Iowa House Bill HSB232

Iowa 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/20/25
• Refer: 2/20/25

Caption

A bill for an act relating to the historic preservation tax credit available against the individual and corporate income taxes, the franchise tax, and the insurance premiums tax.

Impact

This bill is significant as it impacts individuals and businesses involved in historic preservation projects. The amendment to extend the existing rights for tax credit claims serves to reassure stakeholders that their previously awarded credits will remain intact despite the new regulations. This provision aims to mitigate potential financial losses for taxpayers who rely on these incentives for investment in preserving historic properties. By ensuring a smoother transition to the newly prescribed limits, HSB232 seeks to foster continued investment in the preservation of Iowa’s historical assets.

Summary

House Study Bill 232 (HSB232) is designed to revise regulations surrounding the historic preservation tax credit available against several taxes, including the individual and corporate income taxes, the franchise tax, and the insurance premiums tax. The bill amends the existing laws established in 2022 with House File 2317, which gradually reduced the refundability of the historic preservation tax credit starting in 2023 and set a 75% maximum refundability starting from tax years beginning in 2027. Previously, the tax credit was fully refundable at 100%. HSB232 aims to protect the rights of taxpayers by extending the protection clause for those who claimed tax credits before July 1, 2023, thereby ensuring they are not adversely affected by the new regulation changes.

Contention

The adjustments proposed in HSB232 have likely sparked debate over the appropriateness of reducing refundability for tax credits while trying to protect existing claims. Critics may argue that limiting tax credits detracts from the incentive to pursue costly preservation efforts. Proponents, however, may highlight the importance of fiscal responsibility and the need to balance legislative intent with realistic economic limitations. The ongoing discussions surrounding these points echo broader concerns about tax policy and state investment in cultural heritage.