@NCCapitol

@NCCapitol

Property tax break for veterans, survivors scaled back

Posted March 28

A proposal to give more property tax relief to disabled veterans and surviving spouses of fallen emergency responders is moving ahead – with some key changes meant to ease the concerns of cities and counties.

— A proposal to give more property tax relief to disabled veterans and surviving spouses of fallen emergency responders is moving ahead – with some key changes meant to ease the concerns of cities and counties.

Under current law, 100 percent disabled veterans are exempt from local property tax for the first $45,000 of their property's value. The version of House Bill 2 that passed the House Finance Committee on Tuesday morning would raise that cap to the first $100,000 of value.

An earlier version of the bill did not cap the exempted value at all and left local governments responsible for absorbing the loss of revenue. But sponsor Rep. Nelson Dollar, R-Wake, said officials have learned that there is a high concentration of such veterans in a "relatively small number of counties," including Cumberland, that would be disproportionately affected.

"We had to tail back our ambitions a little bit," Dollar told the panel. "The additional amount will be covered by the state in this case and not be covered by the municipalities."

The proposal would also include in the exemption the surviving unmarried spouses of law enforcement officers, emergency medical technicians and firefighters killed in the line of duty. Dollar said about 370 emergency responders have died on the job across the state since the late 1970s.

"For hometown heroes who have sacrificed their very lives for the safety and protection of their communities," Dollar said, "the least we can do is to help their spouses, their orphans."

However, the local governments will have to cover the losses. The state will not reimburse the counties for the difference, Dollar said, noting, "It’s their employees."

Dollar took a little good-natured ribbing about the bill number – House Bill 2 – from Rep. Becky Carney, D-Mecklenburg.

Dollar pointed out that the the Hurricane Matthew relief legislation passed last December was also numbered House Bill 2. "I don’t ascribe meaning to numbers," he said.

"Maybe we ought to consider – as they retire numbers in sports – maybe we should retire House Bill 2," Carney suggested with a laugh.

The bill goes next to House Appropriations Committee.

5 Comments

Please with your WRAL.com account to comment on this story. You also will need a Facebook account to comment.

Oldest First
View all
  • Beauregard Macy Mar 29, 2:01 p.m.
    user avatar

    View quoted thread


    None of the occupations you listed are public service, with the possible exception of lineman. And the reason for the tax break is the risk incurred through public service. If an HR director at the Controllers office gets paralyzed in a non-duty related accident, you think that is a reason they should not pay property tax? If the printer fell on them however......

  • Michael Bawden Mar 28, 5:31 p.m.
    user avatar

    The people who deserve tax breaks are the job creators since this has been a proven effective strategy of creating jobs and stimulating economic growth since the days of Reagan.

  • William James Mar 28, 2:28 p.m.
    user avatar

    Giving Vets and Emergency workers always gets votes and positive press, but why are'nt other public service workers eligible for death benefits/tax relief for their families. I mean statistically linemen, construction, fishing, farming, and many other physical occupations have far more death and serious injuries compared to the military or emergency responders, but they don't get a thing and even their death has to be a paid ad.

  • Beauregard Macy Mar 28, 2:06 p.m.
    user avatar

    View quoted thread


    Absolutely! Let's lump the accountant at UNC general administration making $80k and working 30 hours a week in with the grunts making $40k in Afghanistan, losing their life, limbs, or eyesight.

  • Kyle Clarkson Mar 28, 12:09 p.m.
    user avatar

    Why not include all public servants in with this!?