BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
SB 651 (Leno)
Hearing Date: 05/26/2011 Amended: 04/25/2011
Consultant: Jolie Onodera Policy Vote: Judiciary 3-2
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: SB 651 would eliminate the requirement that
domestic partners have a common residence in order to establish
a registered domestic partnership (RDP).
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund
Secretary of State registration Minor, absorbable one-time
costs General
Income tax revenue lossUnknown; potentially significant General
revenue loss in excess of $110 - $825
per one percent increase in RDPs
Health benefits for increased Unknown; potentially
significant costs General
enrollees of $550 per 100 new RDPs
Unemployment insurance Minor, absorbable costs annually Special*
*Unemployment Fund
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: SUSPENSE FILE.
Under existing law, in order to register as a domestic
partnership with the Secretary of State, two people must 1) have
a common residence; 2) not be married to someone else or be a
member of another domestic partnership; 3) not be related by
blood in a way that would prevent them from being married to
each other in this state; 4) be at least 18 years of age; 5) be
members of the same sex, or if members of the opposite sex, one
or both persons must be over the age of 62; and, 6) both persons
must be capable of consenting to the domestic partnership. This
bill would eliminate an existing difference between domestic
partners and married spouses by eliminating the requirement that
domestic partners have a common residence.
By removing this existing requirement, this bill would expand
the number of persons who may establish and register a domestic
partnership, and extends the legal rights and economic benefits
SB 651 (Leno)
Page 3
of domestic partners. The Secretary of State indicates there are
110,498 individuals registered as domestic partners, based on
55,249 RDP filings. It is unknown how many additional RDPs will
result due to the provisions of this bill as data is not
collected by the Secretary of State for those individuals who
have previously been denied due to the common residency
requirement or have not applied due to the existing registration
requirements. However, even a one percent increase in RPDs would
represent approximately 1,100 individuals or 550 RDP filings.
The Secretary of
State indicates minor and absorbable costs to revise the RDP
filing form and update the agency website. The Secretary of
State has not identified any cost savings as a result of this
proposed change in eligibility criteria.
Several domestic partnership laws enacted in prior years granted
domestic partners additional rights and benefits in order to
achieve parity between marriage and domestic partnerships in
California. AB 26 (Migden) 1999 created the official domestic
partnership registry and among other things, granted health
benefits to domestic partners of state employees. By increasing
the number of potential registered domestic partnerships could
result in increased health benefit costs to the state of an
unknown amount. The Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)
has indicated for any employee who adds a spouse or domestic
partner to his or her health plan would cost $5,500 more
annually in health benefits and an unknown amount for retiree
and survivor's health benefits as afforded by the state. It is
unknown how many of the new RDP filings would have a member
employed by the state, but every 100 applicable new RDP filings
would result in $550,000 annually in increased health benefits.
SB 1827 (Migden) 2006 created the State Income Tax Equity Act
which allowed registered domestic partners to file joint income
taxes in order to receive the same financial protection afforded
to married couples. According to the Franchise Tax Board, the
average income tax benefit for married filing jointly versus
those filing as single or head of household could range from
$200 to $1,500 per year depending on the income levels of each
individual. For every one percent increase in registered
domestic partnerships who so choose to file could result in
income tax revenue loss of up to $110,000 to $825,000 annually.
Additional taxpayer benefits extended to RDP and RDP's
SB 651 (Leno)
Page 4
dependents including the exclusion from gross income for
specified medical expenses and health insurance benefits could
result in additional lost tax revenue of an unknown, but
potentially significant amount.
The Employment Development Department indicates that although
there would likely be some increase in unemployment insurance
(UI) claims due to more individuals meeting the requirements for
a valid domestic partnership, any increase would likely be very
minor. Less than one percent of all UI benefit eligibility
issues adjudicated involve an individual who quit due to
domestic reasons, which includes quitting work to move with a
spouse, imminent spouse, registered domestic partner, or
imminent registered domestic partner, as well as other
circumstances such as lack of child care or caring for an ill
family member. It is not anticipated that this bill would result
in a significant increase in UI claims.