Committee Summary for House Ways and Means (04/01/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB302 00:06:02.639 - 9:03:48 AM	General Working Session	relative to enabling the state treasury to invest in precious metals and digital assets.	Ammon, Keith(R)[A+]2024
HB696 01:02:48.359 - 10:00:34 AM	General Working Session	exempting electricity generators from the utility property tax and including them under the statewide education property tax, and relative to communications services tax revenues.	Vose, Michael(R)[A]2024
HB302 02:01:13.520 - 10:58:59 AM	Executive Session	relative to enabling the state treasury to invest in precious metals and digital assets.	Ammon, Keith(R)[A+]2024
HB696 02:06:53.760 - 11:04:39 AM	Executive Session	exempting electricity generators from the utility property tax and including them under the statewide education property tax, and relative to communications services tax revenues.	Vose, Michael(R)[A]2024

HB302: Monica Misipelli, State Treasurer Information Only00:06:02.639 - 9:03:48 AM; State Treasurer Monica Misipelli provided an overview of the potential impact of HB302 on state investments. She clarified that the bill does not mandate investment in precious metals and digital assets but adds them as options. Misipelli explained that operating funds, including the rainy day fund, are typically invested in short-term, low-volatility assets to ensure liquidity for state operations. She noted that these types of funds would not be suitable for the volatile assets proposed in the bill. However, she mentioned that trust funds managed for perpetuity could potentially utilize these options if deemed appropriate by the investment advisor. Misipelli emphasized that the addition of these investment options does not pose an immediate concern or fiscal impact. She also discussed the role of the investment advisor in managing state funds according to statutory guidelines and investment policies, and responded to questions about the state's investment profile and the potential use of these new investment options.
HB302: Representative Information Only00:09:41.600 - 9:07:27 AM; A representative asked for clarification on which funds would be appropriate for the investments proposed in HB302. Misipelli explained that trust funds managed in perpetuity could potentially utilize these options, as they are managed by an investment advisor with the goal of capital appreciation over time. She noted that these funds could sustain some volatility, unlike operating funds which require liquidity and stability.
HB302: Representative Information Only00:10:53.360 - 9:08:39 AM; The representative inquired about the 5% limit mentioned in the bill and whether it would apply to perpetual investment funds. Misipelli confirmed that the bill could allow up to 5% of certain funds to be invested in the proposed assets, which is a typical limit to avoid concentration risk. She also discussed the role of the investment advisor in managing these funds and their discretion in choosing investments.
HB302: Representative Information Only00:12:00.640 - 9:09:46 AM; The representative asked about the investment advisor's experience with precious metals and digital assets. Misipelli explained that the state hires investment advisors to manage funds according to statutory guidelines and investment policies, and these advisors have discretion over investment choices. She noted that while the state does not currently invest in digital assets, some firms do, and the market is still relatively new.
HB302: Representative Information Only00:14:27.000 - 9:12:13 AM; The representative asked about the state's investment profile and risk tolerance. Misipelli explained that the state follows RSA 11 for trust fund investments, which outlines various investment objectives. She noted that the risk profile varies depending on the fund's purpose, with some funds being more conservative and others more aggressive.
HB302: Representative Information Only00:16:21.360 - 9:14:07 AM; The representative inquired about the percentage of state assets invested in risk assets. Misipelli explained that the percentages vary by fund, with some being more aggressive than others. She noted that most funds are conservative due to their governmental beneficiaries but promised to provide more detailed information later.
HB302: Representative Information Only00:19:47.720 - 9:17:33 AM; The representative asked about the potential for the state's investment advisor to invest in metals or digital assets under HB302. Misipelli confirmed that the advisor would have the discretion to invest in these assets if deemed appropriate, similar to other investment decisions. She noted that the bill would add these options to the list of permissible investments.
HB302: Representative Information Only00:24:02.159 - 9:21:48 AM; The representative asked if other state treasurers have the authority to invest in precious metals. Misipelli stated she was not aware of other states having this authority on their books.
HB302: Unknown Speaker Information Only00:25:25.120 - 9:23:11 AM; The speaker discusses the process and frequency of meetings with their financial advisor. They mention managing about 40 trust accounts totaling $60 million, which were previously managed in-house but now centralized with a financial advisor to cut costs and simplify the process. The relationship with the advisor is relatively new, about a year old, with the strategy being six months old. They meet quarterly for portfolio performance reviews but interact more frequently due to monthly statements, deposits, and withdrawals.
HB302: Unknown Speaker Information Only00:28:28.480 - 9:26:14 AM; The speaker confirms the existence of a five-year contract with the financial advisor, which was selected through an RFP last year. They intend to do business with this vendor but will likely need to issue another RFP in five years.
HB302: Representative Elmy Information Only00:29:45.399 - 9:27:31 AM; Representative Elmy asks about the difficulty for the current advisor to include investments in digital assets and precious metals. The response indicates that it would not be difficult for the advisor to consider these as investments, as the law currently allows for mutual funds and other investments.
HB302: Unknown Speaker Information Only00:31:15.840 - 9:29:01 AM; The speaker explains that under RSA 6A, the treasurer is allowed to invest in a wide range of legal investments as listed under RSA 383-B:3-303, which includes deposits, obligations of the U.S. government, and other investments that banks are allowed to make. They are unsure about the impact of adding digital assets and precious metals to this list.
HB302: Representative Spar Information Only00:32:09.240 - 9:29:55 AM; Representative Spar discusses the difference between investment vehicles under RSA 68 for cash management and the longer-term trusts managed by the advisor. They inquire about the legality of investing in cryptocurrencies and precious metals, and it is clarified that there is no prohibition currently in place for these investments in the trusts.
HB302: Representative Mall Information Only00:33:47.200 - 9:31:33 AM; Representative Mall discusses the types of products that the state can invest in, including mutual funds which might contain various assets like precious metals. He clarifies that the state is already allowed to invest in such mutual funds, indicating the existing flexibility in investment options.
HB302: Representative Ammon Support00:34:53.839 - 9:32:39 AM; Representative Ammon supports the bill, highlighting that similar legislation has been passed in Oklahoma, Texas, and is pending in Arizona. He emphasizes the need for investment in assets that can hedge against inflation, mentioning the national debt and the potential for currency devaluation. He discusses the specifics of the bill, including safeguards for digital assets and the strategic reserve of Bitcoin in the U.S., suggesting the bill's importance for portfolio diversification and future financial stability.
HB302: Representative Ors Information Only00:43:58.160 - 9:41:44 AM; Representative Ors asks about the energy required to corrupt the Bitcoin system, to which it is explained that the network's structure and difficulty adjustment prevent corruption, and that more energy strengthens the network. He also inquires about the finite nature of Bitcoin, receiving an explanation about the block reward halving and the scarcity it creates.
HB302: Representative Uler Information Only00:43:58.160 - 9:41:44 AM; Representative Uler questions the intrinsic value of Bitcoin and its use for transferring funds, to which it is clarified that Bitcoin can be tracked and its value stems from solving the Byzantine generals problem and preventing double spending on the internet.
HB302: Representative Southworth Oppose00:49:24.160 - 9:47:10 AM; Representative Southworth questions the necessity of the bill, suggesting that the financial advisor already has the discretion to invest in various assets. He expresses skepticism about the need for the legislation, indicating that the discussion and interest in digital and precious metals should be enough to guide the financial advisor without a new law.
HB302: Representative Spark Information Only00:50:36.720 - 9:48:22 AM; Representative Spark discusses the current ability to invest in precious metals or cryptocurrencies, noting it's not prohibited by law but depends on existing guidelines and limitations on what banks can do. He suggests the bill would clarify these investments explicitly.
HB302: Representative Opel Oppose00:53:01.079 - 9:50:47 AM; Representative Opel expresses concern that the bill goes beyond just enabling legislation and sends a strong signal to the treasurer to invest in these assets. He believes the spotlight has already been shined on these investments, and the treasurer is aware of the interest, questioning the need for the legislation.
HB302: Representative Yulery Support00:54:29.720 - 9:52:15 AM; Representative Yulery supports the bill, arguing that passing it would explicitly permit investments in these assets, clarifying the authority for the treasurer and investment advisors. He views the legislation as permissive and structured to minimize risk to the state's assets.
HB302: Representative M Oppose00:55:52.480 - 9:53:38 AM; Representative M expresses reluctance to allow the state to directly invest in risky assets, emphasizing the need for professional management. He suggests that while third-party advisors might be appropriate for managing such investments, he is wary of the state directly engaging in these riskier asset categories.
HB302: Representative Smith Information Only00:57:41.680 - 9:55:27 AM; Representative Smith raised concerns about the policy established by HB302, questioning whether the bill includes investment exposure caps and security provisions. He noted that the state treasurer is limited to investing no more than 5% of federal public funds directly, and he objects to this clause, suggesting it might not be sufficiently vetted for direct investment by the state treasurer.
HB302: State Treasurer Information Only00:59:30.400 - 9:57:16 AM; The State Treasurer clarified that her office often utilizes consultants and investment advisors due to the small size of her staff. She explained that the law allows them to hire third parties to meet investment requirements, and she interprets the law as allowing her to achieve investment objectives through these providers, not directly managing investments herself.
HB302: Representative Information Only01:00:37.920 - 9:58:23 AM; A representative inquired about the guidelines used by the State Treasurer's office to consider investments, specifically asking if there are mandates to stay ahead of inflation. The Treasurer responded that they aim to beat inflation but face challenges with the type of funds they hold, emphasizing the need to maintain liquidity while trying to invest to stay ahead of inflation.
HB696: Mark Manganello, Bureau of School Finance, Department of Education Information Only01:02:48.359 - 10:00:34 AM; Mark Manganello discussed the potential impacts of HB696, which proposes to shift electric generators from the utility property tax to the statewide education property tax (SWEPT). He explained that this change would reduce the taxes paid to the education trust fund by about $12.7 million but would not impact the SWEPT revenue, which remains at $363 million. He detailed how this shift would affect utility and non-utility property taxpayers, leading to a reduction in their tax liabilities.
HB696: Representative Elme Information Only01:07:08.720 - 10:04:54 AM; Representative Elme expressed confusion over the classification of electric generators as utilities or manufacturers, noting that they pay both the business profits tax and the utility property tax. He sought clarification on the terminology used to differentiate between utility and non-utility taxpayers under the proposed bill.
HB696: Representative Opel Information Only01:08:35.679 - 10:06:21 AM; Representative Opel raised concerns about the three-year exemption from SWEPT included in the bill for entities with existing payment in lieu of taxes agreements. He worried about the potential impact on property taxpayers during this exemption period, as the tax base would be expanded but the number of payers would not immediately increase.
HB696: Representative Information Only01:11:15.199 - 10:09:01 AM; A representative asked if the valuation of town property would decrease due to the proposed changes in HB696. Mark Manganello clarified that the bill deals with the utility portion of taxes and would not impact regular town taxes outside of SWEPT.
HB696: Representative Shambert Information Only01:12:28.360 - 10:10:14 AM; Representative Shambert inquired about the bill's effect on budget writers currently considering the state budget. It was clarified that the bill aligns energy manufacturers with manufacturing rather than transmission, and it does not directly affect the budget writers but is part of existing law considerations.
HB696: Representative Opel Information Only01:13:39.480 - 10:11:25 AM; Representative Opel expressed ongoing concerns about the impact of HB696 on the education trust fund. He was interrupted to allow testimony from the municipal association, but before that, he questioned the changes during the three-year exemption period, which was explained as a phase-out of existing payment in lieu of taxes agreements into direct property tax assessments.
HB696: Representative Buery Information Only01:15:02.719 - 10:12:48 AM; Representative Buery explained that the three-year exemption in HB696 is intended to phase out existing payment in lieu of taxes agreements, allowing local assessors to directly assess property taxes on the facilities. He noted that this would increase the pool of revenue available to local communities, potentially reducing property taxes for residents by balancing the decrease in SWEPT deposits with increased general property tax revenue.
HB696: Brody Deay, New Hampshire Municipal Association Information Only01:16:16.960 - 10:14:02 AM; Brody Deay from the New Hampshire Municipal Association clarified that moving generators from UPT to SWEP does not affect municipal revenues but impacts school district funding. He emphasized that the association has no position on the change itself but is concerned about the information sharing under the new subparagraph 3 of RSA83-f Roman 5. He argued that sharing this information with municipal assessors would lead to more accurate assessments and reduce litigation risks, as the information is often revealed during discovery anyway.
HB696: Representative Tierney Information Only01:21:18.080 - 10:19:04 AM; Representative Tierney disagreed with some points made by Brody Deay, stating that when a generator switches to a town's assessment, the valuation typically increases, affecting the town's grand list. He highlighted that the manufacturing process of electricity by generators is considered in PILOT agreements, which is unique compared to other manufacturers, and this could lead to special considerations in tax assessments.
HB696: Representative Opel Information Only01:22:57.679 - 10:20:43 AM; Representative Opel expressed concern about the impact of switching from UPT to SWEP on local education property taxes and municipal taxes. He questioned whether the switch would decrease local education property taxes and if power producers with PILOT agreements would be exempt from paying SWEP for three years, potentially affecting taxpayer bills.
HB696: Molly Connors, New England Power Generators Association Information Only01:27:53.480 - 10:25:39 AM; Molly Connors from the New England Power Generators Association, joined by Heidi Kroll from the New Hampshire Hydropowers Association, clarified that generators have not been owned by utilities for some time and compete in volatile wholesale electricity markets. She emphasized that the switch from UPT to SWEP is a cleanup of tax policy, not an energy policy change. Connors also addressed the tax rates and assessments, noting that local property taxes often value generators higher than the state, leading to discrepancies and lawsuits. She clarified that the bill's reporting requirements are for identifying taxable properties, not for collecting confidential information for property tax assessments.
HB696: Heidi Kroll, Granite State Hydropower Association Information Only01:33:51.760 - 10:31:37 AM; Heidi Kroll from the Granite State Hydropower Association discussed PILOT agreements, noting they are voluntary and typically involve smaller renewable generators. She mentioned that the change in tax policy would not take effect until 2028, providing a two-year notice for any ongoing or future negotiations. Kroll emphasized that the commission felt comfortable with the minimal impact on existing PILOT agreements due to the timing and scale of the facilities involved, and highlighted the mutual benefit of these agreements for both generators and municipalities.
HB696: Representative Sworth Information Only01:36:34.719 - 10:34:20 AM; Representative Sworth sought clarification on the potential for lawsuits related to assessments. The discussion indicated that with the proposed changes, one point of contention would be removed as the state would no longer conduct an assessment.
HB696: Representative Opel Information Only01:37:45.520 - 10:35:31 AM; Representative Opel confirmed the details of the pilot program, noting that it would be negotiated between renewable energy producers and municipalities, and that the current law would remain unchanged by the bill. The pilot agreements are voluntary and if not seen as beneficial by either party, they would not be entered into, reverting to normal taxation.
HB696: Representative Yuler Information Only01:39:09.760 - 10:36:55 AM; Representative Yuler discussed the implications of the bill on future pilot agreements, noting that while pilots would still be permissible, the knowledge of future SWEPT responsibilities would influence negotiations. The discussion also touched on the current taxation situation where the same equipment might be taxed multiple times.
HB696: Representative Tierney Information Only01:40:29.440 - 10:38:15 AM; Representative Tierney clarified that under the current system, renewable energy facilities are not paying property tax twice but are paying different taxes to the town, school, and county. The bill would exempt them from the SWEPT tax for a period, affecting future pilot negotiations to include SWEPT.
HB302: Representative Ulerade Support02:01:13.520 - 10:58:59 AM; Representative Ulerade moved to pass House Bill 302, describing it as a permissive bill that does not mandate any action but allows for certain financial activities.
HB302: Representative Opel Oppose02:02:02.400 - 10:59:48 AM; Representative Opel expressed concerns about the future implications of the bill, suggesting it could be severe for the state. They questioned the necessity of the bill, arguing that the actions it permits are already allowed and adding more legislation is unnecessary.
HB302: Representative Sod Support02:02:02.400 - 10:59:48 AM; Representative Sod supported the bill, highlighting the importance of the guardrails included in the legislation to address potential issues.
HB302: Representative Alme Information Only02:03:18.880 - 11:01:04 AM; Representative Alme expressed confusion about the inclusion of commodities in the bill, specifically mentioning precious metals and jewelry, and questioned the need for a strategic reserve.
HB302: Representative Malloy Information Only02:03:18.880 - 11:01:04 AM; Representative Malloy, a trustee of trust funds in Greenland, discussed the RSA related to trust funds, indicating familiarity with the financial management practices that the bill touches upon.
HB302: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:04:48.800 - 11:02:34 AM; The speaker discussed the existing regulations and oversight by the attorney general's office on investment policies for cemetery trusts, trustees of trust funds, and library trusts. They mentioned the use of the 'prudent man' standard for investments and questioned whether similar oversight exists for state treasury investments, suggesting that if such oversight is already in place, the bill might not be necessary.
HB302: Clerk Vote02:05:34.880 - 11:03:20 AM; The clerk conducted a roll call vote on the motion to pass House Bill 302. The vote resulted in 11 votes in favor and 8 against, with one member absent. The motion to pass the bill was successful.
HB696: Representative Ulery Support02:06:53.760 - 11:04:39 AM; Representative Ulery moved for the bill to pass, citing extensive prior discussion and his involvement in a related commission. He mentioned agreement with Representative Ames on the general principles and the report generated, suggesting confidence in the bill's merit.
HB696: Representative Opel Oppose02:08:20.400 - 11:06:06 AM; Representative Opel expressed concerns about the bill, noting he did not serve on the related commission and still had questions. He suggested retaining the bill due to its effective date being July 1st, 2027, which would allow more time for review without impacting the implementation timeline. He urged the committee to consider retaining the bill rather than passing it immediately.
HB696: Clerk Vote02:09:42.560 - 11:07:28 AM; The clerk conducted a roll call vote on the motion to pass House Bill 696. The vote resulted in 17 votes in favor and 2 against, with one member absent. The motion to pass the bill was successful.
HB696: Clerk Information Only02:09:42.560 - 11:07:28 AM; The clerk concluded the discussion on HB696, announcing the vote results as 17-2 in favor of the motion to pass. The motion to put the bill on consent was objected to, and it was decided not to include it on consent. A minority report was confirmed to be written by Representative Spar, with another member humorously mentioning writing it as well, only to clarify it was an April Fools' Day jest. The executive session on HB696 was then closed.
HB696: Chair Information Only02:11:11.280 - 11:08:57 AM; The chair announced the completion of discussions on all House bills, stating that they must be dispatched by April 3rd. They also mentioned that the committee now has 10 Senate bills to review. Plans were made to hold public hearings starting the following Monday, with no meetings scheduled for Tuesday due to the chair's unavailability. The chair also discussed scheduling conflicts and the availability of online public hearings. They confirmed the schedule for the upcoming public hearings on Monday the 7th and Tuesday the 15th, noting the proximity to tax day. The chair requested that majority and minority reports be submitted by noon the following day.
HB696: Representative Information Only02:13:22.719 - 11:11:08 AM; A representative mentioned having a commission meeting at 10:00 to study revenue alternatives, acknowledging potential scheduling conflicts but noting the availability of online public hearings.

Janigian, John(Chairman)(R)[B+]2024	Ohm, Bill(Clerk)(R)[B]2018	Ulery, Jordan(V Chairman)(R)[A-]2024
Almy, Susan(D)[CT]2024	Oppel, Thomas(D)	Smith, Steven(R)[B+]2024
Malloy, Dennis(D)[CT]2024	Schamberg, Thomas(D)[CT]2024	Southworth, Thomas(D)[CT]2024
Tierney, James(R)[B-]2024	Cole, Brian(R)[B-]2024	Aures, Cyril(R)[A]2024
Bolton, Bill(D)[CT]2024	Elberger, Susan(D)[D-]2024	Smith, Geoffrey(D)[D-]2024
Soti, Julius(R)[A+]2024	Spahr, Terry(D)	Bryer, Scott(R)
Murphy, Mary(R)	Ford, Mary(R)