Add Indiana blind or disabled property tax credit (SEA 1, 2025)

[DTrim99]

Summary

Adds Indiana's blind or disabled property tax credit, created by Senate Enrolled Act 1 (2025) (P.L.68-2025), SEC. 84, adding IC 6-1.1-51.3-2.

The credit is $125 for a blind or disabled owner of a principal residence, with no income limit, for property taxes first due and payable in 2026 and after. It is modeled as blind_or_disabled × min($125, real_estate_taxes), so a credit never exceeds the liability and renters (with no real estate taxes) receive $0.

Changes

• New variable in_blind_disabled_property_tax_credit (TaxUnit, defined_for = StateCode.IN): $125 if any head or spouse is blind or disabled, capped at the property tax liability.
• New parameter gov.states.in.tax.property.blind_disabled_credit.amount ($125, from 2026).
• Wired into the 2026 block of state_property_tax_credits.yaml, alongside in_over_65_property_tax_credit and in_supplemental_homestead_credit.

Context

This is the third and final SEA 1 flat property-tax credit:

• Over-65 $150 credit (IC 6-1.1-51.3-1) — already modeled (Add Indiana over-65 property tax credit #8308).
• Supplemental homestead credit 10%/$300 (IC 6-1.1-20.6-7.7) — added in Add Indiana supplemental homestead credit (SEA 1, 2025) #8997.
• Blind/disabled $125 credit (IC 6-1.1-51.3-2) — this PR.

The SEA 1 veteran credits were repealed by HEA 1427-2025 (veterans keep their pre-existing deductions), so they are intentionally not modeled.

Tests

in_blind_disabled_property_tax_credit.yaml covers: blind homeowner (→ $125), disabled homeowner (→ $125), the liability cap ($80 tax → $80), neither blind nor disabled (→ $0), blind renter with no property tax (→ $0), and non-IN resident (→ $0).

References

• Senate Enrolled Act 1 (2025), enrolled text — SEC. 84, IC 6-1.1-51.3-2
• Indiana DLGF memo — Legislation Affecting Deductions, Exemptions, and Credits

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (ff39625) to head (23f366d).
⚠️ Report is 16 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main     #9007   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files            1         1           
  Lines           18        18           
=========================================
  Hits            18        18           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[DTrim99]

Independent review + fixes applied

Independent review confirmed the credit is regulatorily correct — the $125 blind/disabled credit (IC 6-1.1-51.3-2) is verified on page 143 of the enrolled SEA 1 ("the amount of the credit is equal to one hundred twenty-five [dollars]"), no income limit, 2026+, and the repealed veteran credits are correctly not modeled. No critical issues. Applied the findings:

🟡 Should Address — fixed (test coverage)

• & head_or_spouse now exercised: added a case with a blind dependent child (head/spouse not blind), real_estate_taxes > 0 → $0. Deleting the head/spouse clause would now fail.
• Multi-member .any() now exercised: added a married couple where only the spouse is blind → $125, confirming the spouse path and cross-person aggregation.

🟢 Suggestions — applied

• Trimmed the 5-line formula comment to two lines (matching the sibling in_over_65 style).
• Anchored the enrolled-bill reference to #page=143 (SEC. 84 / IC 6-1.1-51.3-2).

⚠️ Scope note

Like the other property-tax credits, this flows only into taxsim_state_property_tax_credit (TAXSIM parity), not household_net_income — pre-existing/systemic.

[PavelMakarchuk]

Review (multi-validator: regulatory accuracy, references, code patterns, test coverage)

Verdict: Approve — every substantive claim verified against IC 6-1.1-51.3-2 and the DLGF memo; two follow-ups requested below (one factual fix, one interpretation to confirm).

✅ Verified against the statute and DLGF memo

• $125 amount: IC 6-1.1-51.3-2(b), confirmed in the enrolled act (the #page=143 anchor correctly lands on the provision) and the DLGF memo (pp. 4–5).
• No income limit: explicitly confirmed — the DLGF memo states the blind/disabled credit's requirements "do not include an income limitation" (unlike the over-65 credit's $60k/$70k caps). The PR's central claim is right.
• 2026 timing: assessment date Jan 1, 2025 → first due and payable 2026 ("2025 Pay 2026"); 2026-01-01 matches the over-65 convention.
• Liability cap and stacking: Sec. 0.5 makes it a nonrefundable credit against the bill, so min_(amount, real_estate_taxes) is right; the memo lists the over-65 and blind/disabled credits as distinct code values (47/48), so summing both in the aggregate is correct.
• Code patterns clean (head/spouse gate via tax_unit.any, dependent-exclusion and spouse-only-blind tests present, alphabetical list placement, changelog correct).

🟡 Please address

1. Wrong DLGF memo page anchor (same copied-anchor issue as #8997): #page=2 points at the Over-65 credit section; the blind/disabled credit is on pp. 4–5 — change to #page=4 in both amount.yaml and the variable's reference tuple (and add #page=143 to the variable's bare enrolled-act URL).
2. Per-owner vs per-return — confirm and pin with a test: the statute entitles "an individual," and unlike the over-65 credit's Sec. 1(d) ("only one (1) credit may be allowed" per property, with proration), Sec. 2 has no one-credit-per-property restriction — the memo's side-by-side restrictions column confirms the asymmetry. Two blind/disabled co-owning spouses may therefore each claim $125 ($250 total), while the model's tax_unit.any(...) collapses to a single $125. Worth confirming DLGF administrative practice; either way, add a both-spouses-blind test to document the chosen interpretation (currently that semantics is unpinned — a refactor to .sum() would silently change it).

🟢 Suggestions

• Aggregate-level tests, mirroring vt_renter_credit_in_aggregate.yaml: (a) 2026 case asserting taxsim_state_property_tax_credit picks the credit up (ideally a 70-year-old disabled homeowner showing the $150 + $125 stack); (b) 2025 case asserting the aggregate excludes it — the parameter extrapolates backward, so only the year-keyed list gates earlier years.
• Known limitation notes: is_disabled is broader than the SSA substantial-gainful-activity standard the statute references (is_ssi_disabled is closer); base is total real_estate_taxes rather than principal-residence-only; and stacked credits can exceed a small total liability since each caps independently (pre-existing framework behavior, but this credit makes it reachable).
• Coordination: #8996, #9006, #8997, and this PR all edit the same 2026 block of state_property_tax_credits.yaml — merge-order conflicts will be trivial but watch that no entry is dropped in resolution.