INFB Staff Discuss Priority Issues
Published: Friday, December 26, 2025
Indiana Farm Bureau public policy team members Katrina Hall, Brantley Seifers, Katie Nelson and Ryan Hoff briefed Farm Bureau members on the organization's 2026 Statehouse Priority Issues at the Indiana Ag Gathering on Dec. 12 in French Lick, Ind.
Among the top priority issues were tweaks to Senate Bill 1 and the One Big Beautiful Bill, township government reform and reorganization in Indiana, and farmland protections.
Hoff, senior director of public policy, noted that SB1 is the "largest change" in local government that was passed in 2025.
"For the first time, 51% of property tax was shifted on to the residential taxpayers," he said.
SB1 has various phases of implementation, with 10% homestead credit capped at $300 and a reduced agricultural base rate already having come into effect, and more phases being adopted in the new year. Hoff said the law will have different effects on individual Hoosiers based on their tax mix. Taxation will differ between business, personal, homestead or acreage property owned, etc.
"And at the end of it, the county fiscal body is going to have a lot more authority over the budgeting for other tax units going forward," he said.
Hoff referred to SB1 as "tax relief now, tax reform later." It includes a 10% homestead credit of up to $300 and a reduced agricultural base rate for two years. In the new year, a maximum levy growth quotient of 4% will be set on non-farm property taxes. Hoff expects the rolling average of non-farm income to also be capped at about 4%, but this has not yet happened.
Another impact on farmers would be the business personal property tax. Currently, individuals owning $80,000 or less of business personal property are not required to pay taxes on them. Under SB1, this threshold would be raised to $2 million.
Hoff said the true impacts of SB1 will be minimal for the next three years but will hit in the next five to 10 years.
By 2031, Indiana will have phased out of the homestead standard deduction, and a maximum $3 rate will be imposed. Hoff explained that this would create the formula of the maximum $3 rate minus the tax cap equals the total deduction. In an example, he said a $300,000 homestead with a 1% deduction would pay a third of the rate.
"There would be no cap loss," he said.
SB1 also states that fire territories established in 2025 "may not impose a rate over .4%."
This would largely be affected by the reorganization of townships and reform of municipal government. Hoff explained that local income tax councils in Indiana are set to be eliminated in 2028, shifting the responsibilities onto the county fiscal body.
Changes to go along with this shift in government responsibility includes the fire territories rate of .4%; an optimal maximum of .5% on all county residents including cities, towns, schools and units requiring binding review; what Hoff calls a "rural district rate" of 1.2%; and a municipal rate of 1.2%. He added that the total rate for everyone, both state and locally, would not be able to exceed 2.9%.
"If we go into an environment where we have a 3% maximum rate, there is no maximum levy growth every year. The only way to grow your revenue as a local unit of government is to increase the assessed value (AV) to bring in new AV," Hoff said.
Examples of AV he gave include: nuclear facilities, data centers, new residential development, etc.
"I think this is going to have a big change for the future of economic development and the types of development that local units are going to be interested in hosting going into the future," he said.
As senior director of policy strategy and advocacy, Hall highlighted some things to watch concerning the effects SB1 may have on county and local governments.
"There is a battle brewing about the tax base shift," she said.
She said SB1 fixes include : local income tax (LIT) adoption, Tax Increment Financing (TIF), debt and the farmland formula. However, it also creates some major questions, including: will township governments be eliminated or merged with their county, and who controls EMS and fire?
Another big question Hall discussed was how SB1 would affect school districts. Will there be just one school district per county or will it be based on enrollment? She added that many schools want their own local income tax.
With so many questions in play, Hall said this is a chance for Farm Bureau members to make an impact.
"Be collaborative," Hall said. "This is a real opportunity for the Farm Bureau to be a thought leader."
New this legislative session is House Bill 1064, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. This bill proposes regulations on drones flown under 400 feet, excluding use by emergency responders. The bill, penned by INFB Vice President Kendell Culp, provides levels of civil and criminal charges as penalties of nuisance or malicious drones. The bill makes operating a drone less than 100 feet above or landing on private property a misdemeanor of civil trespass. This includes an increased penalty for trespassing over agricultural property.
The bill also proposes that flying drones over certain places, people or animals be listed as a crime resulting in misdemeanor, and that drones flown to collect data, recordings or photos of a person or property should be listed as a Class A misdemeanor. It goes on to propose this misdemeanor be raised to a level 6 felony if the data, recordings or photos include critical infrastructure.
"It really is a protection for agriculture," said Hall. "The only defense is the consent of the landowner."
She added that this includes protections over private residencies, schools, playgrounds, etc.
Finally, the bill requires insurance for drones weighing 55 pounds or more and urges for the development of insurance guidelines to be made by the Department of Homeland Security.
Two wrap up the discussion, Nelson, executive director of public policy, identified one emerging issue in agricultural policy: ultra-processed foods.
"This is kind of a catch-all term," she said. "It could include nutrient-dense foods."
An example she gave to illustrate this was the difference between non-fat yogurt and Cheetos. Yogurt goes through multiple different processes to ensure food safety, add flavor, increase shelf life, etc., but has high nutritional content. Cheetos, on the other hand, are also "ultra-processed" but have a very low nutritional content.
Nelson urges farmers to advocate for a definition for ultra-processed foods that would differentiate the two and focus on nutritional value.
"There is no current policy on this," she said. "AFBF is pushing for a federal definition."
However, she encouraged a state definition due to lack of policies around the issue. Currently, only California has a policy around ultra-processed foods, and Nelson said the state's definition would include foods like yogurt. Also, she said the international definition, known as the NOVA Classification, also focuses on processing rather than nutritional content.
"Without state definitions, the president may look at California or NOVA for guidance," she said.
Other priority discussed issues include: Riverboat license relocation, immigration, soybean market development, veterinarian licensing, annexation, assessment and assessor administration clarification, and the pork tenderloin being declared the official state sandwich.
Return to Top of Page