Minnesota Bill Book

Data centers would not pay sales tax on electricity and would be ignored in water and solar rules, shifting costs to other ratepayers.

Citizens could see higher electricity bills because utilities will lose tax revenue and may raise rates for everyone else, while data centers keep profits and avoid extra regulation.

Data centers

• Accountability (hurts) — exemptions reduce oversight. data centers not subject to water and tax rules
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — limits consumer protections. tax and water rule exemptions favor data centers over ratepayers
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — cost shifts to other electricity users. lost tax revenue may be covered by higher rates for the public
• Process Transparency (hurts) — bill introduced with limited public input. early stage, no hearings noted
• Funding Tilt (hurts) — reduces state revenue. sales tax exemption cuts revenue that could fund services

• Official text (MN HF4153)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2026/0/HF/4153/
• LegiScan — HF4153https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF4153/2025

The bill would protect doctors and nurses from criminal charges when they treat patients, even if a mistake hurts someone.

If this passes, patients will have fewer ways to hold doctors and nurses responsible for bad care. Mistakes could go unchecked. Citizens should watch the bill now before it moves forward.

Health care providers

• Accountability (hurts) — removes criminal accountability. Providers cannot be charged criminally for treatment errors.
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — weakens patient rights. Patients lose ability to sue criminally for harmful mistakes.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — cost shift to public. Unchecked errors may raise health costs for taxpayers and patients.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — no new transparency. Bill does not add oversight or reporting requirements.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — no funding changes. Bill does not allocate or change money.

• Official text (MN HF1647)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/1647/
• LegiScan — HF1647https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF1647/2025

The bill would let the state sell tax‑forfeited land next to lakes to private buyers, cutting public access and shifting costs to taxpayers.

People could lose fishing spots and beach access if the bill passes. Developers would get cheap land and profit. Taxpayers would foot the cost of losing public space. Speak up while it’s still just a proposal.

Real estate developers

• Accountability (hurts) — Reduces oversight of land use. Private sale limits public scrutiny of how the land is managed.
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — Erodes public access. Public loses shoreline access that was previously protected.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Taxpayers pay for loss. Community bears the cost of losing public land and recreation.
• Process Transparency (hurts) — Limited public input. Bill moves with little public debate or notice.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No new funding. Bill does not allocate money; effect is cost shift.

• Official text (MN SF2381)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/SF/2381/
• LegiScan — SF2381https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/SF2381/2025

The state could sell tax‑forfeited land next to public water to private owners, limiting public access and control.

Citizens should watch this bill because it could turn publicly‑used shoreline into private property, reducing recreation space and giving developers profit while the state gains no clear benefit.

Real Estate Developers

• Accountability (hurts) — sale decision moves to private market. Reduces oversight of land use near water
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — public loses access. Limits public use of shoreline
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — taxpayers lose public land. Potential loss of recreational space
• Process Transparency (hurts) — bill just introduced. No public input required
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — no funding changes. No new money allocated

• Official text (MN SF2704)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/SF/2704/
• LegiScan — SF2704https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/SF2704/2025

The city could get back sales tax on building supplies for certain projects, lowering costs for those projects.

Citizens may see lower construction costs for city projects, but the state loses tax revenue, meaning taxpayers could end up paying more elsewhere.

Construction

• Accountability (hurts) — Tax exemption reduces oversight of spending. Less transparency on how tax refunds are used
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — No direct impact on personal rights. Bill does not affect individual legal protections
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Tax revenue loss shifts cost to taxpayers. State collects less sales tax, burden shifts to citizens
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Bill is only introduced, no detailed process yet. Limited information on implementation steps
• Funding Tilt (hurts) — State funds are reduced for other services. Refunds divert money from general revenue

• Official text (MN HF456)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/456/
• LegiScan — HF456https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF456/2025

Aitkin County could sell land taken for unpaid taxes to private owners, possibly limiting public access.

Citizens could lose community space and control over local land while private interests gain new property.

Real Estate

• Accountability (neutral) — No new oversight. Bill does not add accountability measures.
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — Reduces public right to access land. Allows private sale without public use guarantee.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Public may lose land value. Costs to community not covered.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Standard committee referral. No special transparency.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding changes. No money allocated.

• Official text (MN SF552)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/SF/552/
• LegiScan — SF552https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/SF552/2025

This bill would create a program for life-sustaining treatment, but it might protect healthcare providers from being sued.

People should think about how this bill could affect their rights if something goes wrong with their treatment. It's important to know who is protected and who is not.

• Accountability (hurts) — Immunity for providers may reduce accountability.. The bill establishes immunity for certain acts by healthcare providers.
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — Limits on lawsuits can affect patients' rights.. Patients may have fewer options to sue if providers are immune.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Some data will be classified, reducing transparency.. The bill allows for data related to the program to be classified.

• Official text (MN HF1810)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/1810/
• LegiScan — HF1810https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF1810/2025

This bill would change how health insurers are taxed, which might change your insurance costs.

If this bill passes, it could affect how much you pay for health insurance. It is important to watch how this bill develops.

• Funding Tilt (neutral) — The impact on funding is unclear.. Unknown

• Official text (MN HF2071)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/2071/
• LegiScan — HF2071https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF2071/2025

This bill would let the state sell certain lands near water, which could change who owns them.

People should pay attention to this bill because it could affect public access to water and land ownership in their area.

• Accountability (neutral) — The bill does not clarify who benefits from the land sales.. Unknown
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — Public access to water might be affected.. Unknown
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — No clear cost shifts are mentioned.. Unknown

• Official text (MN HF2524)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/2524/
• LegiScan — HF2524https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF2524/2025

Minnesota farmers with water‑quality certified acres would pay less property tax, while other taxpayers would cover the shortfall.

The bill could help farmers who protect water, but it also means the state will collect less tax, so everyday people may see higher taxes or fewer services.

Agriculture

• Accountability (neutral) — No new oversight mechanisms added. The bill does not change how officials are held accountable.
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — No impact on personal rights. The proposal does not affect individual legal rights.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Tax credit reduces revenue. Other taxpayers will likely pay for the lost property tax revenue.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Standard legislative process. Bill follows normal committee referrals and reporting.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Funds directed to farmers. Appropriated money supports the tax credit for certified farms.

• Official text (MN HF363)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/363/
• LegiScan — HF363https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF363/2025

This bill would stop landlords from raising rent too much in places built for people with lower incomes, helping them afford their homes.

This bill would help people in low-income housing keep their rent affordable. It would make sure that landlords who get special tax breaks to build these homes do not raise rents too high. This is important because it protects people from being priced out of their homes. Some might say landlords need to raise rents to cover costs, but this bill focuses on projects that already get help from the government.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Landlords receiving tax credits would face limits on rent increases.. The bill aims to hold landlords of low-income housing projects accountable for keeping rents affordable if they receive low-income housing tax credits.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Protects tenants from sudden, large rent increases.. This bill would protect low-income tenants from large rent increases, helping them maintain stable housing.
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Tenants would benefit from stable rents, while landlords might have less flexibility.. The cost of potential higher rents would be shifted away from low-income tenants, ensuring they do not bear the burden of unpredictable increases. Landlords might have less flexibility in setting rents.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — No specific transparency measures mentioned.. The official text does not specify any new transparency measures related to the process of limiting rent increases.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Aims to ensure public tax credits directly benefit low-income tenants through stable rents.. The bill aims to ensure that existing low-income housing tax credits directly benefit low-income tenants by limiting rent increases, tilting funding benefits towards tenants.

Pushing for it: Low-income tenants
Bearing the cost: Landlords of projects receiving tax credits

• Official text (MN HF1605)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/1605/
• LegiScan — HF1605https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF1605/2025

This bill would make it harder for big companies to buy single-family homes, hoping to make more homes available and cheaper for regular families.

This bill wants to help regular people find homes. It would make it harder for big companies to buy single-family houses, which could mean more homes are open for families. The bill would also make these companies pay more taxes when they do buy homes. That extra money would go to programs that help people afford to buy their own homes. Some people might say that big companies should be allowed to buy any property they want. But supporters believe this bill would make housing fairer for everyone. It is important to know about this bill now because it is still being discussed and could change how people in Minnesota buy homes.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Increased accountability for corporate entities in the housing market.. Corporate entities would face new rules and taxes, making them more accountable in the housing market.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Protects the right of individuals to homeownership.. It would protect the chance for regular people to own homes by limiting big companies from buying them all up.
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Costs shifted to corporate owners.. Big companies buying single-family homes would pay higher taxes, shifting costs away from individual homebuyers.
• Process Transparency (helps) — Creates a statewide landlord database.. A new list of landlords would make it clearer who owns rental properties.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Funds dedicated to affordable homeownership programs.. Money from new taxes on corporate home purchases would go to programs helping people buy homes.

Pushing for it: Workforce and affordable homeownership program
Bearing the cost: Corporate owners

• Official text (MN HF2687)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/2687/
• LegiScan — HF2687https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF2687/2025

This bill would make a public list of all landlords in Minnesota, so renters can easily find out who owns their home and if they follow the rules.

This bill would help renters know who their landlord is and if they are following the rules. If a landlord does not register, they could face fines or be sued. This means renters would have an easier time holding bad landlords accountable. Some might say this is too much work for landlords or an invasion of their privacy. But supporters believe it creates a fairer system for everyone. People should pay attention now because it is just starting to move through the state government.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Landlords would be easier to track and hold responsible.. Creates a statewide landlord database and civil penalties for non-registration, increasing transparency and accountability.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Renters get new ways to make sure landlords follow rules.. Provides civil remedies for tenants and Attorney General enforcement, strengthening tenant protections.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Landlords would pay for registering and any fines.. Landlords would incur costs for registration and potential civil penalties for non-compliance.
• Process Transparency (helps) — The public would know more about who owns rental homes.. Establishes a statewide database, making landlord information publicly accessible.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — State resources would help enforce landlord rules.. Attorney General enforcement suggests state resources would be used to ensure compliance, benefiting the public.

Pushing for it: Renters, the state
Bearing the cost: Landlords

• Official text (MN HF2966)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/2966/
• LegiScan — HF2966https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF2966/2025

This bill would give Minnesota renters and homeowners more money back on their taxes by lowering how much they have to pay first.

This bill would help people in Minnesota keep more of their money. If it passes, renters and homeowners could see bigger checks from the state when they file their taxes. This means more money for families to spend on food, bills, or savings. It's still very new, so now is the time to tell your lawmakers if you think this is a good idea for your community.

Everyday People

• Accountability (neutral) — Neutral. The bill does not directly address accountability for actions or decisions.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Enhances financial protections. The bill would increase financial relief for renters and homeowners.
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — State bears increased cost. The state would pay out more in refunds and credits, benefiting individuals.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Standard legislative process. The bill is following the normal steps of being introduced and referred to a committee.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Tilts funding to individuals. The changes would result in more money going to individual taxpayers.

Pushing for it: Minnesota renters and homeowners
Bearing the cost: Minnesota state budget

• Official text (MN HF4119)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2026/0/HF/4119/
• LegiScan — HF4119https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF4119/2025

This bill would stop landlords from raising rents too much for people living in low-income housing that gets special tax help.

This bill is important because it would help keep housing affordable for people who need it most. If it passes, landlords who get special tax breaks to offer low-income housing would not be able to raise rents by too much. This means families could plan their budgets better and not worry as much about sudden, big rent increases. It helps make sure that the special tax help given to these housing projects actually helps the renters, not just the owners.

Everyday People

• Accountability (neutral) — Neutral. The bill does not directly address accountability for wrongdoing, but rather sets limits on rent increases.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Protects renters. This bill would protect low-income renters from large, unexpected rent increases, helping them keep their homes affordable.
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Benefits renters. This bill would prevent landlords from shifting higher costs onto low-income renters by limiting rent increases.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Neutral. The bill does not impact how transparent the legislative or regulatory process is.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Tilts to renters. The bill ensures that housing projects receiving public tax credits provide a clearer benefit to low-income renters by controlling rent costs.

Pushing for it: Low-income renters
Bearing the cost: Landlords of low-income housing projects

• Official text (MN SF1652)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/SF/1652/
• LegiScan — SF1652https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/SF1652/2025

This bill would help injured police and firefighters keep their health insurance and get more of their disability money.

This bill would make sure police officers and firefighters who get hurt on the job can keep their health insurance for longer. It would also stop them from giving up their right to this health insurance. Plus, it would limit how much money lawyers can take from their disability payments. This means more money would go to the injured officers and firefighters themselves. People should care because it helps those who protect us get the support they need if they get hurt. Some might worry about the cost to cities or towns, but the bill aims to make sure injured workers are taken care of.

Big Business

• Accountability (neutral) — Neutral impact. The bill focuses on benefits for workers, not accountability for bad actors.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Protects worker rights. This bill would protect the right of peace officers and firefighters to continued health insurance and ensure more of their disability benefits go to them by limiting attorney fees.
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Benefits injured workers. The bill would ensure employers provide health insurance for longer, which is a cost to employers but a benefit to injured workers. It also limits attorney fees, meaning less cost for the worker.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Neutral impact. The bill does not address process transparency.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Tilts towards injured workers. By limiting attorney fees, the bill would ensure more of the disability benefit money goes directly to the injured peace officer or firefighter.

Pushing for it: Injured peace officers and firefighters
Bearing the cost: Lawyers (due to fee limits), potentially employers (due to extended health insurance provision)

• Official text (MN SF3412)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/SF/3412/
• LegiScan — SF3412https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/SF3412/2025

This bill would give more money back to people who pay property taxes or rent by making them pay less upfront, helping them save money.

This bill would help ordinary people keep more of their money by giving them bigger tax refunds and renters credits. If this bill passes, people who own homes or rent in Minnesota would get more money back from the state. This could make it easier for families to pay their bills. It is important to support bills like this that aim to help people directly.

Everyday People

• Accountability (neutral) — Neutral impact on accountability.. The bill does not directly address government or corporate accountability.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Helps people financially.. The bill would provide financial relief to homeowners and renters, which can indirectly support their financial well-being.
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Costs are borne by the state, benefiting individuals.. The state budget would cover the increased refunds and credits, directly benefiting individual taxpayers and renters.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Early stage, no transparency issues yet.. The bill is in its early stages of introduction, with no indication of rushed or opaque processes.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Tilts funding towards ordinary people.. The bill aims to increase financial benefits for homeowners and renters, shifting funds to support them.

Pushing for it: People who own homes or rent
Bearing the cost: The state budget

• Official text (MN SF4593)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2026/0/SF/4593/
• LegiScan — SF4593https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/SF4593/2025

This bill would give extra money to iron ore miners who lose their jobs, helping them pay for food and housing.

This bill would help workers in the iron ore mining industry if they become jobless. It would give them more money than regular unemployment benefits, which could make a big difference for families during tough times. People who support this bill would say it helps a key industry and its workers when the economy slows down. Those who might not like it could argue about where the extra money comes from or if it is fair to give special benefits to one group of workers.

Workers

• Accountability (neutral) — Neutral impact on accountability.. The bill focuses on providing benefits, not on holding anyone accountable for actions.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Adds a protection for specific workers.. It would provide additional financial support, which is a form of protection, for workers in a specific industry.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — Cost source is not specified.. The bill states benefits would be 'provided' but does not detail who would pay for these additional benefits.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Standard legislative process.. The bill is in the early 'Introduced' stage, following normal legislative steps.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Funds would directly benefit workers.. Any funds associated with this bill would directly go to support individual workers who are unemployed.

Pushing for it: Iron ore mining industry workers (Additional benefits)
Bearing the cost: Unknown

• Official text (MN HF3108)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/3108/
• LegiScan — HF3108https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF3108/2025

The bill would make emergency mental health visits free by removing co‑pays, coinsurance, and deductibles for mobile crisis teams.

People in a mental health emergency could get help right away without worrying about out‑of‑pocket costs, and the state would fund the service, easing the burden on families.

Everyday People

• Accountability (neutral) — no new oversight changes. Bill removes cost barriers but does not alter accountability mechanisms.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — expands access. People can get emergency mental health care without paying out of pocket.
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — shifts cost to state. State funds the service, relieving consumers of payment.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — early stage. Bill is only introduced; limited transparency on process.
• Funding Tilt (helps) — appropriates money. Bill includes appropriations to cover service costs.

Pushing for it: State
Bearing the cost: Unknown

• Official text (MN HF973)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/973/
• LegiScan — HF973https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF973/2025

The bill would give families more tax refunds, lower overtime taxes, a bigger child credit, and a new tax rate for high earners.

Citizens should watch this bill because it could put more money back in pockets of working families, while asking wealthier Minnesotans to pay a bit more.

Everyday People

• Accountability (neutral) — No new oversight or accountability measures.. The bill does not change how tax officials are held accountable.
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — No impact on personal rights.. The provisions deal with tax refunds, not civil rights.
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Cost shift to higher earners.. A new tax tier means wealthier individuals may pay more.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Standard legislative process.. The bill is introduced and referred to the Taxes committee.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No specific funding source indicated.. Refunds would be paid from general state revenue.

• Official text (MN HF3954)https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2026/0/HF/3954/
• LegiScan — HF3954https://legiscan.com/MN/bill/HF3954/2025