SJR 201
Proposes an amendment to the Oregon Constitution to require a portion of surplus revenue that would otherwise be returned to personal income taxpayers to be used for funding public kindergarten through grade 12 education, community colleges and wildfire prevention and suppression, if surplus revenue exceeds a certain threshold.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
3%
Oppose
97%
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed House
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill proposes an amendment to Oregon’s Constitution that would change how the ‘kicker’ – a tax refund based on corporate income tax revenue – is distributed. If the state’s corporate income and excise tax revenues exceed estimates by at least two percent, a portion of that surplus would be used to fund public education (kindergarten through 12th grade and community colleges) and wildfire prevention and suppression. Specifically, half of the excess revenue would be directed to these areas, with the remaining half going back to personal income taxpayers, unless the amount exceeding $300 million triggers a split, allocating 50% to education/wildfire and 50% to reserve accounts. The amendment would be put to a vote of the people.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Cosponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of SJR 201 generally advocate for redirecting surplus tax revenues towards vital public services, including education and wildfire prevention/suppression. Many argue that this allocation is necessary to address the state's underfunding in these areas, particularly following the pandemic and amid increasing wildfires in rural regions. Some also emphasize the need for more equitable distribution of revenue generated by the kicker law, which they claim disproportionately benefits high-income taxpayers. By supporting SJR 201, proponents aim to provide a more predictable revenue stream for Oregon's public services, ultimately promoting collective survival over private luxury and reducing income inequality.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of Senate Joint Resolution 201 (SJR 201) argue that Oregon already has sufficient funds to address its needs, including education, and that diverting a portion of the Kicker tax refund to education and community colleges would be unnecessary. Many that the state is overtaxed and mismanaging funds, particularly with regards to Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), and that further taxes or redistribution of existing funds would exacerbate problems rather than solve them. Some also express concerns about the potential erosion of trust between voters and lawmakers if the Kicker refund is reduced or eliminated. Additionally, several that Oregon's education system is already struggling, despite high spending per student, and that diverting funds to education would not necessarily improve outcomes. Overall, opponents of SJR 201 emphasize the need for fiscal responsibility, transparency, and accountability in government decision-making.
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.