Military Retirement Income Deduction
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Create an account to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Progress
Where this bill stands in the legislative process.
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Overview
This bill modifies South Carolina’s tax code to include retirement income from certain federal retirement plans in the definition of ‘retirement income’ for state tax purposes. Specifically, it expands the definition to encompass qualified retirement plans for officers in the United States Public Health Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. This change allows individuals receiving retirement benefits from these federal agencies to potentially deduct a portion of their income from their South Carolina state taxes.
Key provisions
- Expands the definition of ‘retirement income’ to include retirement income from federal retirement plans.
- Specifically includes qualified retirement plans for officers in the United States Public Health Service.
- Specifically includes qualified retirement plans for officers in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
- Applies to taxpayers and surviving spouses.
- Includes dependent indemnity compensation related to the deceased spouse’s military service.
- Takes effect upon Governor approval and applies to tax years beginning in 2025.
Who is affected
- Military retirees and their families
- South Carolina taxpayers
- Federal employees in the United States Public Health Service
- Federal employees in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Notable changes
Bill text
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.
Text extraction is in progress. View the official source.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
3 on record
Primary sponsor
M.M. Smith
Cosponsors
B.L. Cox
Arguments
Reasons offered for and against this legislation.
Arguments in favor
No arguments in favor have been submitted.
Submit yoursArguments opposed
No arguments opposed have been submitted.
Submit yours