Add Row
Add Element
Kozi checks and balances
update

Kozi Checks & Balances
Media Site Home

cropper
update
Add Element
  • Categories
    • Kansas Tax Compliance
    • Audit-Proofing Strategies
    • Bookkeeping Basics
    • QuickBooks Optimization
    • Industry Insights
    • Tax Deduction Deep-Dives
    • Local Business Spotlights
    • Payroll Taxes
    • Business Directory
Add Row
Add Element
cropper
update
 Kozi Checks & Balances TaxTactics News 
cropper
update
March 17.2025
3 Minutes Read

Kansas Tackles Property Tax Hikes: What Do New Proposals Mean for You?

Kansas capitol building representing property tax limit proposals

Understanding Kansas Property Tax Proposals: S.B. 280 vs. H.B. 2396

As discussions surrounding property taxes heat up in Kansas, two fresh legislative proposals are taking center stage: S.B. 280 and H.B. 2396. Both initiatives aim to address the rising cost of property taxes, but they explore different mechanisms for controlling levies. S.B. 280 proposes an annual limit that allows local governments to increase property tax collections only to match inflation and accommodate new constructions, directly involving voters in any further increases. Meanwhile, H.B. 2396 provides citizens the power to protest and potentially overturn property tax hikes while simultaneously boosting state funding for local government agencies.

The Need for Property Tax Limits

The proposed levy limits in Kansas are significant in a context where property taxes comprise a substantial portion of state and local revenues. Historically, Kansas has had some form of property tax limit in place until it was largely repealed in 2021. S.B. 280 aims to revive this concept by creating a structured pathway where voters can assess whether increased taxation is justified, fostering stronger community engagement with tax policies. This change resonates particularly well with taxpayers who increasingly feel the strain of property taxes on their budgets.

Inflation and New Construction: Essential Considerations

Notably, one key feature of S.B. 280 is its built-in adjustment for inflation. This consideration ensures that local governments do not fall behind on the costs associated with providing essential services as prices rise. As property values and communities evolve with new subdivisions and businesses, the need for public infrastructure to support these developments must be adequately funded. The bill seeks to address this balance without harming taxpayers' wallets too severely.

Potential Drawbacks of Current Proposals

Despite their merits, the current proposals also carry some potential drawbacks. For example, while H.B. 2396 gives taxpayers a means to contest tax increases, the protest process may complicate the fiscal planning for local governments, leading to uncertainty in budget allocations—something that cities and counties must navigate to maintain efficient services. Ultimately, carefully considering these proposals' structures may lead Kansas to a more balanced and fair taxation system.

What This Means for Kansas Taxpayers

As Kansans engage in this ongoing debate, the implications of these property tax proposals can shape the financial landscape for countless families. With the possibility of a structured levy limit being reinstated, residents may find themselves with more control over local tax matters and better insights into how government services are funded. This proactive approach can encourage a sense of ownership and responsibility among taxpayers regarding their financial contributions to their communities.

What’s Next for Kansas' Tax Future?

Ultimately, as these proposals make their way through legislation, the future of property taxes in Kansas rests on balancing growth, fairness, and accountability. Citizens have the power to advocate for which structures benefit their communities best. As these discussions evolve, staying informed and engaged will be critical for making impactful choices in local governance.

Payroll Taxes

Write A Comment

*
*
Related Posts All Posts
12.12.2025

The Impact of QSBS Exclusion on Investment: A Misguided Incentive?

Update Questioning the Efficacy of QSBS Exclusion Investment incentives designed to stimulate growth can sometimes have unexpected ramifications. The Qualified Small Business Stock (QSBS) exclusion, which allows investors to exclude capital gains from certain small business stocks, is a classic example of a policy that may do more harm than good in the long run. Intended to encourage investment in budding startups, it instead distorts business decisions by favoring certain structures and industries, ultimately leading to economic imbalances. How QSBS Distorts Business Decisions Investors often find themselves navigating a complex landscape shaped by this tax exclusion. To qualify, companies must adhere to stringent rules: they must be domestic C-corporations with gross assets under $75 million and must actively conduct a qualified trade or business using at least 80% of their assets. This creates a scenario where business growth or investor decisions hinge less on fundamental strengths and more on tax qualifications, potentially leading to missed opportunities in more deserving sectors. How the OBBBA Shapes QSBS Landscape The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) made notable modifications to QSBS rules, raising the exclusion limit from $10 million to $15 million for investments made after July 4, 2025. Such financial incentives can lead to skewed investment patterns, as they shift focus away from innovative or impactful industries in favor of those that meet the technical requirements of QSBS. The Case for Simplifying Tax Incentives Critics argue that rather than maintaining a convoluted tax structure that incentivizes only specific outcomes, a broader, simpler approach like expanding expensing provisions could yield a more neutral playing field. Such a change could provide a pro-growth environment where businesses are incentivized by actual economic performance rather than arbitrary tax benefits. Rethinking Investment Strategies Investors must remain adaptable as they confront the landscape reshaped by QSBS and its recent expansions. Understanding the nuances of these regulations can prove crucial, especially for early-stage employees and startup founders who may be navigating their stock options and equity compensation. With many states imposing their taxes on QSBS gains despite federal exclusions, comprehension of regional tax implications becomes imperative. Empowering Communities Through Informed Investment The complexities surrounding QSBS highlight the need for grassroots financial education. For community stakeholders, grasping these intricacies isn't just about maximizing financial returns; it's about ensuring stability within local economies. By fostering informed investment and encouraging the right types of business growth, communities can harness these incentives to their advantage. It’s time to take a step back and rethink not just how we promote investment, but how we can do so in ways that serve both businesses and the larger economic community effectively.

12.11.2025

Unpacking the OBBBA: A Close Look at Debt, Deficits, and Tax Revenue

Update Understanding the OBBBA's Fiscal Impact and Future TrendsThe One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), set against a backdrop of rising national debt and ongoing economic challenges, is entering the fiscal dialogue with significant implications for the future of U.S. economic health. As projections suggest that public debt could soar to 124% of GDP by 2034, it's essential to unpack how this legislation interacts with existing fiscal dynamics.What Does the OBBBA Entail?At its core, the OBBBA represents a substantial tax cut—estimated at $5 trillion over the next decade. While this sounds promising as it aims to stimulate economic growth by reducing individual income tax rates, it adds a layer of complexity due to its potential to escalate national deficits. According to recent modeling, even accounting for spending reforms, the OBBBA is projected to increase the deficit by approximately $3.8 trillion, which puts additional strain on the already rising debt levels.Implications for Tax Revenue and Deficit SpendingThe act's design ensures it is impactful, but it poses questions regarding sustainability. It's projected to boost GDP modestly by 1.2%, enhancing economic conditions but creating a higher deficit-to-GDP ratio. When considering historical trendlines of revenue—which is expected to average around 18% of GDP—there's a clear indicator that if spending cuts are not balanced effectively, we could face severe fiscal cliffs that threaten financial stability.Potential Tariff Benefits Against Debt IncreaseMoreover, the introduction of new tariffs under the Trump administration may offset some costs of the OBBBA, providing an additional $2.1 trillion in revenue, reducing the net increase in deficits to about $1.4 trillion. However, these tariffs also carry their own economic implications, potentially leading to tariff-induced inflation and challenges for consumer spending, complicating the economic landscape further.Future Outlook and RecommendationsLawmakers are encouraged to consider healthcare and old-age programs that significantly contribute to the nation’s debt as they navigate impending fiscal policies. Crafting a bipartisan fiscal commission could be a prudent step towards addressing these critical long-term issues. Ensuring that the economic growth promised by the OBBBA is sustainable is vital for protecting the fiscal health of the country and avoiding a crisis that might necessitate drastic adjustments in the future.

12.09.2025

Navigating the NCTI Tax Surprise: What States Are Missing

Update Why State Taxation of NCTI Might Surprise You The new tax on net controlled foreign corporation-tested income (NCTI) is making waves in state tax codes across the nation, yet many taxpayers might find themselves blindsided by unexpected charges. Despite prior exclusions of the global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) tax in states like Iowa, Kansas, New Hampshire, and Tennessee, the transition to NCTI could see these states unwittingly start taxing this income due to how they have defined their exclusions. Lawmakers might be caught off guard as legislation evolves, potentially revealing a hidden tax burden in state funding. Decoupling from GILTI: A Double-Edged Sword The effort to decouple from GILTI in some states was initially a relief for taxpayers, reflecting a policy aimed at avoiding unnecessary taxation on foreign income. Yet, as outlined in the recent changes proposed by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), states risk falling into a trap of implementing a new tax regime that could be even more burdensome. Without explicit efforts to adjust for NCTI, states could inadvertently adopt a tax that encompasses all income associated with foreign subsidiaries, even when those entities are subject to hefty foreign taxes. The Tax Code Complexity: Understanding the NCTI Landscape For the average taxpayer, decoding the intricacies of NCTI taxation can feel daunting. Under the OBBBA, the rules have shifted considerably, leading to questions about how states will interpret their tax codes. For instance, while some states have excluded GILTI by names, such as the exclusion from certain IRC sections, NCTI's introduction adds a new layer of complexity, particularly with regards to how much foreign income can be taxed without appropriate credit provisions in place. The Impacts of State Taxation: Implications for Businesses Taxing NCTI at the state level could push businesses operating in high-tax foreign jurisdictions to rethink their strategies. Companies might consider shifting more of their operations outside states that adopt aggressive taxation on foreign income, thereby potentially diminishing their local economic contributions. Furthermore, the lack of foreign tax credits at the state level could deter businesses from settling or expanding their bases of operation in states that seek to tax NCTI, creating long-term implications for economic growth and job creation. What Can Taxpayers Do? As the discussion surrounding NCTI unfolds, taxpayers should remain vigilant and proactive. It is beneficial to consult with tax professionals who understand these nuances and can help navigate potential challenges. Taxpayers might find opportunities to voice their concerns to state lawmakers before any hasty implementations take place. Engaging in dialogues surrounding the equity of taxing international income will ensure that the implications of these decisions are well understood by all parties involved. Stay Updated on the Evolving Tax Landscape As taxpayers face new challenges brought about by NCTI, staying informed will be critical. Subscribing to tax updates or seeking regular counsel from trusted financial advisors will equip individuals and businesses alike with the knowledge necessary to navigate this shifting terrain effectively.

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

Core Modal Title

Sorry, no results found

You Might Find These Articles Interesting

T
Please Check Your Email
We Will Be Following Up Shortly
*
*
*