The House and Senate have a hiatus through November 30th, so this report describes, rather than voting, some of the many “economic development” bills introduced earlier this year to give selective subsidies and tax breaks to certain businesses and developers Introduced in 2021, with two already in effect and several others passed by either the House of Representatives or the Senate (but not both). This report describes some of those who have not yet received a vote.
House Bill 4827: Housing Subsidies Approval
Introduced by Rep. John Roth (R) to approve a new selective property tax for developers, this for residential real estate. The owner of a new or renovated residential property on at least one hectare in an eligible “district” would receive a 50% property tax reduction for 12 years. This would be available to people earning up to 125% of the local median income. Referred to the committee, currently no further action.
Senate Law 615: Approve an Additional $ 300 Million in Government Subsidies to Entrepreneurs
Introduced by Sen. Kenneth Horn (R) to approve a new business subsidy program that would allow certain businesses and developers to collect up to $ 300 million in income tax paid by workers and residents (and leave the state). Officials at the state agency responsible for granting subsidies to entrepreneurs could approve up to 40 new subsidy contracts each year through 2026. The draft law was presented by the Economic and Small Business Development Committee with a “favorable” recommendation.
House Bill 4544: Stop Using Indian Casino Revenue For Business Subsidy Programs
Introduced by Rep. Jeff Yaroch (R) on March 18, 2021 to require all funds and assets held by the Michigan Strategic Fund to be classified as public money and assets and, like other government revenues, to be issued only upon approval may be an appropriation enacted by the legislature and provided for by law. Also, $ 60 million of annual Indian casino revenue now earmarked for this agency is said to be diverted to the transportation and road funding budget instead. The “Strategic Fund” is the state government agency that oversees the granting of taxpayer-funded subsidies to specific companies and developers, selected by their employees and approved by a panel of policy officials. Referred to the committee, currently no further action.
House Bill 4979: Prohibit device to increase corporate social benefits
Introduced by Rep. Steven Johnson (R) to prohibit the State Department, which is responsible for granting selective subsidies to certain companies and developers, the Michigan Strategic Fund, from designating a property as a tax-exempt “Renaissance Zone” unless it is completely in an “authorized emergency area” within the meaning of a state housing law. This has often been used to convert selective tax breaks into direct cash subsidies that are estimated to cost state taxpayers up to $ 9 billion in 20 years. Referred to the committee, currently no further action.
House Bill 4423: More municipalities to take on “land bank” debt
Introduced by Rep. David LaGrand (D) to expand the communities that can go into debt in connection with their property purchases and sales into a state “Landbank Fast Track Authority”. Referred to the committee, currently no further action.
House Bill 4060: Authorize State Subsidies for “Micro Enterprises”
Introduced by Rep. Abdullah Hammoud (D) to approve state subsidies for “micro-enterprises”. The subsidies could be loan guarantees of up to $ 35,000 plus some other perks distributed by “micro-business development organizations” that the state would give grants to. The bill would also create a state government “micro-enterprise development center” to determine which private organizations would receive the grant. Referred to the committee, currently no further action.
House Bill 4646: Extension of certain subsidies for developers, preferring “compact” developments. Introduced by Rep. Kyra Bolden (D) to enable every town, village or municipality to offer selective “Neighborhood Enterprise Zone (NEZ)” tax breaks for certain Approving property developers, not just county towns and certain “needy communities”. Referred to the committee, currently no further action.
Permission is hereby granted to reprint this blog post in whole or in part, provided the author (or authors) and the Mackinac Center for Public Policy are properly cited.