HB 1174: Payments Under Protest; Procedure
- Session Year: 2025-2026
- House: House
- Latest Version Date: 2025-03-18
Current Status:
Failed
(2025-12-08: Carried over to 2026 Regular Session.)
Introduced
In Committee
First Chamber
In Committee
Second Chamber
Final Decking
Enacted
Allows for the interest earned on payments under protest in the litigated claims fund to be paid in nontaxation cases if the claimant prevails. Establishes a procedure for the disposition of moneys and refiling of actions when a payment under protest suit is filed prematurely. (SD1)
Allows for the interest earned on payments under protest in the litigated claims fund to be paid in nontaxation cases if the claimant prevails. Establishes a procedure for the disposition of moneys and refiling of actions when a payment under protest suit is filed prematurely. Effective 7/1/3000. (HD1)
Allows for the interest earned on payments under protest in the litigated claims fund to be paid in nontaxation cases if the claimant prevails. Establishes a procedure for the disposition of moneys and refiling of actions when a payment under protest suit is filed prematurely.
|
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES |
H.B. NO. |
1174 |
|
THIRTY-THIRD LEGISLATURE, 2025 |
H.D. 1 |
|
|
STATE OF HAWAII |
S.D. 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
A BILL FOR AN ACT
RELATING TO THE PROCEDURE FOR PAYMENT UNDER PROTEST LAWSUITS.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. The legislature finds that the case Grace Business Development Corporation v. Kamikawa, 92 Hawaiʻi 608, 994 P.2d 540 (2000), held that if a taxpayer pays money under protest but then sues for a refund before the defendant agency has formally taken a position on whether the money is due, the appeal is to be dismissed. If the agency later decides that the money is indeed due, it is usually too late for the suit to be refiled, potentially allowing the agency to keep the disputed moneys as a government realization without allowing the taxpayer to obtain a judicial ruling on the merits of the exaction. To prevent the possibility of injustice, this Act adds procedural safeguards to ensure that the courts will be able to reach the merits of the dispute.
Accordingly, the purpose of this Act is to:
(1) Allow for the interest earned on payments under protest in the litigated claims fund to be paid in nontaxation cases if the claimant prevails; and
(2) Establish a procedure for the disposition of moneys and refiling of actions when a payment under protest suit is filed prematurely.
SECTION 2. Section 40-35, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsections (b) and (c) to read as follows:
"(b) Action to recover
moneys paid under protest or proceedings to adjust the claim may be commenced
by the payer or claimant against the public accountant to whom the payment was
made, in a court of competent jurisdiction, [within] no later than
thirty days from the date of payment. If
no suit or proceeding is brought within [the thirty-day period,] that
time, the money paid under protest shall be deposited into the appropriate
account in the treasury of the State by the accountant and the amount deposited
shall thereupon become a government realization. Any action to recover payment of taxes under
protest shall be commenced in the tax appeal court.
(c)
If action to recover the money paid under protest or a proceeding to
adjust the claim is timely commenced [within the thirty-day period],
the amount paid under protest shall, pending final decision of the cause, be
deposited by the public accountant into the state treasury, in a fund to be
known as the "litigated claims fund", together with subsequent
payments or portions thereof, made to the accountant under the same
protest. If judgment is rendered in
favor of the claimant, the claimant shall be paid the amount of the judgment
out of the litigated claims fund by warrants signed by the comptroller upon
vouchers approved by the head of the department, board, bureau, commission, or
other agency with which the claimant had the dispute. If the amount of money in the litigated
claims fund is insufficient to pay the judgment the head of the department,
board, bureau, commission, or other agency with which the claimant had the
dispute shall include in their respective budget requests to the department of
budget and finance an amount necessary to pay the judgment, plus interest, as
provided herein. Interest [at the
rate of two per cent a year] earned on the payment by the litigated
claims fund from the date of each payment under protest shall also be paid
out of the amount appropriated for the judgment payable to the claimant;
provided that if the claim is for the recovery of taxes paid under protest by
the claimant, the rate of interest and the overpayment of taxes shall be
refunded in the manner provided in section 231-23(c) and (d). The amount of the judgment to be paid to the
claimant shall be ascertained by the head of the department, board, bureau,
commission, or other agency with which the claimant had the dispute from a
certified copy of the judgment, which shall be the authority for making payment
to the claimant. If judgment is rendered
against the claimant[,] on the merits, the amount of money paid
by the claimant under protest [which] that is in the litigated
claims fund shall be deposited into the appropriate account in the treasury of
the State and the amount shall become a government realization. If the claimant's suit is determined to
have been brought prematurely because the agency had not rendered a final
decision, then the claimant's payment may be retained in the litigated claims
fund and:
(1) If the agency then renders a final decision, the claimant may, within thirty days after notice of the decision, refile the action for a refund of the payment that is in the litigated claims fund, whereupon the court shall have jurisdiction over the refiled action; provided that if the agency decides against the claimant and no suit or proceeding is brought within thirty days after notice of the decision, the money paid under protest shall be deposited into the appropriate account in the treasury of the State and the amount shall become a government realization; or
(2) If the agency has not rendered a final decision within one hundred eighty days after the date of the claimant's payment, or decides in favor of the claimant, the agency shall refund the payment to the claimant with interest the same as if judgment had been rendered for the claimant, and certify to the court that it has done so."
SECTION 3. Statutory material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken. New statutory material is underscored.
SECTION 4. This Act shall take effect upon its approval.
Report Title:
Payments Under Protest; Procedure
Description:
Allows for the interest earned on payments under protest in the litigated claims fund to be paid in nontaxation cases if the claimant prevails. Establishes a procedure for the disposition of moneys and refiling of actions when a payment under protest suit is filed prematurely. (SD1)
The summary description of legislation appearing on this page is for informational purposes only and is not legislation or evidence of legislative intent.
|
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES |
H.B. NO. |
1174 |
|
THIRTY-THIRD LEGISLATURE, 2025 |
H.D. 1 |
|
|
STATE OF HAWAII |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
A BILL FOR AN ACT
RELATING TO THE PROCEDURE FOR PAYMENT UNDER PROTEST LAWSUITS.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. The legislature finds that the case Grace Business Development Corporation v. Kamikawa, 92 Hawaiʻi 608, 994 P.2d 540 (2000), held that if a taxpayer pays money under protest but then sues for a refund before the defendant agency has formally taken a position on whether the money is due, the appeal is to be dismissed. If the agency later decides that the money is indeed due, it is usually too late for the suit to be refiled, potentially allowing the agency to keep the disputed moneys as a government realization without allowing the taxpayer to obtain a judicial ruling on the merits of the exaction. To prevent the possibility of injustice, this Act adds procedural safeguards to ensure that the courts will be able to reach the merits of the dispute.
Accordingly, the purpose of this Act is to:
(1) Allow for the interest earned on payments under protest in the litigated claims fund to be paid in nontaxation cases if the claimant prevails; and
(2) Establish a procedure for the disposition of moneys and refiling of actions when a payment under protest suit is filed prematurely.
SECTION 2. Section 40-35, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsections (b) and (c) to read as follows:
"(b) Action to recover
moneys paid under protest or proceedings to adjust the claim may be commenced
by the payer or claimant against the public accountant to whom the payment was
made, in a court of competent jurisdiction, [within] no later than
thirty days from the date of payment. If
no suit or proceeding is brought within [the thirty-day period,] that
time, the money paid under protest shall be deposited into the appropriate
account in the treasury of the State by the accountant and the amount deposited
shall thereupon become a government realization. Any action to recover payment of taxes under
protest shall be commenced in the tax appeal court.
(c)
If action to recover the money paid under protest or a proceeding to
adjust the claim is timely commenced [within the thirty-day period],
the amount paid under protest shall, pending final decision of the cause, be
deposited by the public accountant into the state treasury, in a fund to be
known as the "litigated claims fund", together with subsequent
payments or portions thereof, made to the accountant under the same
protest. If judgment is rendered in
favor of the claimant, the claimant shall be paid the amount of the judgment
out of the litigated claims fund by warrants signed by the comptroller upon
vouchers approved by the head of the department, board, bureau, commission, or
other agency with which the claimant had the dispute. If the amount of money in the litigated
claims fund is insufficient to pay the judgment the head of the department,
board, bureau, commission, or other agency with which the claimant had the
dispute shall include in their respective budget requests to the department of
budget and finance an amount necessary to pay the judgment, plus interest, as
provided herein. Interest [at the
rate of two per cent a year] earned on the payment by the litigated
claims fund from the date of each payment under protest shall also be paid
out of the amount appropriated for the judgment payable to the claimant;
provided that if the claim is for the recovery of taxes paid under protest by
the claimant, the rate of interest and the overpayment of taxes shall be
refunded in the manner provided in section 231-23(c) and (d). The amount of the judgment to be paid to the
claimant shall be ascertained by the head of the department, board, bureau,
commission, or other agency with which the claimant had the dispute from a
certified copy of the judgment, which shall be the authority for making payment
to the claimant. If judgment is rendered
against the claimant[,] on the merits, the amount of money paid
by the claimant under protest [which] that is in the litigated
claims fund shall be deposited into the appropriate account in the treasury of
the State and the amount shall become a government realization. If the claimant's suit is determined to
have been brought prematurely because the agency had not rendered a final
decision, then the claimant's payment may be retained in the litigated claims
fund and:
(1) If the agency then renders a final decision, the claimant may, within thirty days after notice of the decision, refile the action for a refund of the payment that is in the litigated claims fund, whereupon the court shall have jurisdiction over the refiled action; provided that if the agency decides against the claimant and no suit or proceeding is brought within thirty days after notice of the decision, the money paid under protest shall be deposited into the appropriate account in the treasury of the State and the amount shall become a government realization; or
(2) If the agency has not rendered a final decision within one hundred eighty days after the date of the claimant's payment, or decides in favor of the claimant, the agency shall refund the payment to the claimant with interest the same as if judgment had been rendered for the claimant, and certify to the court that it has done so."
SECTION 3. Statutory material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken. New statutory material is underscored.
SECTION 4. This Act shall take effect on July 1, 3000.
Report Title:
Payments Under Protest; Procedure
Description:
Allows for the interest earned on payments under protest in the litigated claims fund to be paid in nontaxation cases if the claimant prevails. Establishes a procedure for the disposition of moneys and refiling of actions when a payment under protest suit is filed prematurely. Effective 7/1/3000. (HD1)
The summary description of legislation appearing on this page is for informational purposes only and is not legislation or evidence of legislative intent.
|
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES |
H.B. NO. |
1174 |
|
THIRTY-THIRD LEGISLATURE, 2025 |
|
|
|
STATE OF HAWAII |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
A BILL FOR AN ACT
RELATING TO THE PROCEDURE FOR PAYMENT UNDER PROTEST LAWSUITS.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. The legislature finds that Grace Business Development Corporation v. Kamikawa, 92 Hawaiʻi 608, 994 P.2d 540 (2000), held that if a taxpayer pays money under protest but then sues for a refund before the defendant agency has formally taken a position on whether the money is due, the appeal is to be dismissed. If the agency later decides that the money is indeed due, it is usually too late for the suit to be refiled, potentially allowing the agency to keep the disputed moneys as a government realization without allowing the taxpayer to obtain a judicial ruling on the merits of the exaction. To prevent the possibility of injustice, this Act adds procedural safeguards to ensure that the courts will be able to reach the merits of the dispute.
Accordingly, the purpose of this Act is to:
(1) Allow for the interest earned on payments under protest in the litigated claims fund to be paid in nontaxation cases if the claimant prevails; and
(2) Establish a procedure for the disposition of moneys and refiling of actions when a payment under protest suit is filed prematurely.
SECTION 2. Section 40-35, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsections (b) and (c) to read as follows:
"(b) Action to recover
moneys paid under protest or proceedings to adjust the claim may be commenced
by the payer or claimant against the public accountant to whom the payment was
made, in a court of competent jurisdiction, [within] no later than
thirty days from the date of payment. If
no suit or proceeding is brought within [the thirty-day period,] that
time, the money paid under protest shall be deposited into the appropriate
account in the treasury of the State by the accountant and the amount deposited
shall thereupon become a government realization. Any action to recover payment of taxes under
protest shall be commenced in the tax appeal court.
(c)
If action to recover the money paid under protest or a proceeding to
adjust the claim is timely commenced [within the thirty-day period],
the amount paid under protest shall, pending final decision of the cause, be
deposited by the public accountant into the state treasury, in a fund to be
known as the "litigated claims fund", together with subsequent
payments or portions thereof, made to the accountant under the same
protest. If judgment is rendered in
favor of the claimant, the claimant shall be paid the amount of the judgment
out of the litigated claims fund by warrants signed by the comptroller upon
vouchers approved by the head of the department, board, bureau, commission, or
other agency with which the claimant had the dispute. If the amount of money in the litigated
claims fund is insufficient to pay the judgment the head of the department,
board, bureau, commission, or other agency with which the claimant had the
dispute shall include in their respective budget requests to the department of
budget and finance an amount necessary to pay the judgment, plus interest, as
provided herein. Interest [at the
rate of two per cent a year] earned on the payment by the litigated
claims fund from the date of each payment under protest shall also be paid
out of the amount appropriated for the judgment payable to the claimant;
provided that if the claim is for the recovery of taxes paid under protest by
the claimant, the rate of interest and the overpayment of taxes shall be
refunded in the manner provided in section 231-23(c) and (d). The amount of the judgment to be paid to the
claimant shall be ascertained by the head of the department, board, bureau,
commission, or other agency with which the claimant had the dispute from a
certified copy of the judgment, which shall be the authority for making payment
to the claimant. If judgment is rendered
against the claimant[,] on the merits, the amount of money paid
by the claimant under protest [which] that is in the litigated
claims fund shall be deposited into the appropriate account in the treasury of
the State and the amount shall become a government realization. If the claimant's suit is determined to
have been brought prematurely because the agency had not rendered a final
decision, then the claimant's payment may be retained in the litigated claims
fund and:
(1) If the agency then renders a final decision, the claimant may, within thirty days after notice of the decision, refile the action for a refund of the payment that is in the litigated claims fund, whereupon the court shall have jurisdiction over the refiled action; provided that if the agency decides against the claimant and no suit or proceeding is brought within thirty days after notice of the decision, the money paid under protest shall be deposited into the appropriate account in the treasury of the State and the amount shall become a government realization; or
(2) If the agency has not rendered a final decision within one hundred eighty days after the date of the claimant's payment, or decides in favor of the claimant, the agency shall refund the payment to the claimant with interest the same as if judgment had been rendered for the claimant, and certify to the court that it has done so."
SECTION 3. Statutory material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken. New statutory material is underscored.
SECTION 4. This Act shall take effect upon its approval.
|
INTRODUCED BY: |
_____________________________ |
|
|
|
Report Title:
Payments Under Protest; Procedure
Description:
Allows for the interest earned on payments under protest in the litigated claims fund to be paid in nontaxation cases if the claimant prevails. Establishes a procedure for the disposition of moneys and refiling of actions when a payment under protest suit is filed prematurely.
The summary description of legislation appearing on this page is for informational purposes only and is not legislation or evidence of legislative intent.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Dec 8, 2025 | Carried over to 2026 Regular Session. |
| Mar 19, 2025 | Report adopted; Passed Second Reading, as amended (SD 1) and referred to WAM. |
| Mar 19, 2025 | Reported from JDC (Stand. Com. Rep. No. 1144) with recommendation of passage on Second Reading, as amended (SD 1) and referral to WAM. |
| Mar 14, 2025 | The committee(s) on JDC recommend(s) that the measure be PASSED, WITH AMENDMENTS. The votes in JDC were as follows: 5 Aye(s): Senator(s) Rhoads, Gabbard, Chang, San Buenaventura, Awa; Aye(s) with reservations: none ; 0 No(es): none; and 0 Excused: none. |
| Mar 13, 2025 | The committee(s) on JDC deferred the measure until 03-14-25 10:00AM; Conference Room 016 & Videoconference. |
| Mar 7, 2025 | The committee(s) on JDC has scheduled a public hearing on 03-13-25 9:45AM; Conference Room 016 & Videoconference. |
| Mar 4, 2025 | Referred to JDC, WAM. |
| Mar 4, 2025 | Passed First Reading. |
| Mar 4, 2025 | Received from House (Hse. Com. No. 155). |
| Feb 28, 2025 | Passed Third Reading with none voting aye with reservations; none voting no (0) and Representative(s) Cochran, Pierick, Templo, Ward excused (4). Transmitted to Senate. |
| Feb 28, 2025 | Reported from FIN (Stand. Com. Rep. No. 982), recommending passage on Third Reading. |
| Feb 25, 2025 | The committee on FIN recommend that the measure be PASSED, UNAMENDED. The votes were as follows: 13 Ayes: Representative(s) Yamashita, Takenouchi, Grandinetti, Holt, Hussey, Keohokapu-Lee Loy, Kitagawa, Lamosao, Lee, M., Miyake, Morikawa, Templo, Alcos; Ayes with reservations: none; Noes: none; and 3 Excused: Representative(s) Kusch, Reyes Oda, Ward. |
| Feb 21, 2025 | Bill scheduled to be heard by FIN on Tuesday, 02-25-25 12:00PM in House conference room 308 VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE. |
| Feb 14, 2025 | Passed Second Reading as amended in HD 1 and referred to the committee(s) on FIN with none voting aye with reservations; none voting no (0) and Representative(s) Cochran, Matayoshi, Poepoe, Ward excused (4). |
| Feb 14, 2025 | Reported from JHA (Stand. Com. Rep. No. 695) as amended in HD 1, recommending passage on Second Reading and referral to FIN. |
| Feb 12, 2025 | The committee on JHA recommend that the measure be PASSED, WITH AMENDMENTS. The votes were as follows: 10 Ayes: Representative(s) Tarnas, Poepoe, Belatti, Hashem, Kahaloa, Perruso, Takayama, Todd, Garcia, Shimizu; Ayes with reservations: none; Noes: none; and 1 Excused: Representative(s) Cochran. |
| Feb 7, 2025 | Bill scheduled to be heard by JHA on Wednesday, 02-12-25 2:00PM in House conference room 325 VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE. |
| Jan 27, 2025 | Referred to JHA, FIN, referral sheet 4 |
| Jan 23, 2025 | Introduced and Pass First Reading. |
| Jan 21, 2025 | Pending introduction. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 14, 2025 | The committee(s) on JDC recommend(s) that the measure be PASSED, WITH AMENDMENTS | Senate Standing Committee on Judiciary |
Passed |
|
| Feb 28, 2025 | Third Reading | House Floor |
Passed |
|
| Feb 25, 2025 | The committee on FIN recommend that the measure be PASSED, UNAMENDED | House Standing Committee on Finance |
Passed |
|
| Feb 12, 2025 | The committee on JHA recommend that the measure be PASSED, WITH AMENDMENTS | House Standing Committee on Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
STAND. COM. REP. NO. 1144
Honolulu, Hawaii
RE: H.B. No. 1174
H.D. 1
S.D. 1
Honorable Ronald D. Kouchi
President of the Senate
Thirty-Third State Legislature
Regular Session of 2025
State of Hawaii
Sir:
Your Committee on Judiciary, to which was referred H.B. No. 1174, H.D. 1, entitled:
"A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO THE PROCEDURE FOR PAYMENT UNDER PROTEST LAWSUITS,"
begs leave to report as follows:
The purpose and intent of this measure is to:
(1) Allow for the interest earned on payments under protest in the Litigated Claims Fund to be paid in nontaxation cases if the claimant prevails; and
(2) Establish a procedure for the disposition of moneys and refiling of actions when a payment under protest suit is filed prematurely.
Your Committee received testimony in support of this measure from one individual.
Your Committee received comments on this measure from the Tax Foundation of Hawaii.
Your Committee finds that in Grace Business Development Corporation v. Kamikawa, 92 Hawaiʻi 608, 994 P.2d 540 (2000), the Hawaii Supreme Court held that if a taxpayer pays money under protest but then sues for a refund before the defendant agency has formally taken a position on whether the money is due, the appeal is to be dismissed. However, if the agency later decides that the money is indeed due, it is usually too late for the suit to be refiled, potentially allowing the agency to keep the disputed moneys as a government realization without allowing the taxpayer to obtain a judicial ruling on the merits of the exaction. This measure will prevent the possibility of injustice by adding procedural safeguards to ensure that the courts will be able to reach the merits of the dispute.
Your Committee has amended this measure by making it effective upon its approval.
As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your Committee on Judiciary that is attached to this report, your Committee is in accord with the intent and purpose of H.B. No. 1174, H.D. 1, as amended herein, and recommends that it pass Second Reading in the form attached hereto as H.B. No. 1174, H.D. 1, S.D. 1, and be referred to your Committee on Ways and Means.
Respectfully submitted on behalf of the members of the Committee on Judiciary,
|
|
|
________________________________ KARL RHOADS, Chair |
|
|
|
|
STAND. COM. REP. NO. 982
Honolulu, Hawaii
, 2025
RE: H.B. No. 1174
H.D. 1
Honorable Nadine K. Nakamura
Speaker, House of Representatives
Thirty-Third State Legislature
Regular Session of 2025
State of Hawaii
Madame:
Your Committee on Finance, to which was referred H.B. No. 1174, H.D. 1, entitled:
"A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO THE PROCEDURE FOR PAYMENT UNDER PROTEST LAWSUITS,"
begs leave to report as follows:
The purpose of this measure is to:
(1) Allow for the interest earned on payments under protest in the litigated claims fund to be paid in nontaxation cases if the claimant prevails; and
(2) Establish a procedure for the disposition of monies and refiling of actions when a payment under protest suit is filed prematurely.
As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your Committee on Finance that is attached to this report, your Committee is in accord with the intent and purpose of H.B. No. 1174, H.D. 1, and recommends that it pass Third Reading.
Respectfully submitted on behalf of the members of the Committee on Finance,
|
|
|
____________________________ KYLE T. YAMASHITA, Chair |
|
|
|
|
STAND. COM. REP. NO. 695
Honolulu, Hawaii
, 2025
RE: H.B. No. 1174
H.D. 1
Honorable Nadine K. Nakamura
Speaker, House of Representatives
Thirty-Third State Legislature
Regular Session of 2025
State of Hawaii
Madame:
Your Committee on Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs, to which was referred H.B. No. 1174 entitled:
"A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO THE PROCEDURE FOR PAYMENT UNDER PROTEST LAWSUITS,"
begs leave to report as follows:
The purpose of this measure is to:
(1) Allow for the interest earned on payments under protest in the litigated claims fund to be paid in nontaxation cases if the claimant prevails; and
(2) Establish a procedure for the disposition of monies and refiling of actions when a payment under protest suit is filed prematurely.
Your Committee received comments on this measure from the Tax Foundation of Hawaii.
Your Committee finds that the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that if a taxpayer sues for a refund of payment under protest before an agency has decided whether the money is owed, the appeal should be dismissed. This may result in the agency keeping payments under protest without the opportunity for judicial review on the issue. This measure introduces procedural safeguards to ensure the courts can address the merits of such disputes.
Your Committee has amended this measure by:
(1) Changing the effective date to July 1, 3000, to encourage further discussion; and
(2) Making technical, nonsubstantive amendments for the purposes of clarity, consistency, and style.
As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your Committee on Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs that is attached to this report, your Committee is in accord with the intent and purpose of H.B. No. 1174, as amended herein, and recommends that it pass Second Reading in the form attached hereto as H.B. No. 1174, H.D. 1, and be referred to your Committee on Finance.
Respectfully submitted on behalf of the members of the Committee on Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs,
|
|
|
____________________________ DAVID A. TARNAS, Chair |
|
|
|
|
|
Date
|
Testimony PDF
|
|---|---|
| Mar 11, 2025 | HB1174_HD1_TESTIMONY_JDC_03-13-25_.PDF |
| Feb 25, 2025 | HB1174_HD1_TESTIMONY_FIN_02-25-25_.PDF |
| Feb 12, 2025 | HB1174_TESTIMONY_JHA_02-12-25_.PDF |
Discussed in Hearing
28SEC
House Standing Committee on Finance
2MIN
House Standing Committee on Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs
Bill Author
Bill Co-Author(s):