|
Dear OSCC Members & Colleagues –
The 2025 legislative session did not pick up much momentum last week as heavy snows and ice shut down the capitol on Thursday and Friday.
We continue to see the 2025 legislature struggle to gain its footing, primarily due to uncertainty around the state budget as there continues to be concern over potential losses to federal funding.
The upcoming quarterly revenue forecast in two weeks may provide the footing the legislature needs to start moving with some confidence.
Here is summary of where we think some of the major subject areas stand as of now:
Tax policy
We think that House Bill 2010 is the most significant tax bill that will move in the short term. This is the ‘provider tax’ legislation that local hospitals and health systems need to leverage federal money for the Oregon Health Plan. The 2% tax on commercial health insurance premiums will also be included in the bill. OSCC is appreciative that this tax rate was not increased in this legislation.
OSCC continues to believe that there is widespread interest in raising Oregon’s estate tax (i.e. ‘death tax’) exemption beyond the current $1 million level. Oregon is one of only 12 states left that tax the value of a small business and estate upon the death of an owner. OSCC has testified early and often on a number of good bills here – House Bill 2301, Senate Bill 380 and Senate Bill 405. OSCC will be a strong advocate here.
At this early stage, OSCC does not see much momentum behind the effort raise the $1 million CAT tax exemption for small businesses. A primary agenda priority for OSCC, we do not see the early momentum on this issue that we saw in 2023. As it stands, any small business with over $1 million in gross sales is subject to Oregon’s gross receipts tax. OSCC is a chief proponent of increasing this exemption for small businesses. Small businesses between $1 and $5 million gross revenue represent over two-thirds of CAT tax payers but only about 6% of total CAT revenues.
Labor/Workforce Policy
Senate Bill 916: This bill has dominated the early labor policy landscape in 2025 with two public hearings and a third hearing scheduled for this week.
SB 916 would allow unemployment benefits for striking workers. OSCC is opposing the bill as it stands. It would force taxpayers to foot the bill for striking public sector workers; and for the private sector, it would force thousands of small employers to subsidize labor disputes for much larger corporations. OSCC testified last week and submitted comments to OPPOSE this bill.
GOOD Legislation Coming up This Week
House Bill 3140: OSCC has long supported this legislation in support of our recreation and fitness industries, and will do so again in 2025. House Bill 3140 restores liability waivers for Oregon companies that engage in outdoor sporting, recreation, health and fitness. It would put Oregon businesses back on equal footing with surrounding western states.
Recent state court rulings have effectively nullified Oregon liability waivers, impacting the accessibility and affordability of recreation and fitness. Oregon businesses now pay significantly more for liability insurance than other western states, and as a result, recreation and fitness providers are forced to either increase consumer costs or eliminate recreation options.
Stories abound of liability insurance carriers dropping Oregon companies engaged in sports and recreation. For those able to obtain liability insurance, the premiums are dramatically higher.
HB 3140 will have its first hearing in the House Economic Development, Small Business and Trade Committee on Wednesday, February 19th at 8:00am. You can register to testify on the bill, or you can submit your written support of the bill.
BAD Legislation Coming up This Week
House Bill 3187: This is a follow up effort to unsuccessful legislation in 2023 that aimed to expand Oregon’s age discrimination laws for employers, ostensibly to protect older workers. The issue is that age discrimination is already clearly defined in Oregon as any adverse employment decision taken against an employee aged 18 and older due to that employee’s age. There is no need for greater clarification as it would cause more confusion and lawsuits.
For example, HB 3187 prevents employers from asking job applicants basic questions about years of experience in the field in which they’ve applied for a job and prevents language identifying skills that may be necessary for fulfilling work responsibilities as these things may be a proxy for age.
HB 3187 will have its first public hearing in the House Labor and Workplace Standards Committee on Wednesday, February 19th at 3:00pm. You can register to testify on the bill, or you can submit your written comment on the bill.
| 
