HB425

I am here to testify in opposition to House Bill 425. As someone who deeply values the role that nonprofits play in building strong, resilient communities, I believe this bill unintentionally undermines the principles of fairness and equity that are essential for a thriving nonprofit sector. Religious organizations are critical to the fabric of our communities, but so are the many secular nonprofits—food banks, shelters, arts organizations, health clinics—that work alongside them to meet diverse community needs. HB 425 creates an uneven playing field by allowing religious organizations to retain tax-exempt status while generating rental income, a privilege not extended to other nonprofits that also serve the public good. This isn’t about opposing religious organizations—it’s about ensuring that all nonprofits are treated equitably, regardless of their focus or affiliation. Property taxes fund services that benefit everyone: public education, emergency response, roads, and more. When tax exemptions are expanded without clear justification, the financial burden doesn’t disappear—it shifts to homeowners, small businesses, and other nonprofits who continue to pay their fair share. We all benefit from public services, and it’s reasonable to expect that when organizations engage in revenue-generating activities like renting property, they contribute back to the community that supports them. I’m also concerned about the vague language in the bill, which could create loopholes. What defines a “similar mission”? Without clear guidelines, this opens the door for potential abuse, where rental arrangements are framed to fit the exemption even if they don’t genuinely align with the organization’s core purpose. This risks eroding public trust in our tax system and diverting resources away from the community programs that tax exemptions are meant to support. Nonprofits are strongest when we have policies that promote accountability, equity, and sustainability across the board. HB 425 doesn’t align with those values. Instead, it creates an unfair advantage for one type of nonprofit while increasing the financial burden on others. I urge the committee to reject this bill and work toward tax policies that support all nonprofits fairly, ensuring that we continue to build communities where everyone can thrive. Thank you for your time and consideration.

This is an unnecessary bill. Religious, charitable, and educational properties already may continue to qualify for a property tax exemption if they rent property to another qualifying entity as long as both entities fill out the proper applications. The wording of the bill is also questionable as municipalities would have to spend additional time and money babysitting both entities reviewing the "mission or goal" as well as the use of the property and the use of the rental income for qualifying purposes.

Absolutely not. The churches in this country get far too many passes. If they want to be on our land, they need to pay taxes. They need to pay into the town they are occupying, consider it penance for all of the abuse they hide.

Regardless of where the money goes, renting property turns the church into a profitable organization which should be subject to property taxes and any related business taxes. There is already enough leeway given to religious organizations with regards to exemptions. This one is a bridge too far.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.

Position recorded without written comment.