Massachusetts Bill Book

The bill would add a new fee to homeowners insurance so the state can pay for fire water supplies and a cistern program.

Households will see higher insurance costs, while fire departments get more money for water supplies, so citizens should weigh the extra expense against better safety.

Insurers

• Accountability (neutral) — no new oversight. Bill adds fee but does not create new accountability mechanisms
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — no rights removed. Bill does not change any right to sue or sue protections
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — homeowners pay. Fee is placed on homeowners insurance, shifting cost to consumers
• Process Transparency (hurts) — still early stage. Bill is only introduced, limited public input
• Funding Tilt (hurts) — shifts funding to fees. Uses insurance fees rather than general revenue

Pushing for it: state fire program
Bearing the cost: homeowners

• Official text (MA H4112)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H4112
• LegiScan — H4112https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H4112/2025

The bill would give some public benefit corporations lower tax rates, meaning less money for state services and higher costs for taxpayers.

If passed, these companies could pay less taxes while everyday residents may see fewer public resources, so voters should weigh the trade‑off now.

Public benefit corporations

• Accountability (hurts) — Tax breaks may reduce oversight of corporations.. Lower tax rates could lessen financial scrutiny of benefiting firms.
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — No direct impact on personal rights.. The bill does not change individual legal protections.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Tax revenue loss shifts cost to taxpayers.. State collects less money, so residents may fund services.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Early stage, no hidden procedures noted.. Bill is introduced with public hearings scheduled.
• Funding Tilt (hurts) — Preferential rates reduce state revenue.. Tax cuts for selected firms lower overall tax intake.

• Official text (MA H3052)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H3052
• LegiScan — H3052https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H3052/2025

The bill would require health insurers to help pay patients' unpaid co‑pays, co‑insurance and deductibles, easing the burden on doctors and hospitals.

If passed, hospitals may get more money from insurers for unpaid patient bills, which could keep services open, but insurers might raise premiums for everyone.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — adds insurer responsibility. Insurers would be held accountable for unpaid patient obligations.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — helps patients. Patients gain better protection against unpaid medical bills.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — cost may shift to consumers. Insurers may pass added costs to premiums, affecting all consumers.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — no new transparency measures. The bill does not change reporting or disclosure rules.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — no funding changes. No new money is allocated or taken away.

• Official text (MA S758)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/S758
• LegiScan — S758https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/S758/2025

The bill would change how unpaid health insurance deductibles are handled, affecting who pays the balance.

Citizens could see their out‑of‑pocket costs shift if the bill limits insurer obligations, while insurers may gain protection from unpaid deductibles.

Insurers

• Accountability (neutral) — no clear accountability change. Bill does not specify new oversight.
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — unclear impact on consumer rights. Potentially limits right to sue over unpaid deductibles.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — cost shift unclear. Could shift cost to consumers or insurers.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — bill just introduced. Limited public input so far.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — no funding changes. No new money allocated.

• Official text (MA H1196)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H1196
• LegiScan — H1196https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H1196/2025

The bill would change how much employees of the Commonwealth pay each month for their group health insurance.

If passed, public employees might pay more or less each month for health coverage, and the state could move part of the cost onto workers or the budget.

Workers

• Accountability (neutral) — No clear change to oversight or accountability.. The bill does not add new reporting or oversight requirements.
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — No direct impact on the right to sue or consumer protections.. It only adjusts premium amounts.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Potential shift of cost to employees.. If premiums rise, workers may pay more out of pocket.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Standard legislative process with a scheduled hearing.. No special fast‑track or secrecy.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No new funding or tax changes identified.. The bill does not create new revenue sources.

• Official text (MA H2785)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H2785
• LegiScan — H2785https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H2785/2025

This bill would change how rental property tax credits work, which could affect renters and landlords.

People should pay attention to this bill because it could change rental costs or benefits for both renters and landlords.

• Accountability (neutral) — No clear accountability measures mentioned.. Unknown
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — No direct impact on rights or protections.. Unknown
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — Unclear who will bear the costs.. Unknown
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Process is ongoing with scheduled hearings.. Hearing scheduled
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding changes mentioned.. Unknown

• Official text (MA H3029)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H3029
• LegiScan — H3029https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H3029/2025

The bill would let people or companies claim a tax credit for installing sewage lines, reducing the money the state collects.

Citizens might see lower taxes for sewage projects, but the state could lose revenue that might fund other services, so voters should watch the bill.

Construction

• Accountability (neutral) — No change to oversight or accountability mechanisms.. The bill does not add or remove any accountability provisions.
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — No impact on personal rights.. The bill deals with tax credits, not civil or consumer rights.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — State loses revenue.. The tax credit shifts the cost of sewage line projects onto the state budget.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Standard legislative process.. The bill follows normal reporting and committee steps.
• Funding Tilt (hurts) — Reduces state funds.. Providing a tax credit lowers the amount of tax revenue the state collects.

• Official text (MA H3133)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H3133
• LegiScan — H3133https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H3133/2025

This bill would give tax credits to companies for renewable energy projects, which could help them save money.

If this bill passes, big companies might get more money for renewable energy projects. This could help the environment, but it mainly benefits the companies.

Big Business

• Funding Tilt (helps) — This bill provides financial benefits to companies.. Tax credits can lead to significant savings for businesses.

Pushing for it: big companies
Bearing the cost: Unknown

• Official text (MA S2090)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/S2090
• LegiScan — S2090https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/S2090/2025

Doctors would have to send insurance companies an estimate of what a patient’s treatment will cost.

Patients could see cost estimates sooner, but doctors might spend more time on paperwork, which could raise prices or slow care; the bill gives insurers more data about expected bills.

Insurers

• Accountability (hurts) — less patient visibility. Patients lose direct view of billing estimates
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — no clear change. No new rights added or removed for patients
• Who Bears Cost (neutral) — cost shift unclear. No explicit shift of costs shown in text
• Process Transparency (helps) — more streamlined process. Provides insurers with clearer billing estimates
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — no funding changes. No money allocation mentioned

• Official text (MA H1126)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H1126
• LegiScan — H1126https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H1126/2025

The bill would let the state create programs to increase vaccination and protect the community from disease.

If passed, families could see more vaccine clinics and outreach, helping keep kids safe but the plan may cost taxpayers and could raise privacy concerns about health data.

Everyday People

• Accountability (neutral) — No clear mechanisms for oversight are described.. The text does not specify reporting or enforcement.
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — No explicit changes to individual rights are mentioned.. The bill focuses on public health programs.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — Funding sources are not identified.. It is unclear whether taxpayers or other groups will pay.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Only a hearing date is listed; details are missing.. The bill’s specifics have not been disclosed.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding provisions are outlined.. The bill does not mention new money or reallocations.

• Official text (MA S1618)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/S1618
• LegiScan — S1618https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/S1618/2025

This bill would help people living in government-assisted housing buy their homes, giving them more control over where they live.

This bill would let people who live in government-assisted housing buy their homes. This could give them a chance to build wealth and have more say in their living situation. It also wants to make sure that housing programs are fair for everyone by setting diversity goals. People should pay attention because this bill could change how many people get to own a home instead of just renting.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Empowers tenants with ownership, increasing their stake and control.. The bill would provide tenant ownership in government-assisted housing.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Grants tenants the right to own their homes, a major protection.. Legislation to provide tenant ownership in government-assisted housing.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — The bill does not specify a negative cost shift onto ordinary people.. The bill's summary mentions tax credits for diversity goals, but not direct costs for tenant ownership.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Follows standard legislative process.. Referred to the Joint Committee on Housing; Hearing scheduled.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Tax credits tied to diversity goals support public interest.. Establish diversity goals and plans prior to receiving certain tax credits.

Pushing for it: Tenants in government-assisted housing
Bearing the cost: Public funds (via tax credits for diversity goals)

• Official text (MA H1510)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H1510
• LegiScan — H1510https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H1510/2025

This bill would stop bosses from using a worker's immigration status to hide breaking rules about pay, benefits, or taxes, so workers can get what they are owed.

This bill is important because it would help make sure all workers are treated fairly. If bosses cannot use a worker's immigration status against them, workers will feel safer speaking up when they are not paid correctly or do not get their benefits. This means bosses would have to follow the rules for everyone, which helps protect all workers and makes the workplace more honest. People should pay attention now while lawmakers are still deciding on this bill.

Workers

• Accountability (helps) — Increases employer accountability. Employers would be held more accountable for following wage, benefit, and tax laws, as they could not use immigration status to conceal violations.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Protects worker rights. Workers' rights to fair pay and benefits would be better protected, as they would not face threats related to immigration status when reporting violations.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — Neutral, ensures costs are borne by violators. Employers who violate laws would bear the cost of their actions, rather than shifting the burden of lost wages or benefits onto workers.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — No direct impact on transparency. The bill does not directly address legislative process transparency, but it promotes transparency in employer practices.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding mentioned. The bill does not include any specific funding provisions or appropriations.

Pushing for it: Workers owed wages, benefits, or taxes
Bearing the cost: Employers who violate wage, benefit, or tax laws

• Official text (MA H2176)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H2176
• LegiScan — H2176https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H2176/2025

This bill would give landlords more tax money to remove lead paint, making rental homes safer for families and kids.

This bill wants to help landlords pay for removing dangerous lead paint from rental homes. Lead paint can make kids very sick, so making homes safer is important. If this bill passes, landlords might be more likely to fix up old homes, which would be good for families looking for safe places to live. But it also means the state would collect less tax money. Now is the time to tell lawmakers if you think this is a good way to make homes safer.

Landlords

• Accountability (neutral) — Neutral. The bill focuses on incentives, not direct accountability changes.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Helps protect health. By encouraging lead remediation, it would make rental housing safer for tenants, especially children, protecting their health.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — State tax revenue loss. The state would lose tax revenue due to the increased credit, while landlords would gain financial help for repairs.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Normal process. The bill is moving through the regular legislative process with scheduled hearings and extensions.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Incentivizes safety. The tax credit would help landlords pay for lead removal, tilting funding towards making rental properties safer.

Pushing for it: Landlords and renters
Bearing the cost: The state's tax revenue

• Official text (MA H3103)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H3103
• LegiScan — H3103https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H3103/2025

The bill would raise the renter relief tax credit, giving renters more money back on their state taxes.

Renters could see a bigger tax break, easing housing costs, while the state would need to find money, possibly raising other taxes or cutting services.

Everyday People

• Accountability (neutral) — No change to oversight mechanisms. The bill does not alter how the credit is administered or monitored.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Expands renter benefit. Increasing the credit gives renters more financial relief.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Cost shifts to taxpayers. State revenue must cover the larger credit, potentially affecting other budgets.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Standard legislative process. The bill follows normal procedures with hearings and committee reports.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Funds directed to renters. The credit directs state money to renters rather than other uses.

Pushing for it: Renters
Bearing the cost: State taxpayers

• Official text (MA S1970)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/S1970
• LegiScan — S1970https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/S1970/2025

This bill would make police share more facts about when they take people's money or property, so we can all see if it is fair.

This bill would make police share more facts about when they take people's money or property without charging them with a crime. Right now, it can be hard to know how often this happens or why. This bill would shine a light on these actions, helping people understand if the process is fair. Some might say it creates extra work for police, but supporters believe it helps keep everyone honest and protects people's stuff. It is important to pay attention to this bill now, while it is still being discussed, to make sure people's rights are protected.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Increases police accountability.. It would require police to report data on civil asset forfeiture, making their actions more visible.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Helps protect people's property rights.. By increasing transparency, people would have more information to challenge unfair property seizures.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — Potential administrative costs for police.. Police departments might have new administrative costs for data collection and reporting.
• Process Transparency (helps) — Directly improves transparency.. The bill's main goal is to increase transparency and data reporting for civil asset forfeiture.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding changes mentioned.. The bill does not mention specific funding changes or allocations.

Pushing for it: Citizens who have property taken
Bearing the cost: Police departments (due to reporting burden)

• Official text (MA H1990)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H1990
• LegiScan — H1990https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H1990/2025

This bill would make police tell everyone how much property they take from people, helping us see if it's fair.

This bill is about making sure police openly share details about property they take from people, even if those people are not found guilty of a crime. Right now, it can be hard to know how often this happens or why. If this bill passes, we would get clear reports on what property is taken, its value, and why. This helps regular people and lawmakers understand if the rules for taking property are fair and if changes are needed. Some might say collecting this data is extra work for police, but others believe it's important for trust and making sure police are accountable.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — improves oversight. Requires police to report data on civil asset forfeiture, increasing transparency about property seizures.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — helps future protections. By making data public, it could help identify practices that erode people's property rights, leading to future reforms.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — administrative burden. Law enforcement agencies would bear the administrative cost of collecting and reporting the required data.
• Process Transparency (helps) — high transparency gain. The core purpose of the bill is to make civil asset forfeiture practices more transparent to the public and lawmakers.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — no funding changes. The bill does not involve specific funding allocations or shifts.

Pushing for it: The public, people whose property is taken
Bearing the cost: Law enforcement agencies

• Official text (MA H3297)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H3297
• LegiScan — H3297https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H3297/2025

This bill would make landlords pay real estate broker fees instead of renters, which could save renters money when they move into a new home.

This bill would change who pays the fee when you use a real estate agent to find a place to live. Right now, renters often pay this fee, which can be a lot of money when you are also trying to pay a security deposit and first month's rent. This bill would make landlords pay that fee instead. Supporters say this would help renters save money and make it fairer, since landlords are the ones who own the property and benefit from renting it out. Some landlords might say this would add to their costs, which could lead to higher rents overall. This bill is still new, but a meeting is coming up, so people who rent or own property in Massachusetts might want to pay attention.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Landlords would be responsible for a cost related to their property.. The bill would require lessors (landlords) to pay real estate broker fees, making them directly accountable for this cost.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Protects renters from an upfront cost.. Renters would be protected from having to pay a significant upfront broker fee when securing housing.
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Shifts cost from renters to landlords.. The cost of real estate broker fees would shift from being paid by renters to being paid by landlords.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — No specific info on transparency.. The bill's text does not contain provisions directly related to legislative or governmental process transparency.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Favors renters.. The bill aims to benefit renters by removing a financial burden from them.

Pushing for it: Renters
Bearing the cost: Landlords

• Official text (MA H335)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H335
• LegiScan — H335https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H335/2025

The bill would stop landlords from charging extra fees to new or current renters, so people would pay only the rent they agree to.

If the bill passes, renters will not have to pay surprise fees, which could make housing cheaper. Landlords could lose extra income, so they may fight it. The bill gives everyday people a chance to keep more of their money.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Stops hidden fees, making landlords answerable.. Prohibits extra fees, increasing landlord accountability.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Strengthens renters' rights.. Protects renters from surprise charges.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — Cost shift moves fee burden from renters to landlords.. Landlords lose a revenue source, renters keep money.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — No new reporting or funding requirements.. Bill does not add transparency measures.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding changes mentioned.. No budget impact identified.

• Official text (MA H336)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H336
• LegiScan — H336https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H336/2025

This bill would let pregnant people sign up for health insurance anytime, helping them get care when they need it.

This is a good chance for pregnant people to get health coverage when they need it most. It's important to support this bill so everyone can get the care they deserve.

Everyday People

• Rights & Protections (helps) — Improves access to health care. Allows pregnant individuals to enroll outside of regular enrollment periods.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Standard legislative process. The bill is moving through the normal legislative steps.

• Official text (MA H1204)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H1204
• LegiScan — H1204https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H1204/2025

The bill would let people who use public waterway rides claim a tax credit, lowering their state tax bill.

Citizens could save money on taxes by taking water buses, encouraging greener travel and easing traffic, while the state gives up revenue.

Everyday People

• Accountability (neutral) — no change. does not affect oversight of agencies
• Rights & Protections (helps) — adds benefit. gives taxpayers a new credit
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — shifts cost. state loses revenue, taxpayers fund it
• Process Transparency (neutral) — standard. bill follows normal legislative process
• Funding Tilt (hurts) — cost shift. credits reduce tax revenue

• Official text (MA H3013)https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H3013
• LegiScan — H3013https://legiscan.com/MA/bill/H3013/2025