California Senate Bill SB667

California 2021-2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/19/21
• Refer: 3/3/21
• Report Pass: 3/11/21
• Refer: 3/11/21
• Report Pass: 4/14/21
• Refer: 4/14/21
• Report Pass: 5/20/21
• Engrossed: 6/1/21
• Refer: 6/17/21
• Report Pass: 7/6/21
• Refer: 7/6/21
• Report Pass: 8/26/21
• Enrolled: 9/10/21
• Chaptered: 9/30/21
• Passed: 9/30/21

Caption

Property taxation: disabled veterans’ exemption: filing of claims.

Impact

The bill's passage is expected to simplify the process for these representatives, thereby potentially increasing the number of claims filed for the disabled veterans property tax exemption. This accessibility change could lead to enhanced financial relief for disabled veterans and their families by ensuring that they can take advantage of this exemption without being hindered by administrative barriers or the need for personal attendance in the claims process.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 667, introduced by Senator Roth, amends Section 277 of the Revenue and Taxation Code to broaden the scope of individuals who can file for a disabled veterans property tax exemption. This exemption is available to veterans, their spouses, and unmarried surviving spouses under specific conditions related to the veteran's disability status. The bill makes significant changes by allowing executors, administrators, or personal legal representatives of a claimant's estate, as well as trustees of deceased claimants' trust assets, to file claims with the assessor on behalf of veterans or their dependents.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB 667 has been largely positive, as it aims to provide additional support for disabled veterans and acknowledges the intricate realities faced by their families after the veteran's passing. Advocacy groups and legislators championing veterans' rights have expressed support, seeing this bill as a step in the right direction towards improving the welfare of those who served in the military. However, as with many policy changes, there were concerns about the administration of such claims and the implications for local government accountability.

Contention

One notable point of contention may relate to the bill's expansion of responsibilities for local government officials concerning the approval of claims, which could result in increased administrative workloads. Additionally, the bill stipulates that certain costs incurred by local agencies for implementing the mandates of this act will not require reimbursement from the state, which may raise discussions about the financial responsibilities of local governments. The lack of reimbursement could be a concern for local entities managing the transition to these new procedures.