POLISCOPE
Back to bills
Part ofTaxes →

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.
Did Not Advance

Connecticut Establishes Personal Income Tax Deduction for Military Funeral Honor Guard Compensation

Original title: AN ACT ESTABLISHING A PERSONAL INCOME TAX DEDUCTION FOR MILITARY FUNERAL HONOR GUARD DETAIL COMPENSATION.

Last action · April 14, 2026: Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, SenateSponsors: Karen Reddington-Hughes and 5 others

Introduced
Committee
Floor Vote
Passed
Law

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

What This Bill Proposed

Connecticut legislators introduced a bill to create a personal income tax for compensation received for participating in military funeral honor guard details, taking effect July 1, 2026.

Who It Would Have Affected

Groups the bill's text would have affected, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

military funeral honor guard detail members

Taxpayers who serve on honor guard details become eligible to subtract their honor guard compensation from their state adjusted gross income.

Key Facts

  • Establishes a new personal income tax deduction for compensation received for serving as a member of a military funeral honor guard detail.
  • Applies to compensation received pursuant to section 27-76 of the general statutes.

Frequently Asked Questions

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Where This Stands

This bill did not become law - Tabled in the Senate.

Procedural history

15 actions
  1. Apr 14, 2026Senate
    Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, Senate
  2. Apr 14, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    No New File by Committee on Finance, Revenue and Bonding
  3. Apr 14, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Reported Out of Legislative Commissioners' Office
  4. Apr 14, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Filed with Legislative Commissioners' Office
  5. Apr 14, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Joint Favorable
  6. Apr 8, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Immediate Transmittal to Committee on Finance, Revenue and Bonding
Show 9 earlier actions
  1. Mar 23, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    File Number 130
  2. Mar 23, 2026Senate
    Senate Calendar Number 103
  3. Mar 23, 2026Senate
    Favorable Report, Tabled for the Calendar, Senate
  4. Mar 23, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Reported Out of Legislative Commissioners' Office
  5. Mar 16, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Referred to Office of Legislative Research and Office of Fiscal Analysis 03/23/26 12:00 PM
  6. Mar 11, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Filed with Legislative Commissioners' Office
  7. Mar 10, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Joint Favorable
  8. Feb 27, 2026Connecticut General Assembly
    Public Hearing 03/03
  9. Feb 26, 2026Connecticut General AssemblyCommittee
    Referred to Joint Committee on Veterans' and Military Affairs

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

Lobbying Activity

No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Sponsors

Connected Entities

Karen Reddington-Hughes, Chris Stewart, Bill Buckbee and 4 more
PersonKaren Reddington-Hughes“Representative for the 66th District”Map →
PersonChris Stewart“Representative for the 51st District”Map →
PersonBill Buckbee“Representative for the 67th District”Map →
OrganizationGeneral Assembly“Legislative body considering the bill”Map →
PersonBrian Lanoue“Representative for the 45th District”Map →
PersonMark DeCaprio“Representative for the 48th District”Map →
PersonAmy Morrin Bello“Representative for the 48th District”Map →

Sources

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance20
    Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 35)
  • Controversy5
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment5
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz15
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record