Rhode Island House Bill H7057

Rhode Island 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/9/26
• Refer: 1/9/26

Caption

Gradually phases in modifications to federal adjusted gross income over a five (5) year period for social security income, from twenty percent (20%) up to one hundred percent (100%), beginning on or after January 1, 2027.

Impact

The projected impact of HB 7057 on state laws is significant, particularly for low- to middle-income retirees who rely heavily on Social Security as their primary source of income. By gradually reducing state taxes on this income, the bill aims to ease the tax burden on elderly residents, potentially influencing more seniors to remain in or move to Rhode Island. Opponents of the bill may raise concerns about the strain on state revenue and how it may affect public services that rely on income tax revenues. However, proponents argue that creating a more attractive environment for retirees could ultimately stimulate the local economy through increased consumer spending.

Summary

House Bill 7057 is a significant piece of legislation concerning personal income tax in Rhode Island. The bill proposes a gradual modification to how Social Security income is treated for state tax purposes, phasing in a full exemption over a five-year period. Starting from January 1, 2027, individuals will be able to exclude 20% of their Social Security income from their Rhode Island taxable income, with the percentage increasing annually until it reaches 100% by January 1, 2031. This change is expected to provide financial relief to seniors and retirees, making it more favorable for them to reside in Rhode Island.

Contention

Notably, the bill may face opposition from those who believe it favors a specific demographic at the expense of others, particularly working-age residents who may bear a higher tax burden as a result. Furthermore, the gradual implementation of the modifications to taxable income means that the financial benefits may not be realized immediately, leading to potential debates regarding its urgency and necessity. The discussion will likely revolve around the balance of tax fairness and the state's fiscal health against the needs of its aging population.