It is the chair's opinion that Senate Joint Resolutions 7 and 8, which are constitutional amendments, do not "affect any existing statute or create any new statute", nor do they "modify existing laws or create new laws". Therefore, the joint resolutions would not be required by law to be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions.
A similar point of order was raised in June of 1975, journal page 954 and in February of 1973, journal page 427. It is the opinion of the chair that these earlier rulings were based on sound reasoning and the chair upholds its earlier position.
Therefore, the point of order is well taken.
FRED A. RISSER
President pro tempore
Senate Journal of January 20, 1977 .......... Page: 74
[Point of order:]
Senator Sensenbrenner raised the point of order that, pursuant to senate rule 20, Senate Joint Resolutions 7 and 8 were required to be referred to a senate standing committee not a joint statutory committee. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of February 1, 1977 .......... Page: 124
As it relates to the point of order raised by Senator Sensenbrenner that Senate Joint Resolutions 7 and 8 are required by senate rule 20 to be referred to a senate standing committee, the chair rules the point of order is not well taken.
Senate rule 20 does not require that measures be referred to standing committees as opposed to statutory committees. There is nothing in any of the senate rules that does not allow referral to a statutory committee. The joint resolutions are properly in the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions.
FRED A. RISSER
President pro tempore
Senate Journal of March 28, 1978 .......... Page: 2158
[Point of order:]
Senator Theno moved that Senate Joint Resolution 8 be withdrawn from Joint Committee on Tax Exemptions and referred to committee on Senate Organization.
Senator Berger raised the point of order that a written report on Senate Joint Resolution 8 was necessary to withdraw it from the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of March 30, 1978 .......... Page: 2235
On Tuesday, March 28, 1978, Senator Theno moved to withdraw Senate Joint Resolution 8 from the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions.
Senator Berger raised the point of order that the committee had not yet submitted a written report as required by s. 13.52 of the Wisconsin statutes.
642 On January 20, 1977 the chair ruled that s. 13.52 of the Wisconsin statutes did not require that Senate Joint Resolution 8 be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions. Implicit in that ruling is the absence of a requirement that a written report be submitted on the resolution.
Therefore the point of order raised by Senator Berger is not well taken. The motion made by Senator Theno is proper and the question is shall Senate Joint Resolution 8 be withdrawn from the Joint Survey committee on Tax Exemptions.
1 9 7 5 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of March 9, 1976 .......... Page: 3217
Point of order:
Representative Shabaz rose to the point of order that Assembly Bill 604 was not properly before the assembly because the language on page 12, line 11 of the substitute amendment required the bill to be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions pursuant to Wisconsin Statutes 13.52 (6). Representative Shabaz cited the definition of "proposal" in Assembly Rule 97 (61). Representative Opitz cited the ruling of the speaker on 1973 Assembly Bill 626 on February 19, 1974 (1973 Assembly Journal page 3542).
The speaker [Anderson] ruled as follows:
"First of all, with respect to the precedent of last session, the chair recalls Assembly Bill 626 of last session as a totally different proposal than than the proposal before us. The only two things that were the same were the fact that it dealt with wetlands, but the treatment and specifically the tax treatment was totally different between the two bills. Accordingly, the question that has now been raised is not decided by the precedent of what was ruled on Assembly Bill 626 because the character of the measures was totally different. We have to look at what the requirements of the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions statute provides and its intent.
The intent of sec. 13.52 is to make sure that no new tax exemptions are created without some analysis being made of the impact of those proposals. The chair will assume for purposes of argument that there is no difference between an amendment and the original proposal. Substitute amendment 2 on page 12 in the section in question, talks about the deed of easement, where a deed of easement has been granted; thereafter the property to be assessed for its value as open space and so on. The provisions of section 8 that deal with taxation, the chair is reliably informed, simply restate what is the present law: namely, that where as is provided specifically in sec 70.32 which is cited in that amendment where there has been a deed of easement the property is valued omitting the value of that easement or deducting the value of that easement. A
contribution of that kind, a dedication for public purposes, is presently deductible from the income tax under our existing law. In other words, the language contained in the section complained of by the gentleman from the 83rd is simply a restatement of what the law would be without the language there if this bill is adopted.
Accordingly, since the intent of section 13.52 is to filter out what amounts to changes in our tax law and this does not change existing tax law, the point of order is not well taken."
Senate Journal of March 4, 1976 .......... Page: 1920
[Point of order:]
Senator Sensenbrenner raised the point of order that pursuant to 13.52 (6) of the statutes, Senate Bill 755 [relating to state finances and appropriations, constituting the budget review bill and making appropriations] was required to go to the Joint Survey committee on Tax Exemptions.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Senate Journal of June 18, 1975 .......... Page: 920
[Constitutional amendment:]
Senator Bablitch moved that Senate Joint Resolution 36 be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions.
[Point of order:]
Senator Berger raised the point of order that Senate Joint Resolution 36 must be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions pursuant to 13.52 of the state statutes. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of June 24, 1975 .......... Page: 954
On Wednesday, June 18, 1975, Senator Berger raised the point of order that Senate Joint Resolution 36 must be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions pursuant to 13.52 of the state statutes. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
A similar point of order was raised in 1973 on whether or not a proposed constitutional amendment relating to taxation of agricultural land should be required to be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions. At that time, the presiding officer ruled, on page 427 of the Journal of 1973, that the resolution need not be so referred. It is the opinion of this chair that this earlier ruling was based on sound reasoning and this chair reiterates the
reasoning of the then presiding officer as it is applicable to the present question before this house.
Wisconsin Statute 13.52 creates the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions and describes its power and duties and in specific requires a report to be submitted in writing by the committee of the committee's opinion of the legality of the proposal, the fiscal effect upon the state and its subdivisions and its desirability as a matter of public policy.
Section 13.52 (5) sets forth the powers and duties of the committee. "It is the purpose of this committee to provide the legislature with a considered opinion of the legality of the proposal, of the fiscal effect upon the state and its subdivisions and of the desirability as a matter of public policy of each legislative proposal which would modify existing laws or create new laws relating to the exemption of property or persons from any state or local taxes or special assessments."
644 The powers and duties section, 13.52 (5), and the report section, 13.52 (6), mention in specific: (5) "each legislative proposal which would modify existing laws or create new laws" and (6) "proposal which affects any existing statute or creates any new statute". Senate Joint Resolution 36 does not "affect any existing statute or create any new statute", nor does it "modify existing laws or create new laws". Senate Joint Resolution 36 is a
constitutional amendment which, if passed, would give the legislature the ability to create or modify existing laws. Because this resolution does not directly affect state statutes, it is the opinion of the chair that no report from the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions is needed in order for Senate Joint Resolution 36 to be properly before the senate.
The point of order is not well taken.
FRED A. RISSER
President pro tempore
Senate Journal of June 13, 1975 .......... Page: 893
[Point of order:]
Senator Sensenbrenner raised the point of order that senate substitute amendment 1 [to Assembly Bill 222, relating to state finances and appropriations constituting the executive budget bill of the 1975 legislature, and making appropriations] must be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions pursuant to 13.52 (6) of the state statutes.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Senate Journal of April 22, 1975 .......... Page: 568
[Point of order:]
Senator Sensenbrenner raised the point of order that Senate Bill 17 [relating to a general revision of the insurance law relating to service insurance corporations and the tax exemption for hospital service insurance
corporations and granting rule-making authority] should be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 7 3 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of May 7, 1974 .......... Page: 46
[Point of order:]
Senator Risser raised the point of order that Senate Bill 5, (Spring 1974) Special Session [relating to regulation of elections and campaign contributions and expenditures, providing for public financing of certain political campaigns, granting rule-making authority, providing penalties and making appropriations], was not required by law to be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of May 7, 1974 .......... Page: 47
By request of Senator Risser, with unanimous consent, his point of order raised on Senate Bill 5, Special Session was withdrawn. ( By request of Senator Risser, with unanimous consent, Senate Bill 5, Special Session, was referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions.
645Senate Journal of October 26, 1973 .......... Page: 1901
[Point of order:]
Senator Keppler raised the point of order that Senate Bill 763 [relating to expanding the definition of income for homestead tax credit purposes] had no report from the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions and therefore was not properly before the senate.
The chair [Lt.Gov. Schreiber] ruled the point of order not well taken as the fiscal note stated that the bill did not create a tax decrease.
Senate Journal of October 26, 1973 .......... Page: 1907
[Report:] Wisconsin Legislature Assembly Chamber Madison October 26, 1973
Lt. Governor Martin J. Schreiber
State Capitol
Madison, Wisconsin
Dear Lt. Governor Schreiber:
Senate Bill 763, relative to expanding the definition of income for Homestead Tax Credit purposes, was reported out of the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions without a report because it deals with tax relief, not with a tax exemption. The Committee has traditionally followed this procedure with all Homestead related bills.
Sincerely,
HARVEY L DUEHOLM
Vice-Chairman
Senate Journal of February 14, 1973 .......... Page: 413
[Point of order:]
Senator Parys raised the point of order that Senate Joint Resolution 1 [to amend article VIII, section 1 of the constitution, relating to taxation of agricultural land and undeveloped land (2nd consideration)] must have a written report from the Joint Survey Committee on Retirement Systems [Tax Exemptions] in order to be properly before the senate. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Senate Journal of February 15, 1973 .......... Page: 427
[Ruling of the chair:]
On Wednesday, February 14, Senator Parys raised the point of order that Senate Joint Resolution 1 must have a written report from the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions in order to be properly before the senate. The chair took the point of order under advisement.
Wisconsin Statute 13.52 creates the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions and describes its powers and duties and in specific requires a report to be submitted in writing by the committee of the committee's opinion of the legality of the proposal, the fiscal effect upon the state and its subdivisions and its desirability as a matter of public policy.
646 Section 13.52 (5) sets forth the powers and duties of the committee. "It is the purpose of this committee to provide the legislature with a considered opinion of the legality of the proposal, of the fiscal effect upon the state and its subdivisions and of the desirability as a matter of public policy of each legislative proposal which would modify existing laws or create new laws relating to the exemption of property or persons from any state or local taxes or special assessments." The powers and duties section, 13.52 (5), and the report
section, 13.52 (6), mention in specific: (5) "each legislative proposal which would modify existing laws or create new laws" and (6) "proposal which affects any existing statute or creates any new statute". Senate Joint Resolution 1 does not "affect any existing statute or create any new statute", nor does it "modify existing laws or create new laws". Senate Joint Resolution 1 is a constitutional amendment which, if passed, would give the legislature the ability to create or modify existing laws. Because this resolution does not directly affect state statutes, it is the opinion of the chair that no report from the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions is needed in order for Senate Joint Resolution 1 to be properly before the Senate. The point of order is not well taken.
Tax exemptions: report by joint survey committee on
1 9 8 3 A S S E M B L Y
Assembly Journal of March 20, 1984 .......... Page: 984
Point of order:
Representative Brist rose to the point of order that Senate Bill 663 [relating to the individual and corporate surtaxes, the homestead credit, the required general fund balance, reducing the bonding authority for highway projects, income tax exemptions, income and franchise tax deductions for intercorporate dividends and for insurers' loss carry-backs, property tax statements, the definition of the internal revenue code for purposes of the income, franchise, inheritance and minimum taxes, required health insurance coverage, income tax exemptions, utility taxes on telephone companies, decreasing the primary guaranteed valuation, providing penalties and making an appropriation] was not properly before the assembly under section 13.52 (4) of the statutes because the report of the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions was not approved by a majority of the committee meeting as required by law.
[Note:] The same point or order had been raised in the Senate on 3/13/84, Sen.Jour. p. 709, and was ruled not well taken.
Representative Steven C. Brist, as cochair of the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions, had signed the committee report; see Sen.Jour. of 3/13/84, at p. 697.
The speaker [Loftus] ruled the point of order not well taken.
1 9 8 3 S E N A T E
