Connecticut 2016 Regular Session

Connecticut House Bill HB05638

Introduced
3/17/16  
Refer
3/17/16  
Report Pass
4/5/16  
Refer
4/13/16  
Report Pass
4/19/16  
Report Pass
4/19/16  
Engrossed
5/4/16  
Engrossed
5/4/16  
Report Pass
5/4/16  
Report Pass
5/4/16  
Chaptered
5/23/16  
Chaptered
5/23/16  
Enrolled
5/25/16  

Caption

An Act Concerning The Failure To File For Certain Tax Exemptions And A Grant To The Town Of Middlefield.

Impact

Legally, the bill modifies existing regulations regarding property tax exemptions under the general statutes. Specifically, it permits towns to reimburse taxpayers who demonstrate eligibility for exemptions despite late filings, ensuring that property owners are not penalized unreasonably for missing deadlines. This could lead to a more equitable treatment for taxpayers and help municipal governments manage revenue inflows, as they need to plan for potential reimbursements stemming from these exemptions. The bill also limits potential revenue loss by ensuring that towns can provide timely reimbursements facilitated by proper filing processes.

Summary

House Bill 05638, known as An Act Concerning The Failure To File For Certain Tax Exemptions And A Grant To The Town Of Middlefield, aims to address the issue of individuals failing to file tax exemption applications within the required timeframes. The bill allows individuals who are otherwise eligible for grand list exemptions but missed their filing deadlines a grace period of thirty days to submit their applications. This provision primarily targets property owners in several Connecticut towns including Berlin, Monroe, and Milford, offering them a chance to secure exemption status and tax rebates despite the late filing.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 05638 appears to be generally supportive among local governments and property owners who may benefit from the extended filing grace period. Municipal leaders express optimism that this legislation will help mitigate the adverse consequences of missed filing deadlines. However, some fiscal conservatives might raise concerns about the implications of allowing such extensions on municipal budgets and accountability. Nevertheless, the essential aim of the bill—to provide fair opportunities for tax relief—resonates positively within the community.

Contention

While there is overall support for HB 05638, some contention exists around the potential fiscal impact on municipalities. Critics fear that consistently allowing late applications could encourage laxity regarding compliance and accountability from taxpayers. Furthermore, there is concern about the administrative burden on local assessors who must manage an increased number of applications and subsequent reimbursements, which could strain resources. Yet, proponents argue that these provisions are necessary to ensure that eligible residents are not unduly penalized for procedural delays.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB873

Department of Food and Agriculture: commercial cannabis activity inspectors: peace officer duties.

CA AB723

Transactions and use taxes: County of Alameda: Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District.

CA AB1112

Tax Equity Allocation.

CA SB812

Property taxation: tax-defaulted property sales: minimum price.

AZ HB2558

Community colleges; out-of-county reimbursement.

AZ SB1173

Community colleges; out-of-county reimbursement

CA SB257

Property taxation: welfare exemption: museums.

CA AB885

Property taxation: new construction: definition.