HB9

The introduced bill, House committee text and House-passed text proposed a $250,000 exemption and relief for the 2025 tax year. They included extensive provisional appraisal-roll, tax-rate, tax-bill and supplemental-bill procedures to handle the pending constitutional election. Those provisions did not become law.

The Senate committee substitute reduced the exemption to $125,000, moved the conditional start to 2026, removed the 2025 provisional-tax machinery, and added the per-location, leased-property, related-entity and continuing rendition-election rules. This was a committee rewrite, not a floor amendment. All text versions.

The amendment index lists one floor amendment: Bettencourt’s Senate second-reading F1, adopted May 14. It added the rule for property at locations the owner neither owns nor leases and made four related cross-reference changes. All five instructions survived in the enrolled law. The House concurred in the Senate changes 110–15, with one present but not voting; the Senate passed the bill 31–0. The form’s warning about false statements and the existing secured-party definitions were retained, not newly created criminal offenses or new creditor powers. Final provisions and passage certificates.

Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.

Owners of qualifying income-producing property can benefit from a smaller taxable base. Appraisal districts must administer the grouping and reporting rules. Benefits vary with ownership, property value, taxable location and local rates; the law does not guarantee that each business’s final tax bill falls by a fixed amount.

The May 15 final-stage fiscal note estimates a $193.504 million negative state general-revenue-related impact for fiscal 2026–27, all in fiscal 2027. Its estimated impacts for fiscal 2028, 2029 and 2030 are $106.732 million, $115.129 million and $145.424 million respectively. These are projections, not observed spending or an appropriation in HB9. The state cost arises through school-finance formulas; the roughly $72.6 million fiscal-2027 reduction in school recapture payments is included in that cost, not an additional amount to add again.

The note estimates $339.632 million in school-district revenue loss in fiscal 2027, with part of the school loss transferred to the state through those formulas. For cities, counties and special districts, it estimates $442 million less in fiscal-2027 levies if rates are not raised. Lower taxable value also raises calculated no-new-revenue and voter-approval tax rates. Higher adopted rates can offset revenue losses, shift more tax to nonexempt property and reduce the savings on exempt property; the note does not predict each local government’s actual choice.

Earlier estimates describe different proposals: the introduced-bill note projected a $566.354 million state general-revenue-related cost through fiscal 2027, while the Senate committee note could not determine the cost because of uncertainty about property deployed at customer, vendor or public-right-of-way locations. Neither replaces the final-stage estimate. This briefing explains the enacted rules and estimates; it does not determine any particular owner’s filing obligation or tax savings.