Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />b.Exemption of Intangible Property <br /> <br />The coalition of centrally assessed businesses, including telecommunications <br />companies, power utilities, railroads and airlines, attempted to exempt intangible <br />personal property from property taxation in the 1997, 1999 and 2001 legislative <br />sessions. Despite strong opposition by local government, industry successfully <br />passed HB 2050 in 1999, which was vetoed by the Governor. A similar bill, HB <br />2062, was also vetoed by the Governor following the 1997 session. A veto threat <br />in 2001 kept the same proposal bottled up in committee in 2001. <br /> <br />Any exemption of intangible personal property will reduce local government <br />revenue. A study completed in 1998 by a Department of Revenue work group <br />showed that more than $2 billion in assessed value, some $30 million in tax <br /> <br />dollars, could potentially be removed from the tax rolls. Exempting intangible <br />property will substantially reduce local revenue and will foster perpetual tax <br />appeals and litigation, an approach which appears not to be backed by economic <br />logic. These issues could easily return in 2007. <br /> <br /> Recommendation: <br /> <br /> 1. Oppose the granting of any exemption from taxation for the intangible <br />personal property of centrally assessed companies. If such an exemption <br />is granted, the State should reimburse cities for lost revenue. <br /> <br /> 2. PROPERTY TAXES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES <br /> <br /> Property taxes are critically important to local governments and their ability to provide <br />services to citizens. Property taxes will provide $70 million, or 48%, of the resources to <br />city’s General Fund in fiscal year 2006-07. <br /> <br /> Property taxes also provide revenue to repay General Obligation Bonds, used by cities as <br />a means of funding a wide range of capital facilities and infrastructure. GO bonds for <br />capital construction currently must have been approved by a double majority or have <br />received a majority at a general election to be outside the constitutional cap for general <br />government taxes. Last legislative session bills were introduced to ease the double <br />majority requirements. <br /> <br />City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2007 Session <br />With IGR Mtg 10/17 and 10/26 Amendments C:\Documents and Settings\ceexelf\Local Settings\Temporary Internet <br />Files\OLK10B\LegPol2007Sesxx1.doc <br />Updated on: 11/6/2006 By: Last saved by ceexmfw <br /> 18 <br /> <br />