WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

AB 528

Relating to: school district employee participation in state group health insurance and making an appropriation. (FE)

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Deb Andraca and 21 co-sponsors

Reopens GBTA approvals, raising performance and resilience criteria to grant 20–35% tax abatements (up to 10 years new, 5 for some existing) with new reporting and regs.

Fiscal estimate received
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · AB 528

AB 528 — Green Building Tax Abatements (BDR 58‑425) — Summary

Status: Introduced Feb 11, 2025. Passed the Assembly (3rd reading 6/2/2025) and transmitted to the Senate; later held under submission in Senate committee and listed as “No further action taken.”
Subject: Revises Nevada’s Green Building Tax Abatement (GBTA) program to reopen applications, update the Green Building Rating System, change abatement amounts/durations, and add reporting and regulatory requirements.

Purpose and intent

AB 528 would restore authority for the Office of Energy (the Director) to accept and approve new applications for partial property tax abatements under the Green Building Rating System (GBRS) after a statutory prohibition that had paused approvals since July 1, 2021. The bill modernizes eligibility criteria to emphasize resilience and higher energy performance, revises the scale and duration of abatements, and adds regulatory and reporting requirements intended to align incentives with measurable energy and water savings.

Key provisions

  • Reopens program: Removes the statutory prohibition preventing the Director from approving GBTA applications submitted on or after July 1, 2021.
  • Updated rating requirements: Requires the Director to adopt a Green Building Rating System equivalent to LEED (or an equivalent system) and to identify specific LEED (or equivalent) credits that qualify as “resilience credits.” For buildings that did not previously receive an abatement, certain resilience credits will be required to meet the equivalent of silver/gold/platinum/zero‑carbon certification levels. The bill also requires higher-than-code energy performance for new buildings (specific percentage thresholds are set in the proposed system).
  • Abatement amounts and durations:
    • New buildings: 20–35% off certain property taxes annually, for up to 10 years.
    • Existing buildings (that did not receive a prior abatement): 20–35% annually, for up to 5 years.
    • Existing buildings that previously received an abatement and are recertified: 5% annually, for up to 3 years.
  • Regulatory duties: Directs the Director to adopt regulations, including:
    • Defining resilience credits and performance thresholds.
    • Prescribing procedures that allow the State or a local government to obtain a partial abatement and, in exchange for compensation, assign it to another building in the same county.
    • Requiring recipients to submit annual energy and water consumption reports to the Office of Economic Development and to include energy/water savings information in the Director’s annual report.
  • Program limits and exclusions: The GBRS must not include standards that have been in a chosen rating system for less than two years and excludes standards for homes; the Director must provide reasonable size‑based exceptions.

Who is affected

  • Property owners/developers of commercial, multifamily, and other non‑residential buildings seeking tax abatements for meeting green building standards.
  • Local governments and counties (assessors/treasurers) — potential fiscal impact on property tax revenue; counties may be involved in reviewing and implementing abatements and transfers.
  • Office of Energy (Director) and Office of Economic Development — new regulatory and reporting responsibilities.
  • Taxpayers and public budgets — potential reduction in local property tax revenue where abatements are granted.

Fiscal and procedural notes

  • Fiscal impact: The bill notes there “may” be a fiscal impact on local government; an effect on the State is indicated. Past GBTA experience raised concerns about significant revenue loss in certain jurisdictions.
  • Procedural: The Director must promulgate regulations to operationalize assignment and reporting provisions. The bill, as introduced, noted that certain enactments could require a two‑thirds legislative majority (per language in the “As Introduced” text).
  • Legislative history: Passed Assembly unanimously (Ayes 76, Noes 0) on 6/2/2025; later referred through Senate committees and ultimately held under submission (last noted action: 8/29/2025).

Stakeholder concerns raised in testimony

  • Free ridership: Prior program instances suggested some large properties obtained abatements with minimal actual capital investments or energy improvements.
  • Uncapped incentives and enforcement: Difficulty in ensuring local assessors/treasurers could implement caps or spending-to-incentive safeguards, potentially causing large revenue loss.
  • Administrative workload and timing: Short review windows for local fiscal review and heavy application volumes in prior program cycles.
  • Potential overlap with federal incentives (e.g., Internal Revenue Code Section 179D) and questions about whether some resilience credits may be easier to attain than energy‑performance credits.
  • Recommendations from commenters included adding a required minimum spending-to-incentive ratio, enforceable caps, longer local review timeframes, and avoiding duplicative incentives.

This summary highlights the bill’s substance, who it would affect, and the main implementation and policy issues raised during committee testimony.

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

Sign in to ask a question.