WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 2001

Relates to child care assistance under the child care block grant

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Jabari Brisport and 6 co-sponsors

Creates a Massachusetts personal income tax credit up to $10,000 for homeowners who move their principal residence to a home at least 50% smaller in size.

PRINT NUMBER 2001A
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 2001

Summary — S 2001: “Massachusetts Downsizing Tax Credit”

Status: Committed to Rules (introduced June 10, 2025)
Primary sponsor (per docket): Sen. Paul R. Feeney

Note: The bill text provided creates a “downsizing” tax credit. Some of the metadata you supplied (alternate title referencing child care assistance, and a separate sponsor list including federal names) appears inconsistent with the docketed text; this summary focuses on the actual bill language filed as Senate No. 2001.

Purpose / Intent

The bill would create a tax incentive to encourage homeowners to move to substantially smaller residences. The stated aim is to promote downsizing (for example by older homeowners or empty-nesters), which could free larger homes for other households and reduce housing maintenance or energy burden for the downsizing household.

Key provisions

  • Adds a new paragraph (21) to Part B, subsection (a) of Section 3 of Chapter 62 of the Massachusetts General Laws (state income tax code).
  • Establishes a tax benefit — described in the bill as “an amount not to exceed $10,000” — for qualifying individuals who move their principal residence and meet the size reduction requirement.
  • Eligibility condition: the gross square footage of the new principal residence must be at least 50% less than the gross square footage of the immediately preceding principal residence.

Who would be affected

  • Eligible: Individual owners of property who change their principal place of residence within the Commonwealth and whose new residence’s gross square footage is at least 50% smaller than the immediately prior residence.
  • Not targeted: Renters, non-owners, or moves that do not meet the 50% size reduction threshold.
  • Broader effects: Potential reduction in state income tax revenue for each qualifying taxpayer (up to $10,000 per filer), and possible housing market impacts if the credit encourages larger numbers of homeowners to move to smaller units.

Implementation and administration

  • The benefit is administered under Chapter 62 (Massachusetts personal income tax). The Department of Revenue would likely need to issue rules/specifications for claiming the credit — e.g., documentation of square footage for both properties, proof of change of principal residence (sale/closing or deed, updated MA address), and timing windows for claims.
  • The bill text does not specify an effective date, whether the benefit is refundable, whether it is a credit against tax liability or a subtraction/deduction from taxable income, nor the precise documentation/claim process — these would require implementing regulations or clarifying amendment.

Fiscal considerations

  • Direct revenue impact: unknown. Maximum per-taxpayer benefit is $10,000; total cost depends on number of qualifying taxpayers.
  • Potential indirect effects: increased turnover of larger homes, changes in local housing markets, and administrative costs for DOR to verify claims.

Legislative status and timeline (as provided)

  • Filed: 01/17/2025 (Senate Docket No. 2533)
  • Introduced in the Senate: 06/10/2025; read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary (per provided actions)
  • Subsequent actions listed include referral to Revenue, hearings scheduled (09/15/2025), and “Committed to Rules” (06/13/2025). The provided action list includes duplicate and out-of-sequence entries; consult the official Massachusetts legislative website for the authoritative, current status.

Notes and ambiguities

  • The bill language is concise and leaves several implementation questions open (credit vs. subtraction, refundable status, required proof, effective date).
  • The phrase “moves their principal place of residence from within the commonwealth” is ambiguous; the clear substantive requirement appears to be the 50% reduction in gross square footage between the prior and new principal residence.
  • Some metadata you provided (alternate bill title and sponsor list) does not match the docketed bill text — verify sponsors and committee referrals with official legislative records before citing.

If you want, I can:
- Draft suggested implementing regulations DOR might adopt (documentation checklist, calculation examples), or
- Estimate potential fiscal impact under several uptake scenarios (low/medium/high participation).

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.