Michigan House Speaker Matt Hall says there will be a floor vote this week on a bill to roll back the state income tax rate. That would reverse a determination by the state Treasury and the Attorney General’s office and upheld by court decisions that a 2023 reduction was for one-year only.

The reduction was based on a formula that includes revenue increases and inflation. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel said the rollback to 4.05% was a signal of Michigan’s strong economy.

“In total, we have put $1.6 billion in tax relief back in people’s pockets without cutting any critical services or programs,” she said at the time in a statement released by her office at the time.

Republicans say the rollback was essentially a reset and the rate should have remained at 4.05% instead of returning to 4.25%. Hall said that would require the Legislature to set its top priorities and then make tough decisions, including budget cuts.

“What programs get the best return on investment?” he asked Friday. “We’re going to fund those, we’re going to fund the income tax rollback and we’re going to fund the roads, and then the rest of the stuff is not going to make the cut. We can do that within our existing budget if we set good priorities.”

But Democrats said the GOP tax cut plan is a shell game without a list in advance of roughly $540 million in spending cuts in this fiscal year and $700 million in future years to keep the budget balanced.

“I would like to know the plan,” Rep. Kelly Breen (D-Novi), who serves on the House Finance Committee, told the Michigan Public Radio Network.  “I’m happy to see that it is the first probably honest and sincere effort to put money back into the hands of Michiganders, but the question is, is the juice worth the squeeze?”

The tax rollback bill was adopted last week by the finance committee without Democratic support.

If adopted by the House, the rollback would also have to be approved by the state Senate, which is controlled by Democrats, and by Governor Whitmer.

–Michigan Public’s Steve Carmody contributed to this report.

The Michigan House voted Tuesday to keep lawmakers from signing non-disclosure agreements.

The practice has come under scrutiny in recent years as some lawmakers and state officials have signed NDAs as part of talks to bring some economic development projects. That includes for a General Motors battery plant that spurred the creation of the often-criticized Strategic Outreach and Attraction Reserve (SOAR) Fund.

State Rep. Steve Carra (R-Three Rivers) co-sponsored the bipartisan bills. He said public servants shouldn’t be signing NDAs, especially for business incentives.

“They’re using tax dollars to fund these projects. And then the idea that we as legislators would be complicit in that process and signing secrecy pacts, saying we cannot disclose the conversations we’ve had is a reckless form of governance.”

The bills would apply to lawmakers and their staff acting in their official capacities.

Despite the criticism, the Michigan Economic Development Corporation, which took the lead in talks over some of the projects that have involved NDAs, defended the practice.

“It is important to note that in our experience, those seeking to make a significant investment are increasingly requiring NDAs, given the financial and proprietary information being shared. Further, no decisions are made until an investment opportunity is voted on by the bipartisan and bicameral appointees of Michigan Strategic Fund board in a public setting,” MEDC spokesperson Otie McKinley said in a written statement.

That feeling was shared by some of the lawmakers who voted against the bills.

Opponents to the bills argue NDAs are a tool that keeps Michigan competitive economically and that they stop lawmakers from insider trading when they know something is coming.

Rep. Phil Skaggs (D-East Grand Rapids) was among the lawmakers who voted against the bills.

“Non-disclosure agreements are critical for competitiveness, our ability to attract new jobs, cutting edge technology. And we should be involved in far more serious ethics issues than what I think here is largely a nothing burger,” Skaggs said.

Sponsors of the bills, including Rep. Dylan Wegela (D-Inkster) rejected the argument, however, that NDAs were necessary to bring business to Michigan.

“I think if corporations want public tax dollars, they should do their business in public. And that should be part of the discussion. Right? We’re talking about hundreds of millions of dollars going to multimillion dollar and multibillion dollar corporations,” Wegela said.

Lawmakers on both sides of the argument, however, have said they want the House to take up Senate-passed bills that would expand the Freedom of Information Act. Republican House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Twp) has said those bills aren’t a priority for him.

Ahead of voting in the House Tuesday, Democratic lawmakers unsuccessfully tried to tie the NDA legislation to the FOIA bills so one couldn’t become law without the other.

The NDA bills still passed with wide bipartisan support, by margins of 80-28 and 91-17.

The legislation now heads to the state Senate.