Issue Updates from the State House | Week of February 24, 2026

Issue Updates from the State House

Week of February 24, 2026

A weekly snapshot of key legislative activity impacting Vermont’s business community. 

  • Commerce Budget: The House Commerce and Economic Development Committee finalized its annual budget letter to Appropriations, outlining funding priorities across housing, workforce, and economic development. Key requests include continued support for VHIP, workforce training through Advance Vermont, the International Business Office, and expanded Downtown and Village Tax Credits to spur redevelopment. Several proposals include one-time funding components, particularly within housing, workforce, rural technical assistance, and economic development initiatives.
  • Housing: The Senate Economic Development, Housing, and General Affairs Committee continued work on S.328, adding accessory dwelling units to the list of uses that must be permitted under homeowners association bylaws and reviewing the bill’s broader budget implications. As housing affordability and economic growth remain closely tied to population trends, securing and sustaining funding for these initiatives will be critical as budget negotiations advance.
  • Housing Solutions: The House General and Housing Committee advanced H.775, legislation aimed at promoting more efficient housing development and strengthening access to residential health care services. The bill now moves to the House Ways and Means Committee for further consideration.
  • Yield: The House Ways and Means Committee continues to weigh how much one-time funding to use to buy down this year’s property tax increase and whether relief will be split evenly between homestead and non-homestead properties. The Vermont Chamber is advocating for fiscal responsibility and equitable treatment to avoid shifting long-term burdens onto employers.
  • Liquor Liability Insurance: The House Government Operations Committee heard testimony on language that would repeal the mandatory liquor liability insurance requirement. The proposal responds to ongoing instability in the national casualty insurance market, which has driven significant premium volatility in Vermont’s small and concentrated hospitality sector. Repeal would maintain existing civil liability and regulatory safeguards while restoring regulatory proportionality during a period of market disruption.
  • Event Ticketing: The House Commerce and Economic Development Committee advanced H.512, legislation aimed at curbing excessive resale of event tickets and strengthening consumer protections for venues using online ticketing platforms. The bill now moves to the House Floor for further consideration.
  • Culinary Institute Study: The Senate Economic Development, Housing, and General Affairs Committee continued work on S.327, adding a study to explore the creation of a culinary institute in Vermont. The Vermont Chamber is a named stakeholder. The proposal aligns with broader efforts to expand workforce pipelines and support long-term talent development in the restaurant and hospitality industries.
  • Career and Technical Education (CTE): The House Commerce and Economic Development Committee reviewed draft legislation to reform Vermont’s CTE system in coordination with broader education changes. While timelines, funding, and governance structures remain in development, expanded access and improved alignment with graduation credits signal progress toward strengthening Vermont’s future workforce pipeline.
  • Family Leave: The House General and Housing Committee continued testimony on H.459, which would prohibit certain employers from counting workers’ compensation leave toward Vermont’s family and medical leave requirements. The change would require these leave systems to run sequentially rather than concurrently. Adjusting how these programs interact carries implications for job protection timelines, return-to-work planning, and staffing predictability for employers.
  • Health Care: The House Health Care Committee continued work on H.585, which proposes reforms to Vermont’s insurance structure, including allowing association health plans to provide additional coverage options for employers and self-employed Vermonters. Lawmakers are evaluating whether expanded plan flexibility could help stabilize markets and address affordability pressures.
  • Private Equity: The House Health Care Committee reviewed an updated version of H.583, which would establish a new statutory framework governing acquisitions and changes of control involving health care entities, including transactions with private equity firms. The revised bill adds additional layers of oversight, raising concerns about limiting potential solutions to Vermont’s health care challenges and increasing uncertainty for privately owned providers.
  • Land Use: The Senate Natural Resources and Energy Committee continued review of S.325, a bill proposing targeted updates to land use and permitting policy. The proposal would extend certain Act 250 exemption sunsets to 2030 in order to support housing development and maintain momentum on broader permitting reform timelines. The committee will continue collaborative discussions in the weeks ahead on this significant housing and development initiative.
  • Current Use: The House Environment Committee began discussion of H.70, which would include land enrolled in the Use Value Appraisal Program within the statutory definition of conserved land for purposes of the state’s conserved land inventory. The proposal could help Vermont advance its conservation goals while recognizing the importance of balanced, smart growth.
  • Rodenticides: The Vermont Chamber testified before the House Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry Committee on H.758, which would broadly ban the use of anticoagulant rodenticides commonly used by food manufacturers, restaurants, and other food-related facilities to prevent rodent infestations. The bill is expected to be amended to replace the proposed ban with a study on rodenticide alternatives.
  • Swipe Fees: The Senate Finance Committee reviewed S.135, which would prohibit credit card fees on the tax and gratuity portions of transactions and require retailers to accept cash for purchases under $500. The proposal has drawn renewed attention following a recent ruling in Illinois, though the committee signaled it will wait for further legal clarity before advancing the bill.
  • Bottle Bill: The House Environment Committee advanced H.915, proposing changes to Vermont’s beverage container redemption program. A similar version was vetoed in a prior session, and concerns remain regarding potential cost increases for the beverage industry. Significant revisions are expected as the bill moves forward.
  • Education: The House and Senate Education Committees continued discussions on education reform and district mapping, weighing mandatory consolidation against more limited voluntary models. As crossover approaches, advancing durable reform will require difficult, and potentially unpopular, decisions to ensure long-term quality, operational efficiency, and cost sustainability within Vermont’s education system.

CONNECT WITH OUR TEAM

Megan Sullivan

she/her

Vice President of Government Affairs

802-522-6316

RECENT NEWS

Federal Tax Policy, Vermont Choices, and the Structure of R&D Policy

Federal Tax Policy, Vermont Choices, and the Structure of R&D Policy

The House Ways and Means Committee is considering changes to how Vermont defines taxable income for businesses that invest in research and development. Vermont companies spend millions of dollars each year on R&D across advanced manufacturing, software, biotechnology, and applied research. The tax treatment of those investments directly influences capital allocation, hiring decisions, and long-term competitiveness.

The proposal contains two interdependent components that must be evaluated together. In combination, these changes could materially shape Vermont’s innovation climate, affecting how growth-stage and capital-intensive firms evaluate future investment in the state.

What the Bill Does

The draft legislation makes two significant changes.

First, it adds back federal Section 174 deductions for research and experimental expenses. That means Vermont would not allow businesses to deduct their R&D expenses when calculating state taxable income.

Unlike other areas of the tax code, such as bonus depreciation, the draft does not restore those expenses through state level amortization. As written, R&D costs would not be deductible for Vermont tax purposes.

Second, the bill increases Vermont’s R&D tax credit from 27 percent to 75 percent of the federal R&D credit. That is a substantial increase and would make Vermont’s credit one of the most generous in the country.

These two provisions must be understood together.

What This Means in Practice

There are two primary ways states can treat R&D spending.

One approach is deductibility. Businesses subtract their R&D expenses from taxable income, just like wages, rent, or other operating costs.

Another approach is relying more heavily on tax credits, which apply only to businesses that calculate and qualify for the federal R&D credit and have sufficient tax liability to use it.

Under the existing draft, Vermont would move away from deductibility and rely more heavily on the expanded credit.

For Businesses That Claim the Federal R&D Credit

Businesses that calculate and claim the federal R&D credit would see a larger Vermont credit under the proposed 75 percent rate.

However, because the deduction would no longer be allowed, the total state tax benefit may be smaller than under a system that includes both deductibility and a credit. The outcome depends on each firm’s cost structure and federal credit calculation.

For Businesses That Incur R&D Expenses but Do Not Claim the Credit

Not all businesses that invest in R&D claim the federal credit. Some may not meet the qualification thresholds. Others may not calculate it due to complexity or cost.

Under the draft language, those businesses would lose deductibility of R&D expenses and would not receive the benefit of the credit increase. For those firms, the proposal would result in higher Vermont taxable income.

For Early Stage and Growing Firms

Firms in a loss position or early growth stage often rely on deductions to build net operating losses that can offset future income.

If R&D expenses are permanently disallowed for Vermont purposes, those costs would not be recoverable at the state level, which may affect long term planning and investment decisions.

Timing Versus Permanence

A key distinction in this debate is whether Vermont intends to delay deductibility or eliminate it.

If Vermont required R&D expenses to be amortized over several years, businesses would still recover their costs over time. That is a timing adjustment.

Under the existing draft, there is no amortization restoration. As written, the policy would permanently disallow deduction of R&D expenses at the state level.

That structural difference has meaningful economic implications.

Where the Opportunity and the Risk Sit

The increase to a 75 percent R&D credit is significant. If structured correctly, it could position Vermont as a strong competitor for innovation-based investment.

The risk lies in how the deduction and credit interact. If the credit expansion is paired with preserved cost recovery, the proposal could strengthen Vermont’s competitiveness while maintaining revenue balance. If deductibility is permanently removed, the policy becomes more uneven. Some firms would benefit from the higher credit. Others would see a durable increase in state taxable income.

The Bottom Line

This proposal is not simply about increasing a tax credit. It is about how Vermont defines taxable income for businesses that invest in research and development. Understanding whether the policy preserves deductibility or permanently eliminates it is essential to evaluating its impact.

The Vermont Chamber will continue to work with lawmakers to ensure that tax policy advances affordability, predictability, and long-term competitiveness while avoiding unintended consequences for the businesses that power Vermont’s economy.

CONNECT WITH OUR TAX EXPERT

Amy Spear

President

Fiscal Policy, Taxation, Tourism and Hospitality, Workforce Development

RECENT NEWS

Energy Policy: Modernization, Affordability, and Market Signals

Energy Policy: Modernization, Affordability, and Market Signals

As the Legislature approaches crossover, lawmakers are advancing several significant energy proposals. While varied in scope, each reflects a shared challenge: balancing Vermont’s climate objectives with affordability, regulatory clarity, and economic competitiveness.

Three proposals have emerged as focal points, each testing Vermont’s ability to modernize its energy framework without eroding affordability or predictability. Together, they underscore a broader question this session: how to advance climate policy while strengthening Vermont’s economic foundation.

Building Energy Standards

H.718 proposes structural updates to Vermont’s residential building energy standards framework (RBES/CBES). The bill would create a stakeholder task force to examine contractor registry updates, evaluate licensure requirements, and better align education standards across trades. It also provides clarity for builders who, in good faith, certified projects under RBES/CBES 2020 pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Order, ensuring they would be held harmless from liability.

Revisions since introduction have improved the bill’s structure and moved smaller-scale builders closer to a more stable regulatory framework. Predictability remains critical. In the Vermont Futures Project Business Climate Survey, employers consistently cite regulatory clarity as essential to housing production and workforce attraction. Housing supply, workforce growth, and energy policy remain structurally linked.

Questions remain regarding funding mechanisms and potential downstream compliance costs. As Vermont works to address its housing shortage, regulatory updates must align with administrative capacity to avoid unintended cost escalation. With crossover imminent and divisions remaining in committee, final adjustments will need to materialize quickly.

Expanding Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (C-PACE)

S.138 would expand Vermont’s Property Assessed Clean Energy program to commercial and industrial buildings, allowing businesses to finance efficiency, renewable, and resilience improvements through long-term, fixed-rate property assessments.

At a time when federal incentives remain uncertain, the proposal offers a voluntary, market-based pathway for businesses to invest in efficiency and resilience. In other states, C-PACE programs have reduced operating costs, attracted private capital, and supported job creation. For Vermont employers, the program represents a financing tool rather than a mandate, aligning environmental progress with economic competitiveness.

After sustained stakeholder engagement and multiple revisions, S.138 appears positioned to advance before crossover.

Net Metering

H.716 would remove the adjuster applied to energy generated behind the meter, electricity produced and consumed on-site without reaching the grid. The bill also establishes battery storage goals and directs the Public Utility Commission to account for federal incentive conditions when setting rates.

Earlier language that would have capped the negative adjuster for net-metered energy has been removed, alleviating concerns about immediate cost increases for non-solar ratepayers. However, proposed behind-the-meter and battery-related changes introduce more complex structural questions.

Adjusting this framework outside the established biennial PUC review process could add complexity to one of the most intricate net metering systems in the country. There is also risk that cost shifts could increase rates for non-net-metered customers, undermining affordability for businesses and households alike. Preserving the PUC’s research-driven review process helps ensure that rate decisions remain grounded in economic analysis.

With new language introduced late in the process and crossover near, advancement of the bill in its current form appears uncertain.

What Happens Next

As crossover approaches, compressed timelines and consequential policy choices are converging.  Vermont’s long-term energy strategy must remain aligned with economic competitiveness, workforce growth, and housing development.

The central challenge is not whether Vermont advances its climate goals, but whether it does so in a way that reinforces affordability, regulatory clarity, and long-term economic durability. Striking that balance will determine whether this session’s energy reforms strengthen Vermont’s competitive position or introduce new layers of cost and complexity.

CONNECT WITH OUR ENERGY EXPERT

Jeremy Little

Policy and Outreach Associate

Environment and Energy, Healthcare, Manufacturing, Transportation

RECENT NEWS