian casino gaming compacts and other "off budget" sources.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To require the state business subsidy granting agency to disclose the names of the corporations and developers who are getting nearly $10 billion in cash payments over 20 years under "MEGA" program subsidies mainly granted in 2009 and 2010. Also, to disclose how much each company is getting. Reportedly around half of the money is being collected by the Big Three automakers.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To strip out the subsidy-granting provisions of the bill.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Passed in the House 71 to 35 (details)
To authorize giving up to $200 million of state revenue to certain business owners, in particular a Chinese company involved in iPhone manufacture. Owners of selected firms would get cash subsidies for up to 10 years equal to half or all of the income tax paid by their employees.
Passed in the Senate 29 to 5 (details)
To concur with the House-passed version of the subsidy package, which includes a provision intended to cap the payouts at $200 million.
