1. ACT 388 PROPERTY TAX REFORM John Butler Chief Financial Officer
Lexington Co. School District No. 1
Lexington, SC
Theodore B. DuBose
Attorney
Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd, P.A.
Columbia, SC

2. At A Glance
Passed in 2006
Effective June 1, 2007, increased the state sales tax by 1 cent
Reduced the sales tax on unprepared foods (All sales tax on unprepared foods was subsequently eliminated)
Provided an exemption of owner-occupied residential property from school operating millage
Created the Homestead Exemption Fund
Placed a limitation on millage rate increases for all local governing bodies

3. Homestead Exemption Fund (HEF)
Proceeds from the additional penny sales tax are credited to a fund separate and distinct for the state general fund
The Board of Economic Advisers shall make an annual estimate of the receipts by the HEF by February 15
This estimate must be provided to the legislature and each school district and county

4. Homestead Exemption Fund (HEF)
In 2007, additional legislation created three “tiers”:
Tier I is the amount received by a district for the first $100,000 of assessment on owner-occupied property
Tier II is the amount a district receives for the first $50,000 for taxpayers age 65 or older or those totally and permanently disabled
Tier III, for FY , consists of an amount equal dollar for dollar to the revenue that would be collected by the district from property tax for school operating purposes imposed by the district on owner-occupied residential property for that fiscal year as if no reimbursed exemptions applied reduced by the total of the district's tier one and tier two reimbursements

5. Distribution of Revenue
Beginning with FY school districts were reimbursed for the actual amount that was to be collected from school operating millage imposed on owner-occupied residential property
Beginning with FY the aggregate reimbursements are increased annually by an inflation factor equal to the percentage increase in the CPI, SE Region plus the percentage increase in the population of the State as published by the Office of Research and Statistics multiplied by the prior year’s total reimbursements
An additional add-on weighting for poverty of .20 was added to provide additional revenues for students in K-12 who qualify for Medicaid or are eligible for free and/or reduced lunches

6. Distribution of Revenue (Continued)
Beginning with FY , a school district receives reimbursement for the amount received in prior year plus a proportionate share of the increase above based on of district’s WPU’s as a percentage of statewide WPU’s
Any county that did not raise a minimum of $2.5 million from school operating millage must receive and additional reimbursement from the HEF to bring the reimbursements to districts in that county to at leas $2.5 million
Multi-district counties qualifying for the additional reimbursement would split the funds based on 135 Day ADM of the district divided by the total ADM of all students of the districts in the county
Any funds remaining after all of the above obligations have been met must be distributed to counties for a credit against county operations on owner occupied property taxes

7. Millage Limitation
A local governing body may increase millage for general operating purposes above the rate for the previous year only to the extent of the increase in the average CPI for the most recent 12 month period, plus the percentage increase in the previous year increase in the population of the entity
Negative population growth was later amended to be zero for purposes of this computation
The millage rate limitation may be suspended and the millage rate may be increased upon a 2/3 vote or the local governing body, but only for 5 purposes stated in Act 388
The restriction does not affect millage for levied for bonded indebtedness or used to maintain a reserve account

8. Five Authorized Purposes for Suspending the Millage Limitation
The deficiency of the preceding year;
Any catastrophic event outside the control of the governing body such as a natural disaster, severe weather event, act of God, or act of terrorism, fire, war, or riot;
Compliance with a court order or decree;

9. Five Purposes for Suspending the Millage Limitation (cont.)
Taxpayer closure due to circumstances outside the control of the governing body that decreases by ten percent or more the amount of revenue payable to the taxing jurisdiction in the preceding year; or
Compliance with a regulation promulgated or statue enacted by the federal or state government after the ratification date of this section for which an appropriation or a method of obtaining an appropriation is not provided by the federal or state government.

10. School Districts’ Perspective

12. Growth Act 388 adversely affects fast growing districts.
Act 388 helps slow growing, no growth or declining districts or districts that receive the $2.5 million.

13. Growing Districts

14. Declining Districts

15. $2.5 Million Districts

16. Effect on Per Pupil Revenue
Growing Enrollment Districts
Year WPUs Allocation Per WPU
10, $ 20,000, $ 2,000
11, $ 20,500, $ 1,864
12, $ 21,000, $ 1,750
13, $ 21,500, $ 1,654
14, $ 22,000, $ 1,571
15, $ 22,500, $ 1,500

17. Effect on Per Pupil Revenue
Declining Enrollment Districts
Year WPUs Allocation Per Pupil
10, $ 20,000, $ 2,000
9, $ 20,300, $ 2,137
9, $ 20,600, $ 2,289
8, $ 20,900, $ 2,459
8, $ 21,200, $ 2,650
7, $ 21,500, $ 2,867

18. State Funds
Growing districts receive less state money since their Education Finance Act (EFA) amount is based on their owner-occupied assessments and not the amount they receive from Act 388.
Declining districts receive more state money since their EFA amount is based on their owner-occupied assessments and not the amount they receive from Act 388.
If there is no change in legislation this year this will correct itself for , but there was legislation filed last year that would leave this inequity in place and probably will be introduced again this year.

19. Millage
Districts are restricted to how much millage they can increase and a mill is worth much less than it was prior to Act 388.
The more owner-occupied property a district has, the greater the decline in a value of a mill since owner-occupied assessments are not included in the value now.
This also means that any new mills added will be entirely assessed against business and other non owner-occupied property.

20. Property Reclassification
was the base year where DOR used the owner-occupied assessments and each district’s millage rate to determine the dollar for dollar reimbursement to districts.
Some taxpayers that had 6% property in , which is still taxed for school operations, reclassified it to 4% property after the base year in order to obtain the 100% exemption from school operating taxes.
Therefore, no tax is now collected on it and it is excluded in the amount the state uses to reimburse districts.

21. Re-assessment
The value of property may not be increased by reassessment more than 15%, except in the case of an “assessable transfer of interest.”
Legislation debated in 2010 but not passed would have deleted assessable transfer of interest exception.
According to a report from the state’s Chief Economist given to Government Finance Officers in December of 2008, this will have a greater adverse effect on school districts than Act 388 in the long term.
This was enacted as a result of a constitutional amendment through a state-wide vote by citizens.
Bright spot: For the purpose of calculating debt limit, assessed value shall not be lower than 2006 assessed value.

24. Avoiding The Millage Cap
Using Your Debt Limit for
Capital Expenditures

25. Simple
Counties and municipalities may issue general obligation debt for any corporate purpose.
Many counties and cities use general fund millage to fund capital expenditures.
Consider using general obligation bond funds, instead of general funds, to fund capital expenditures.
Bonds can be issued for short period, keeping interest costs at a minimum.
Owing to petition rules, timing is critical.

26. Not as Simple
Act 388 makes it difficult in some cases to engage in lease-purchase financings for equipment and other capital items.
Consider using proceeds of general obligation bonds to make payments on lease-purchase agreements.
Again, timing is critical.
Additional wrinkle for school districts—installment payments.