POLISCOPE
Back to bills

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.
Did Not Advance

Minnesota House Bill 436 Establishes Homestead Market Value Exclusion for Retired Property Owners Age 65 and Older

Original title: Homestead market value exclusion established for property owned by persons 65 years or older and retired.

Last action · February 20, 2025: Author added ZeleznikarSponsors: Mary Franson and 1 other

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

Minnesota House File 436 establishes a full for residential property owned and occupied by retired residents aged 65 and older, effective beginning with property taxes payable in 2026.

Why it matters

Qualifying retired senior homeowners become eligible to exclude all of their property's market value from property taxation, altering local tax rolls and taxpayer liabilities starting in tax year 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

Retired property owners aged 65 and older

Eligible individuals may have all of their property's market value excluded from taxation, reducing their property tax liability.

Directly affected

County and city assessors

Assessors must process applications, update assessment rolls, and include the new value reduction and exclusion details on annual taxpayer notices.

Key Facts

You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who is eligible for the homestead market value exclusion under HF 436?
Property owners who are 65 years of age or older, retired, and occupy the property as a homestead. For married couples, one spouse must be at least 65 and the other at least 62.
How does a property owner apply for the exclusion?
The property owner must apply to the assessor by December 31 of the first assessment year for which the exclusion is sought.

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 - Died at adjournment · in House committee.

Procedural history

3 actions
  1. Feb 20, 2025House
    Author added Zeleznikar
  2. Feb 17, 2025HouseCommittee
    Motion to recall and re-refer, motion prevailed Taxes
  3. Feb 13, 2025HouseIntroduced
    Introduction and first reading, referred to Veterans and Military Affairs Division

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

Discoveries

1 pattern noticed across the record

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift95% confidence

Expansion of Senior Property Tax Relief

The bill introduces a complete market value exclusion for retired property owners aged 65 and older, replacing or operating distinctly from existing tax credits and deferral programs.

Connected Entities

Scott, Washington, Carver and 6 more
locationScott“County referenced in regional rail authority provisions”Map →
locationWashington“County referenced in regional rail authority provisions”Map →
locationCarver“County referenced in regional rail authority provisions”Map →
PersonCommissioner of Revenue“State official responsible for specifying tax statement and notice forms”Map →
locationRamsey“County referenced in regional rail authority provisions and public library servi”Map →
locationHennepin“County referenced in regional rail authority provisions”Map →
OrganizationMinnesota Legislature“Legislative body considering the bill”Map →
locationAnoka“County referenced in regional rail authority provisions”Map →
locationDakota“County referenced in regional rail authority provisions”Map →

Sources

Open source document

www.revisor.mn.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance20
    Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 80)
  • Controversy40
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment5
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz35
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record