Committee Summary for House Ways and Means (01/29/2026)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB1194 00:06:37.440 - 9:05:43 AM	Public Hearing	relative to credits for assessments paid by insurers.	Janigian, John(R)[B+]2025
HB1144 00:54:54.319 - 9:54:00 AM	Public Hearing	amending the excavation tax rate.	Schamberg, Thomas(D)[CT]2025
HB1708 01:36:54.639 - 10:36:00 AM	Public Hearing	relative to statewide education property taxes and other tax revenues.	Vallone, Mark(D)[D-]2025
HB1293 02:12:15.280 - 11:11:21 AM	Public Hearing	taxing certain properties owned by charitable or non-profit organizations.	Bolton, Bill(D)[F]2025

HB1194: Representative Janikian Information Only00:06:37.440 - 9:05:43 AM; Representative Janikian introduced HB 1194, sponsored at the request of the New Hampshire Insurance Department, to provide stability and predictability in estimating insurance premium tax revenues, especially during catastrophic events like insurer insolvencies. The bill clarifies that untimely filed credits are waived but allows amendments up to three years after filing. It limits credits based on total assessments, reducing the permitted credit percentage when assessments exceed a threshold, to minimize administrative burden and allow insurers to self-calculate credits without department involvement. The goal is to stabilize revenues when catastrophic losses of $10 million or more occur, preventing exposure from insurer failures.
HB1194: DJ Bentancourt, Commissioner, New Hampshire Insurance Department, with Amy Dooh, Tax Unit Director Support00:10:46.240 - 9:09:52 AM; Commissioner Bentancourt and Amy Dooh explained the need for HB 1194 to address revenue volatility from insurer insolvencies. They described the guarantee association as an industry-funded safety net that assesses member insurers to pay claims when a carrier fails, with credits against premium taxes to avoid double taxation. Current law allows 20% credits over five years, but large insolvencies like Colorado Bankers Life ($35 million assessment) create sudden revenue drops, potentially doubling impacts due to prepayments. The bill caps credits at $10 million per year, reducing them to 10% above that to smooth volatility without altering the safety net. They provided illustrations of financial impacts from multiple or large assessments and answered committee questions on revenue effects, noting the bill ultimately increases state revenue by limiting credits, while emphasizing consumer protection and industry responsibility. They clarified no overall revenue loss, just timing adjustments, and discussed policy options like extending credit periods.
HB1194: Henry Deu, American Council of Life Insurers Oppose00:46:51.440 - 9:45:57 AM; Henry Deu represented the American Council of Life Insurers and expressed opposition but optimism for negotiating changes with the Insurance Department. He understood the goal of limiting state revenue exposure in catastrophic failures but sought adjustments: indexing the $10 million cap for inflation to account for future dollar values, and addressing the 'cliff effect' where credits drop sharply from 20% to 10% just above the cap (e.g., at $10.01 million vs. $9.9 million), to make reductions more gradual. He emphasized members' willingness to support policyholders in insolvencies and requested time to refine the language, noting productive discussions with the department.
HB1144: Representative Tom Shamberg, Wilmot and Sutton Support00:54:54.319 - 9:54:00 AM; Representative Tom Shamberg introduces House Bill 1144, which proposes increasing the excavation tax from 2 cents to 4 cents per cubic yard under RSA 72-B. He explains that excavated earth is currently exempt from property taxation and taxed at removal, with revenue retained by municipalities. The bill preserves existing structures without creating new taxes, diverting revenue to the state, or adding burdens. He highlights how excavation stresses roads, bridges, and services, shifting costs to property taxpayers, and urges the committee to recommend ought to pass.
HB1144: Committee Member (Unnamed) Information Only00:58:41.359 - 9:57:47 AM; The committee member references a spreadsheet of towns receiving excavation gravel tax money, noting the last data is from 2021 and suggesting a slowdown in the system not caused by local communities.
HB1144: Representative (Unnamed, Hudson reference) Oppose00:59:44.240 - 9:58:50 AM; The representative questions the bill by recalling a past comment about taxing air from dust at sites. He notes Hudson benefits from a local quarry but argues that increasing the tax on aggregate material would raise costs for houses, factories, foundations, and roads. Shamberg responds that it's been 28 years since the tax was set, and inflation adjustment to 4 cents is modest, not breaking operators, while towns still need to repair roads and bridges.
HB1144: Representative Spar (Unnamed) Support01:01:17.040 - 10:00:23 AM; The representative clarifies that 2 cents from the original time equates to 4 cents today due to inflation. He asks if, without annual adjustments, gravel companies have paid less relative to inflation over 20+ years, increasing taxpayer burdens for infrastructure depreciation caused by their operations.
HB1144: Representative Elme (Unnamed) Information Only01:02:24.160 - 10:01:30 AM; The representative mentions reviewing the spreadsheet, noting Lebanon received $6,436 in a recent year despite having one of the state's largest gravel facilities. He shares an anecdote about Lebanon supplying gravel to Vermont during Hurricane Irene and receiving federal aid for a bridge, with residents in Hanover upset when the bridge failed.
HB1144: Unnamed Speaker (likely Representative Shamberg) Support01:03:26.799 - 10:02:32 AM; The speaker discusses the burdens on local towns from gravel operations, including trucks passing through populated areas and costs due to restrictions on interstate bridges. They argue that the proposed increase in the gravel tax is insufficient given inflation and local impacts, emphasizing that revenues go directly to towns to address issues like affordability.
HB1144: Unnamed Speaker (likely Representative) Information Only01:04:21.760 - 10:03:27 AM; The speaker notes that the 1998 dollar equates to $1.99 today, suggesting the gravel tax should adjust to about 4 cents. They mention low revenues in towns like Wilmot ($35 in 2021) and Salem ($0), but question adding costs amid the affordable housing crisis. In response, the discussion clarifies that funds return to towns, potentially aiding affordability without breaking operators.
HB1144: Representative Murphy Information Only01:08:05.680 - 10:07:11 AM; Representative Murphy questions the impact on homeowners excavating lots and shares an example of moving soil for farmland, noting potential significant costs from truckloads of material. The response clarifies the tax applies only to sand, gravel, and rock, not other soil, though some confusion exists in the bill's language.
HB1144: Unnamed Representative Information Only01:07:01.200 - 10:06:07 AM; The representative discusses how the tax on excavated goods might raise real estate costs but offsets community taxes, making it a 'wash' as the burden shifts from one individual to the community. They note that lower property taxes could enable community decisions on affordability initiatives.
HB1144: Representative Elberger Information Only01:09:08.000 - 10:08:14 AM; Representative Elberger asks about the typical cubic yards of gravel used in an average house to assess impact, but no specific answer is provided.
HB1144: Representative Oppel Information Only01:10:15.120 - 10:09:21 AM; Representative Oppel seeks confirmation that excavation operations impact roads and traffic beyond just the site, leading to costs for property taxpayers in repairs, which the tax could offset.
HB1144: Brody Duchaines, NH Municipal Association Support01:11:36.719 - 10:10:42 AM; Brody provides detailed testimony on the gravel tax history since 1998, proposing an increase from 2 to 4 cents per cubic yard to align with inflation (CPI 104%). He explains the tax offsets exemptions from property taxation on excavated earth, is collected locally to reduce property tax rates, and would double statewide revenue to $500,000. He clarifies it mainly affects commercial operations, not small homeowners, and addresses concerns on housing costs, road damage, and definitions of 'earth' including soil. He suggests potentially raising the excavation threshold to ease administration and responds to questions on impacts, exemptions, and municipal variations like in Lebanon.
HB1144: Unnamed Representative (likely Ulery) Information Only01:15:56.159 - 10:15:02 AM; The representative questions the cost impact on homeowners needing fill dirt (e.g., 10 cubic yards costing 20-40 cents) and notes commercial trucking already pays registration fees for road damage.
HB1144: Representative Elmy Information Only01:18:01.920 - 10:17:07 AM; Representative Elmy asks about eliminating the gravel tax exemption, and Brody explains it would raise property taxes on operators and incentivize over-excavation, similar to timber tax purposes.
HB1144: Unnamed Representative Information Only01:19:04.239 - 10:18:10 AM; The representative questions the statewide property tax reduction from $500,000, noting minimal impact (e.g., 0.001 in Lebanon), and Brody explains it varies by municipality and automatically reduces tax levies.
HB1144: Representative Malloy Information Only01:22:10.320 - 10:21:16 AM; Representative Malloy asks about road damage in gravel-heavy towns and whether the tax mitigates it; Brody clarifies it reduces overall tax levies, easing infrastructure funding, and confirms hearing such issues from members.
HB1144: Representative Ward Information Only01:25:45.440 - 10:24:51 AM; Representative Ward questions the definition of 'earth' including soil and suggests amending it out for support, citing concerns like sod farms. Brody notes soil is already included, hard to separate, and operations not selling off-site aren't impacted; he proposes raising the threshold for small excavations.
HB1144: Jim Misho, Chief Assessor, Town of Hudson Support01:30:06.000 - 10:29:12 AM; Jim provides Hudson-specific data: $9,336 in 2024 excavation tax revenue, doubling to $18,672 at 4 cents. He explains it lowers property tax needs, scales the per-truck cost (20-64 cents), and compares to adjusted timber taxes and current use values, arguing for legislative alignment with other rates.
HB1144: Jennifer Ramsey, DRA Tax Policy Council Information Only01:33:16.400 - 10:32:22 AM; Jennifer requests aligning the effective date with the property tax year (April 1, 2028) for easier administration, avoiding mid-year complexities, given the small dollar amounts involved.
HB1708: Representative Mark Volone, Epping, Rockingham District 5 Support01:36:54.639 - 10:36:00 AM; Representative Volone introduces HB1708FN, inspired by constituent calls for property tax relief. The bill cuts the statewide education property tax (swept) by $90 million (25%) over three years, providing direct relief to all property taxpayers while maintaining education funding. It funds this by raising the business profits tax from 7.5% to 8.5% and increasing the education trust fund portion from 39% to 44%, capped at $90 million. The DRA commissioner oversees gradual swept reduction from $363M to $273M, ensuring no district funding cuts. He emphasizes fiscal responsibility, local control, and shifting burden from homeowners (e.g., 3,500 in Epping) to businesses (140 in Epping), providing tangible savings for families without impacting school budgets.
HB1708: Unnamed Representative (Spar) Information Only01:43:07.600 - 10:42:13 AM; The representative confirms the bill substitutes business tax increases for swept reductions dollar-for-dollar, with no overall tax increase, implemented gradually over three years.
HB1708: Unnamed Representative Information Only01:43:07.600 - 10:42:13 AM; The representative shares a constituent example of a $15,000 tax bill with $750 swept (5%), estimating $180-200 savings, and notes it stays fixed without revenue fluctuations.
HB1708: Representative Oppel Information Only01:44:04.400 - 10:43:10 AM; Representative Oppel asks if targeting relief to lower-income homeowners (below median home value ~$500,000) was considered; Volone acknowledges requests from all incomes but notes exemptions as an alternative, favoring swept for simplicity.
HB1708: Unnamed Representative Information Only01:45:48.560 - 10:44:54 AM; The representative questions business impacts from raising BPT to 8.5%, citing past cuts for business-friendliness; Volone references NH Fiscal Policy Institute data showing no strong causality between cuts and GDP growth, prioritizing homeowner relief over business messaging.
HB1708: Unnamed Representative Information Only01:46:57.760 - 10:46:03 AM; The representative asks about comparative analyses from groups like Cato or Heritage; Volone says he Googled but didn't consult them specifically. On who pays business taxes, Volone argues it ultimately affects users but contrasts with direct family impacts of property taxes, urging property tax cuts now.
HB1708: Representative from Epping Support01:49:05.840 - 10:48:11 AM; The representative discusses the challenges businesses face in affording employee housing and childcare due to high costs, emphasizing that property tax relief would help. She highlights the impact of even small tax savings on low-income households in Epping, aiding with essentials like groceries and gas. She argues that increasing the business profits tax to 8.5% won't deter business growth, given historical precedents and geographic advantages, and stresses the long-overdue need for property tax cuts without state income or sales taxes.
HB1708: Zach Sheen, Executive Director, New Hampshire School Funding Fairness Project Support01:59:55.280 - 10:59:01 AM; Sheen supports HB 1708 as a means to reduce property taxes by adjusting the swept tax rate, funded by increasing the business profits tax (BPT). He notes the historical context from the Claremont lawsuit, where increased education funding led to property tax savings. He argues this bill pairs relief with a revenue source, addressing hesitancy on funding shifts. Citing data, he links education funding to better student outcomes, especially for students with disabilities. He questions who should bear the $90 million cost—businesses via BPT or local property taxpayers—and suggests analyzing impacts on different business sizes, noting broad-based tax cuts for all.
HB1293: Representative Bill Bolton, representing towns of Plymouth, Ashland, and Holderness Support02:12:15.280 - 11:11:21 AM; Bolton explains that nonprofits owning tax-exempt property reduce the tax base while still requiring municipal services, pressuring remaining taxpayers. HB 1293 exempts nonprofits under $1 million valuation fully; for those over, towns can tax the excess at municipal rates only, raise the threshold by vote (e.g., to $5 million), or honor existing PILOT agreements. Churches and universities are excluded. He supports the bill despite being a nonprofit executive director, aiming for fairness between municipalities and nonprofits.
HB1293: Representative from Lebanon Oppose02:19:22.160 - 11:18:28 AM; The speaker discusses the vital role of nonprofits in Lebanon, such as housing authorities, nonprofits providing affordable housing, and organizations like Listen that offer support for heating, food, clothing, and other needs for low-income residents. They argue it would be difficult to exempt all these groups from the proposed tax and express concern about the impact on these services.
HB1293: Representative Bill Bolton, representing Plymouth, Ashland, and Holderness Support02:21:13.200 - 11:20:19 AM; The speaker clarifies that the University of New Hampshire in Plymouth is excluded but discusses alternative arrangements like a $400,000 life safety services agreement, which is less than the potential $5 million in taxes. They suggest targeting exemptions in legislation or allowing local adjustments, such as raising the exemption threshold to $10 million to cover nonprofits. They note that towns like Plymouth already use PILOT agreements for hospitals and encourage others to do so, emphasizing that the bill targets charitable organizations, not all nonprofits.
HB1293: Representative Ols Information Only02:24:03.200 - 11:23:09 AM; The representative distinguishes between charitable organizations and the broader category of nonprofits, pressing for clarity on whether the bill applies only to charitable ones with missions benefiting the public, similar to definitions in video lottery terminal laws.
HB1293: Unidentified Representative Information Only02:25:24.080 - 11:24:30 AM; The representative seeks clarification on the distinction between charitable and nonprofit organizations, suggesting deferring to the municipal association.
HB1293: Unidentified Representative Information Only02:25:24.080 - 11:24:30 AM; The representative references video lottery terminal discussions to highlight the clear legal distinction between nonprofits (broader group like social clubs) and charitable organizations with public benefit missions, urging careful definition.
HB1293: Representative from Plymouth (nonprofit) Information Only02:26:42.720 - 11:25:48 AM; As a 501c3 nonprofit in Plymouth receiving charitable funds from casinos, the speaker notes uncertainty if this satisfies the definition but defers to the municipal association.
HB1293: Representative Mallaloy Information Only02:28:06.479 - 11:27:12 AM; The representative asks about a religious organization owning a nonprofit worth over a million dollars in property and whether it would be assessed property tax if owned by a church.
HB1293: Representative Elberger Information Only02:28:06.479 - 11:27:12 AM; The representative follows up on whether a tax-exempt religious organization running a for-profit business, like a store to raise funds, would be taxable, recalling examples of nonprofits funding programs through unrelated businesses.
HB1293: Unidentified Speaker Information Only02:30:15.680 - 11:29:21 AM; The speaker interprets the bill as requiring municipalities to impose the tax unless they decide otherwise by raising the exemption threshold.
HB1293: Representative Opel Information Only02:30:15.680 - 11:29:21 AM; The representative asks if the only way to carve out certain charities is by raising the exemption threshold uniformly, not selectively, to avoid capriciousness.
HB1293: Unidentified Representative Information Only02:31:03.359 - 11:30:09 AM; The representative inquires about metrics on how many charitable organizations would be impacted if the exemption remains at a million dollars statewide.
HB1293: Representative Bolton Support02:31:03.359 - 11:30:09 AM; The representative acknowledges concerns about unequal treatment across towns but suggests nonprofits could negotiate PILOT agreements to avoid taxes, and towns have incentives to adjust exemptions or use PILOTs.
HB1293: Brody Ducha, New Hampshire Municipal Association Support02:35:26.880 - 11:34:32 AM; The association supports HB 1293 to provide municipalities flexibility in charitable tax exemptions, emulating existing law. It clarifies the bill does not force taxation, allows local increases to the exemption (via council or petition), targets fairness in taxation proportional to community benefits, and notes similar proposals in other states like North Carolina. Churches are unaffected, and 'charitable' is already defined in statute.
HB1293: Brody Ducha, New Hampshire Municipal Association Support02:39:00.800 - 11:38:06 AM; Ducha discusses the need to adjust the $1 million exemption threshold due to rising real estate prices, suggesting it may be too low and proposing increases or carveouts for organizations with regional impact. He emphasizes municipal flexibility in setting exemption amounts and entering into pilot agreements on a case-by-case basis, allowing local consideration of charitable benefits. He addresses concerns about varying exemptions across municipalities, noting potential for viewpoint discrimination but highlighting member requests for more local optionality over statewide mandates.
HB1293: Jim Mishaw, Chief Assessor, Town of Hudson Information Only02:46:34.960 - 11:45:40 AM; Mishaw testifies neutrally, highlighting the lack of statewide transparency on exempt properties, including charitable, religious, governmental, and educational ones. He notes that the MS1 form only provides aggregate exempt land and building values without specifics. He recommends amending the bill to require a comprehensive list on the DRA website for better visibility into exemptions and partial exemptions. He contrasts this with transparent pilot agreements, like Hudson's with Southern New Hampshire Medical Center, which are reported on MS1 and MS4 forms.
HB1293: Eric Shaw, Selectman, Town of New Hampton Support02:49:58.160 - 11:49:04 AM; Shaw supports the bill to address property tax inequities in New Hampton caused by the tax-exempt New Hampton School, which owns property valued over $40 million (8% of town's total) but pays only about 1% of the town budget despite benefiting from services for 15-20% of the population. He details the school's 82% exemption, leading to $40,000 annual payment, plus $80,000 shifted from tax rolls due to property acquisitions, and $270,000 in school costs for faculty children. The school has a $75,000 tuition, $40 million endowment, $30 million revenue, and $3.5 million profit, yet refuses pilot agreements despite ongoing discussions. The bill would provide leverage for fairer contributions.
HB1293: Henry Veu, New Hampshire Alliance of YMCA Oppose02:59:00.160 - 11:58:06 AM; Henry Veu testified on behalf of the New Hampshire Alliance of YMCA, where he also serves as a board member for the Granite YMCA with locations in Manchester, Gtown (likely Goffstown), Londereerry (likely Londonderry), the Sea Coast, and the Concord YMCA. He noted that their downtown Manchester facility is valued over a million dollars and that the Granite Y raises about $1.6 million annually through fundraising to support community programs for those who cannot afford them, including summer camps for kids, child care scholarships supplementing state aid, and wellness programs for the elderly. He explained that the YMCA accepts all who come through their doors and provides services accordingly. If the bill passes, it would reduce their ability to provide these essential services, making operations much more difficult. For these reasons, he opposes the bill.
HB1293: Kathleen Rearen, CEO, New Hampshire Center for Nonprofits Oppose03:04:00.960 - 12:03:06 PM; Kathleen Rearen, CEO of the New Hampshire Center for Nonprofits, a statewide association with over 800 members, expressed extreme concerns about the bill, which she said poses significant threats to communities. She highlighted that nonprofits deliver essential services like child care, affordable housing, health care, and elder care in a cost-effective manner, often saving public dollars. Many charitable nonprofits also foster economic vitality through theaters, performing arts centers, museums, and cultural sites that attract visitors and boost local businesses. Rearen emphasized that New Hampshire's tax exemption process for charitable nonprofits using properties for mission-related services is a successful policy partnership between state government, local government, and nonprofits. Taxing these properties would divert funds, reducing capacity to deliver services at a time of increasing demand. Nonprofits understand municipal budget challenges but operate on thin margins, and taxing them risks essential services. She urged the committee to find the bill inexpedient to legislate.
HB1293: Tom Blonsky, President and CEO, Catholic Charities New Hampshire Oppose03:12:04.000 - 12:11:10 PM; Tom Blonsky testified in opposition to HB 1293, describing it as a draconian tax bill that would impact 13 to 14 of their facilities. He provided background on Catholic Charities, a statewide human services organization with 1,200 staff serving one in 12 New Hampshire residents annually. They operate seven rehabilitation centers and nursing homes, the New Hampshire Food Bank, St. Charles Home and School in Rochester, transitional living programs, senior support programs, eight district offices offering case management, financial literacy, emergency assistance, counseling, and mental health services. Recently, they added healthcare for the homeless in Manchester and the Quasan Dental Clinic serving uninsured and Medicaid populations, plus a new affordable housing program in Peterborough. Last year, they contributed $24.2 million in free or reduced-cost services, but their net operating revenue was negative $175,000. He argued that additional taxes would devastate their finances, forcing tough choices like selling facilities or programs such as Liberty House or New Generation. Nonprofits are exempt because they provide benefits the government might otherwise offer, operating efficiently with transformative impacts, like the Food Bank's rapid distribution of 350,000 pounds of food to SNAP beneficiaries. With tight margins and funding cuts, the bill would create hardship for mission-driven work serving vulnerable populations.
HB1293: Ben Bradley, New Hampshire Hospital Association Oppose03:19:45.840 - 12:18:51 PM; Ben Bradley, representing 26 acute care hospitals including 22 nonprofits and a board member of Dover Children's Home (speaking only for the association), opposed HB 1293. He noted similar past proposals like HB 573 in 2017, which the committee recommended inexpedient to legislate 22-0. The bill would impose municipal property taxes on charitable organizations valued over $1 million, leading to uneven taxation even among similar services based on property value. There's no guarantee revenue would address community health needs or reduce other tax burdens, potentially diverting funds to unrelated municipal projects. Nonprofit hospitals provided $675 million in community benefits in 2023, collaborating on community needs and delivering three times their tax exemptions in benefits per an EY analysis. The bill could disrupt existing agreements with municipalities. He recommended inexpedient to legisate and noted existing PILT opportunities already allow voluntary contributions.
HB1293: Mitch Graves, Business and Industry Association Statewide Chamber of Commerce Oppose03:25:44.479 - 12:24:50 PM; Mitch Graves opposed HB 1293, noting disparate impacts on similarly missioned nonprofits due to property valuations, creating winners and losers. For example, the Granite YMCA in Concord (valued over $4 million) and nearby Boys and Girls Club (over $2 million) would face different tax treatments despite providing after-school programs. The bill alters PILT negotiations, giving municipalities leverage to demand full taxes rather than lesser PILTs, especially if disfavoring an organization. It risks conflicts over regional-impact charities like the Boys and Girls Club serving surrounding communities. Charitable exemptions exist because these organizations provide societal value services, allowing funds to go directly to missions rather than taxes.
HB1293: Matt Ley, Public Policy Director, Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests Oppose03:33:29.680 - 12:32:35 PM; Matt Ley opposed HB 1293, acknowledging municipal financial stresses but warning the bill could create unintended stresses elsewhere. Nonprofits provide deep benefits to communities and statewide, justifying opposition.

Janigian, John(Chairman)(R)[B+]2025	Ohm, Bill(Clerk)(R)[B+]2025	Ulery, Jordan(V Chairman)(R)[A-]2025
Almy, Susan(D)[F]2025	Oppel, Thomas(D)[F]2025	Smith, Steven(R)[B]2025
Malloy, Dennis(D)[CT]2025	Schamberg, Thomas(D)[CT]2025	Southworth, Thomas(D)[F]2025
Tierney, James(R)[B]2025	Cole, Brian(R)[A-]2025	Aures, Cyril(R)[B+]2025
Bolton, Bill(D)[F]2025	Elberger, Susan(D)[F]2025	Smith, Geoffrey(D)[D-]2025
Soti, Julius(R)[A+]2025	Spahr, Terry(D)[D-]2025	Bryer, Scott(R)[B]2025
Murphy, Mary(R)[B+]2025	Ford, Mary(R)[B+]2025