Texas House Bill HB1371

Texas 2013 - 83rd Regular

Caption

Relating to the meaning of "disabled" for purposes of eligibility for an exemption from ad valorem taxation of or a limitation of ad valorem taxes on the residence homestead of a person who is disabled.

Impact

The passage of HB 1371 would have a direct impact on state tax laws, specifically the segments of the Tax Code that govern property tax exemptions for disabled individuals. By expanding the criteria for what constitutes a disability under the law, the bill aims to increase access to financial relief for more residents who are unable to work due to chronic illnesses. This change could result in lowered property tax bills for qualifying individuals, potentially alleviating some of the challenges faced by those in difficult health circumstances.

Summary

House Bill 1371 seeks to clarify the definition of 'disabled' in relation to exemptions from ad valorem taxation on residence homesteads. The bill focuses on ensuring that individuals who are diagnosed with certain medical conditions, such as cancer, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, or epilepsy, are recognized as disabled under state law for the purpose of tax benefits. This amendment intends to provide tax relief to those suffering from significant disabilities, thereby easing their financial burdens associated with property taxes.

Sentiment

The general sentiment around this bill appears to be supportive among advocacy groups and legislators concerned with disability rights and fiscal equity. However, there may be some contention regarding its fiscal implications, as expanding eligibility for tax exemptions can affect state revenue. While proponents argue that the bill provides necessary support for those in need, critics may express concern about the potential impact on funding for state services as budgets get tighter with such exemptions in place.

Contention

Key points of contention could arise regarding the definition of 'disabled' itself and the criteria set forth in the bill. Some may argue that including specific medical conditions opens the door to complexities in determining eligibility, potentially leading to disputes over claims. Additionally, there may be discussions about whether this approach adequately addresses the needs of individuals with varying disabilities that do not fall into the specified categories but still face significant challenges in their daily lives. The balance between broadening eligibility and ensuring that tax policies remain sustainable for the state could be a significant aspect of the debate surrounding this legislation.