Hawaii House Bill HB1805

Hawaii 2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/19/24
• Refer: 1/24/24
• Report Pass: 2/12/24
• Report Pass: 2/29/24
• Refer: 2/12/24
• Refer: 3/7/24
• Engrossed: 2/29/24
• Report Pass: 3/21/24
• Refer: 3/21/24

Caption

Relating To The Procedure For Payment Under Protest Lawsuits.

Impact

By allowing interest earned on payments made under protest to be paid in non-taxation cases, HB1805 enhances protections for taxpayers. It establishes a clearer process for those who wish to contest state agency decisions regarding financial payments. Specifically, the bill ensures that if a lawsuit is filed prematurely, the claimant may have the opportunity to refile once a decision from the relevant agency is rendered, thereby streamlining the legal process and reducing the potential for disputes over procedural errors.

Summary

House Bill 1805 aims to amend the procedures surrounding lawsuits concerning payments made under protest in Hawaii. The bill seeks to address issues highlighted in the court case Grace Business Development Corporation v. Kamikawa, which found that taxpayers could lose their right to challenge agency decisions regarding the proper use of those payments if they did not follow procedural rules strictly. The Act proposes new safeguards that would allow courts to consider the merits of the disputes arising from such payments, thus preventing potential injustices where taxpayers may be forced to forfeit their claims merely due to premature lawsuits.

Sentiment

Overall, there is a favorable sentiment towards HB1805 among stakeholders focused on taxpayer rights and procedural fairness. Supporters argue that the bill represents a progressive step toward more equitable treatment of taxpayers by ensuring that they have a fair opportunity to contest agency decisions without the risk of losing their claims through stringent procedural timelines. However, there may be concerns voiced by state agencies regarding the implications of the changes on their operational processes and budgetary considerations.

Contention

One notable point of contention arises from the procedural adjustments proposed by HB1805. Critics may argue that while the bill seeks to enhance taxpayer rights, it also increases the administrative burden on state agencies, which may need to adjust their processes to accommodate the new rules. Additionally, there may be debates around the sufficiency of the safeguards to genuinely protect taxpayers against procedural pitfalls, as well as discussions around the potential financial implications for the state treasury in terms of managing the litigated claims fund.