Increases the maximum amount of the construction code retrofitting deduction and expands the deduction to cover costs associated with "fortified home" standards compliance (EG1 DECREASE GF RV See Note)
If enacted, HB 145 would amend Louisiana's tax code to support homeowners who voluntarily retrofit their properties. The legislation introduces a broader interpretation of eligible retrofitting costs, allowing taxpayers to claim deductions for a wider range of safety-related upgrades. This change is expected to incentivize renovation efforts, which may improve compliance with state construction standards and raise the overall safety profile of housing in Louisiana.
House Bill 145 aims to enhance the existing construction code retrofitting income tax deduction by increasing the maximum allowable deduction amount from $5,000 to $10,000 per retrofitted residential structure. Additionally, the bill expands the scope of this deduction to cover costs associated with retrofitting qualifying homes to comply with 'fortified home' standards set by the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety. The bill is designed to encourage homeowners to invest in safety and resilience improvements to their properties, thus potentially leading to enhanced safety in residential areas during adverse weather conditions.
The sentiment surrounding HB 145 appears largely supportive among legislators who recognize the need for enhanced residential safety measures. Proponents argue that increasing the tax deduction is a practical approach to encourage homeowners to invest in necessary upgrades. However, there is caution expressed over the potential fiscal impacts on the state's budget as increased tax deductions could lead to a reduction in state revenue. As the bill awaits further discussion, it has sparked a dialogue regarding balancing public safety interests with fiscal responsibility.
Notable points of contention related to HB 145 involve concerns around its long-term budget implications for the state government. While supporters emphasize safety and resilience in housing, opponents question whether increasing tax deductions can be justified in light of potential revenue loss. Furthermore, the specificity of the fortified home standards could lead to debates about the feasibility of compliance for average homeowners, particularly in economically strained regions.