Alaska Legislature: House Finance — May 4, 2026 9:00am

Okay, I'll call this meeting of the House Finance Committee, uh, to order and let the rec— Let the record reflect that the time is currently 9:09 AM on Monday, May 4th, 2026. And present today we have Representative Allard, Representative Stapp, Representative Bynum, Representative, uh, let's see, Kocher-Schraggy, Representative Kocher-Josephson, Representative Galvin, Representative Hannan, uh, let's see here. And I think I've got— let's see— myself, Co-Chair Foster. And just a reminder, folks can mute their cell phones. And we have two items on the agenda today.

We're going to take up public testimony and then review fiscal notes or notes for Senate Bill 130. That's the Fisheries Production Development Tax Credit bill. And then we'll hear a detailed recap on House Bill 104. That is the Address Confidentiality Quality Program. And the bill was heard last session.

However, since that was last session, we'll get a more detailed summary of that today. So if we could have Senator Stevens as well as his staff, Mr. Tim Lampkin, if you could please come to the table and put yourselves on the record and maybe just give us a recap of the bill just to kind of get our minds move into the right direction, and then we'll go to public testimony. Thank you for joining us. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, and Senator Gary Stevens Kodiak.

Appreciate the opportunity to come before you on this bill again. It's a bill that came out of the Seafood Task Force work for many months trying to find ways to help the industry, help fishermen, help processors, and move the industry forward. And this is probably the key bill to come out of that task force because it really does add new and innovative ways to process seafood, to get the last squeak out of it, to make sure that we're getting the most money we can out of the product we're producing. And it's great for not only the processors but also the fishermen. So thank you, Mr. Chairman, for hearing this.

I think it's a good bill and look forward to talking to you about it. Great. Thank you very much. So with that, we've got public testimony. I'm going to go ahead and open up public testimony for SB 130.

And if anyone would like to submit written testimony, testimony, they can do so by writing, emailing us at [email protected]. And it looks like we actually have quite a few people here for public testimony. We'll go to the first one and I'll count them up here. And just so folks know how long the wait might be. But first up, we've got Bella Johnson calling in from Plymouth, Oregon.

Bella, if you could please state your name and your affiliation.

Good morning, everyone. Thank you so much for the opportunity. This is Bella Johnson, and I am the Government Affairs Manager of Pacific Seafood. I just appreciate the Chair and the members of committee for hearing our testimony today. Pacific Seafood operates seafood processing facilities in Kodiak, Seward, and Wrangell.

Founded in 1941, the company now has more than 3,500 team members across 8 states, including approximately 700 team members in Alaska during our winter operations. We are very proud to be here today to support SB 130, which would extend and expand the Fisheries Product Investment Tax Credit. This credit is a critical tool for sustaining and modernizing Alaska's seafood processing infrastructure. The proposed extension and the expansion to include additional species along with quality and cold supply chain equipment are thoughtful and targeted updates. These changes would directly support improved seafood quality and utilization, strengthen Alaska's competitiveness in global markets, and help ensure more value is retained here in the state.

Alaska's seafood processors operate in some of the most remote and logistically challenging regions in the country. Continued investment in modern processing equipment, cold storage, and quality-enhancing technology is critical for food safety, reducing waste, and efficiently utilizing our fish and meeting market expectations. The investment tax credit helps offset the high cost of operating and reinvesting in these environments and supports processors' ability to reliably purchase and process fish for Alaska's fishing communities. At a time of rising operating costs, market volatility, global competition, and aging infrastructure, extending and expanding this credit remains especially important. It has a proven effective— driven reinvestment, improving efficiencies and product quality, and reinforcing Alaska's position as a global leader in sustainable wild-caught seafood.

Pacific Seafood remains committed to investing in Alaska and supporting the fishing communities and a strong processing sector. Thank you for your time and consideration, and we respectfully urge you to support SB 130. Great, thank you very much, uh, Ms. Johnson. We do have Representative Stapp who has a question. Yeah, thank you, Co-Chair Foster, through the chair to Ms. Johnson.

Um, thank you for your testimony. Uh, just curious if you know what type of investments, uh, so some of the members of the processing association will be making in the state's industry in the event that we modernize this bill? Through the chair, Ms. Johnson.

Absolutely. Thank you so much for that question, and we are happy to get back with some more specifics, but most of this would be value-added and reassessing in our Kodiak plant ways that we can amplify our current system, and I can get more specific details of what some of those what most of it would be value-added equipment to help with our awesome product that we have coming out of that facility. Thank you. Okay, and thank you very much, Ms. Johnson. And we've also got with us Representative Jimmy.

And so we do have 9 other folks online to testify, and the next 3 are Mr. Robert Benevols— Venable's, Julie Decker, and We have one at Ayers. So Robert Benevolz, if you could put yourself on the record. Looks like you're calling in from Juneau.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the House Finance Committee. My name is Robert Benevolz. I am the executive director for Southeast Conference, the state's regional economic development organization for Southeast Alaska, working statewide on a number of issues. But we—. We do have a letter of support very deep in the archives of this, so I won't waste your time in reading that to you, but I really just want to first of all thank the task force and the members of both bodies that have worked on this bill for over 2 years to bring a product forward that we would urge support for.

The investments in seafood processing is really key to our local and regional state economies. And it's one of those things that we give our fullest and strongest support to, especially since there is now the expansion of that to the mariculture and other shellfish products, kelp, etc., a space that Southeast Conference has been working in over the last 3, 4 years to bring investment into the state, including to the state of Alaska. We've invested in fish to the— Department of Fish and Game and equipment for DEC as well. So this is critical to our economic well-being, and we just urge your support for Senate Bill 130 and urge you to pass that today if possible. Thank you.

Great, thank you very much, Mr. Venables. And so next up we've got Ms. Julie Decker calling in from Wrangell. If you could put yourself on the record.

Hello, Mr. Chair. For the record, my name is Julie Decker. I did testify before you last week, um, in person to this bill, and so I just called in in case there's any questions, and I'll stand by for any questions. Okay, thank you very much.

Yes, we recall your being here last week, and, uh, so just saw you on the list and wanted to double-check here, and so thanks for being available. Next up we have Ms. Wanetta Ayers calling in from Anchorage, if you could put yourself on the record.

Good morning, Mr. Chair, uh, and members of the House Finance Committee. For the record, my name is Wanetta Ayers. I'm the executive director for the Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference, or SWAMC. Uh, we thank you for this opportunity to testify in support of extending the Fishery Product Development Tax.

SWAMC represents communities across Southwest Alaska, including the Aleutians, Bristol Bay, Alaska Peninsula, and Kodiak. The Southwest Region produces some of the most valuable fisheries in the world, and the economy in the Southwest Region is heavily dependent on commercial fishing and seafood processing for jobs, revenue, and basic infrastructure. Through prior correspondence, we've provided a great deal of information about the value and importance of the seafood industry and seafood processing in the Southwest Region. But of course it provides jobs, underpins essential infrastructure such as ports and our transportation systems and municipal services. At the same time, the industry is facing significant challenges.

While, uh, the Southwest Region accounts for roughly 74% of the state's ex-pescado fisheries value, revenues have declined in recent years due to market shifts, inflation, ill-advised trade policy and fishery disruptions. The region has also experienced a population decline and a reduction in resident employment, and these are clear indicators of economic pressure in our fisheries-dependent communities. The Fishery Product Development Tax is targeted— is a targeted tool that will help address some of these challenges. It supports investment in modern equipment and new technologies and higher-value product development which will help Alaska seafood compete in global markets. It will help achieve some of the goals that we've had with regard to full utilization of our fisheries resources and increase value-added production in, in our region.

These investments will keep that value in-state, and when processing and product development incur— occur in Alaska, it strengthens our local economies helps support fish harvesters and workers and sustains municipal revenues that fund essential services in our region. This policy is also aligned with our regional economic development strategy in terms of achieving some of those goals with innovation and full utilization. So just in closing, extending this tax credit is a practical step. We hope to see other tools added to our toolbox, such as designation as an Opportunity Zone 2.0, and other federal actions that will help us stabilize and revitalize the commercial fishing industry and seafood processing in our coastal communities and help maintain Alaska's global competitiveness in seafood. So we respectfully urge your support for the Fisheries Product Development Tax Credit.

Thank you for your consideration this morning. Thank you very much, Ms. Ayers. And, uh, Representative Stapp. Yeah, I think— Co-chair Foster, through the chair, Ms. Ayers, I appreciate your testimony. I'm just curious if you folks have ever utilized the carry-forward provision that was currently offered in statute, and if so, how many years have you carried forward some of these credits?

Through the chair, Ms.

Ayers. Through the chair, thank you, Representative Staff. I believe that's really a question that's more appropriately directed to the processors themselves. That's not a— that's the—. I think you're referring to an accounting function that would be available to the seafood processors.

So I'm not directly aware of their tax processes. Okay, thanks. Okay, thank you for your testimony. Ms. Abby Frederick calling from Juneau with Silver Bay Seafoods. I believe you also were invited testimony just just double-checking, are you here for questions?

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. For the record, this is Abby Frederick with Silver Bay Seafoods. I also testified last week and I'm available for questions. Great, thank you for joining us.

Uh, Jeremy Woodrow calling in from Juneau with ASMI. Were you also available for questions?

Yes, good morning, Mr. Chair. Yes, Jeremy Woodrow with Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute. I am also just calling available for questions. Great, thank you.

And let's see here, Shannon Carroll, I believe also you may have called or were invited testimony, just double-checking. Trident Seafoods, were you available for questions also? I was actually hoping to testify, Mr. Chair. This is Shannon Carroll.

I did not— I was not invited to testify last week. Oh, great. No, appreciate your being here. Thanks. Yes, if you could go ahead and put yourself on the record, just your name and your affiliation, please proceed with your testimony.

Of course. Thanks, Mr. Chair. My name is Shannon Carroll. I'm calling in from Anchorage, and I work for Trident Seafood.

Trident's been operating in Alaska since 1973, and we maintain a strong commitment to the 9 Alaska communities in which we operate. Dorside processing plants that stretch from Wrangell to St. Paul. We serve over 650 independent fishermen that choose to fish for Trident each year, and they deliver salmon, crab, cod, halibut, pollack, and a variety of other species to us. These fishermen and the communities in which we operate rely on Trident to provide a competitive market and strong partnership. We support SB 130 because it will provide— it will better incentivize investments in new equipment that will benefit our customers, our fishermen, and our communities.

SB 130 is a proven tool that incentivizes the kinds of investments that are needed at a time when capital costs and the needs of the industry are high. Beyond investments that add value and improve quality, Trident has previously used the credit to improve utilization and convert, uh, convert to use what historically had been waste into promising pet and health markets. To give you an example, in 2019 we spent around $1 million installing a mincing and vertical plate freezer line in our Cordova salmon plant. This line takes the frames from salmon that have been filleted and recovers that small amount of meat that's remaining inside, you know, what are essentially the rib bones of a salmon. And then it lays that mince down on large sheet trays, which are then frozen.

That product's been sold into high-end pet food— to high-end pet food producers. And since 2019, we've run nearly 33 million pounds through that line. This investment directly creates more value for every single fish that comes through our plant. And it also means that we have more pounds moving through our plant to cover the high fixed costs that come with operating in rural Alaska, including labor, fuel, packaging, etc. All of this increases the price paid to fishermen, the price that we pay to the Alaska Fisheries Business Tax, and to our communities.

Other examples include— that we've used this tax credit for in our salmon plants include egg drying equipment, filet line upgrades and meat and oil equipment. And I'll just close by noting that the, you know, in my opinion, the future of Alaska seafood really depends on our ability to manage the rapidly increasing fuel and labor costs, the direct competition from unregulated fisheries in Russia, and then the natural resource instability that we see. But it's also on our ability to invest in equipment and processes that really improve quality and efficiency. Through automation, full utilization, and new value-added product forms. And that's what this bill really, really incentivizes.

So thanks. I'd be happy to take any questions. Great, thank you very much. We do have 2 questions. First, I want to note that we have with us also Representative Moore, and our 2 questions are from Representative Galvin and Hannon.

Representative Galvin. Thank you, Co-Chair Foster. Through the chair, Mr. Carroll, thank you for calling in, uh, Thank you, from Anchorage there. I really appreciated hearing your concrete examples of value-added investments that have been made that have truly made a difference in terms of making sure that we are getting all the revenue possible for this industry. You gave an example from 2019.

I think you said £233 million of of dog food, but I just want to make sure I heard that correctly. Mr. Carroll? No, no, it's 33 million pounds through this year. 33 Million pounds of pet food through our Cordova plant since 2019. Since, since 2019, 33 million pounds, is that correct?

Correct. Okay, thank you very much. Appreciate it. Representative Hannon. Thank you, Co-Chair Foster.

Mr. Carroll, one of the groups of fishermen that you mentioned that you fish with are pollock fishermen who are delivering shoreside. Could you describe what those fishing boats and fishermen are like for you? Because sometimes pollock fishery denotes something that it's not, or there's— or you might describe that there are sort of two kinds of pollock fishermen. So could you describe for us the kinds of pollock fishery and boats that are delivering to you shoreside. Mr. Carroll?

Sure, um, through the chair, so we have two plants in Alaska that, that process pollock. We have a plant in Sandpoint and we have a plant in Akutan, Alaska. Um, both of those plants are multi-species plants. They process halibut, cod, black cod, crab, among a variety of other species they buy from both trawl and non-trawl fisheries, but pollock is really the— and I guess they also process both— process salmon as well, but pollock is sort of the anchor tenant, if you will, in those processing facilities that allows us to pay the really high costs that come with operating in the Aleutian Islands. The fisheries that— the fishermen that deliver to us are predominantly independent fishermen, so for our Sandpoint fleet, Most of those pollock fishermen are from Sandpoint and King Cove.

Some are from Kodiak. They're primarily smaller vessels that are under 100 feet, and they typically fish year-round, fish for salmon, for crab, for cod, in a variety of different kinds of fisheries. On the Bering Sea side, we have 6 trident catcher vessels that we own that deliver to us, and then we have 20-plus independent vessels that are owned, many by second-generation fishermen families, and own and operate, that deliver to us shoreside. Many of those vessels also deliver cod to us, and then they tender salmon for our operations in Bristol Bay and then Prince William Sound. So those fisheries are very directly connected to all of our operations throughout, throughout Alaska.

Hopefully that answers your question. Thank you. It does. Okay. I don't see any further questions.

So thank you very much, Mr. Carroll, for calling in. Next step, I've got Mr. Doug Morgan calling in from Wasilla. If you can state your name and your affiliation.

Hey, my name is Doug Morgan, current chairman of the BBRSDA, lifelong Alaskan, third generation Bristol Bay fisherman, and spent the last 46 summers fishing commercially in Bristol Bay. 4Th generation in my family, as my son has fished, fished for the last 10 years. I support SB 130. Quality improvements are paramount to the financial success of our fleet— fleets and coastal communities around the state. Forces beyond our control impact harvest levels on many fisheries in the state, but the one thing that can be positively impacted is the quality of our product.

The fish market is global, and to remain competitive, we need to continue to advance our quality and diversify the value-added offerings we bring to market, making the best use of the last great wild fisheries in the world. As fishermen, there's only so many things we can do on our boats to rise to the challenges that we face against the heavily subsidized foreign farm fish industry. To remain competitive, we need investments from the processing community, which will bring more employment as well as raise the price back to the fleet, which in turn raises the tax revenue for the state and local communities. While the state of Alaska does a good job of managing the resource, they cannot completely remove the natural highs and lows of the run cycles or deal with the impacts beyond their reach, whether natural or otherwise. Erasing the value of the fish will lessen the impact to all when there are smaller returns of fish.

The seafood industry is one of the major pillars of Alaska's economy, and incentivizing investment at the processing level will have a positive return on investment for the state at many levels. Please support the passing of SB 130. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much. And I don't see any questions, so next up we'll go to Cassandra Squibb calling in from Anchorage.

If you can state your name and your affiliation.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. Uh, this is Cassandra Squibb. Can you hear me? Uh, yes, we can.

[FOREIGN LANGUAGE] Okay. I'm Cassandra and I'm the Chief Marketing Officer at Copper River Seafoods. I'm a born and raised Alaskan. I live here in Anchorage and work from our corporate headquarters here in Anchorage. Copper River Seafoods strongly supports Senate Bill 130, which extends and expands the program.

And I want to thank our seafood industry task force for the support and emphasis of this program. Just a little bit about our company. We operate primary processing facilities in Cordova and McNutt, and we have buying stations in Whittier, Seward, Homer, and Kotzebue. We process all major species of Alaska seafood except for crab and pollock. Our corporate headquarters are here, and we have a year-round value-added manufacturing facility here right in downtown Anchorage, along with a seasonal salmon processing facility here.

And one of the largest cold storage facilities in the city. We are committed to keeping our manufacturing here in the state and providing year-round jobs for Alaskans and supporting the many local businesses that support our company. The Fisheries Product Development Tax Credit has been extremely important to our company. It's helped to offset millions of dollars in capital investments that have allowed us to increase the value of our seafood resources by improving utilization, as you've heard, and transforming our raw material into more valuable product forms. We have— this program has supported our investments in equipment like portion machines, skin pack machines, fillet machines, roe processing equipment, and marinade equipment.

And on the horizon, Alaska herring innovation is a really bright spot for our company with the recent return of the Prince Tinsley In Sound commercial fishery for herring. We have pledged to continue to support our re-emerging herring fleet in Tinsley In Sound, and SB 130 is a really helpful pathway to expand and modernize our herring processing capacities so that we can compete more effectively with global herring markets and really help to increase the value of Alaska's herring resource. So in summary, if Alaska wants to remain competitive, we have to continue to invest in modern processing and product innovation here at home. And programs like this will help to ensure Alaska seafood is not just harvested here, but processed, innovated, and valued here too. So for these reasons, we strongly support SB 130, and thank you for allowing me to testify.

Great, thank you very much. I don't see any questions, uh, so with that, um, let's see here. Oh, looks like we have one more person, uh, Sinclair Wilts. Calling in from Anchorage. If you can state your name and your affiliation.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Sinclair Wilp. I am vice president of Westward Seafoods. Thank you for the opportunity to speak in favor of Senate Bill 130. Westward Seafoods operates 3 processing plants in Unalaska, Dutch Harbor.

We process pollock, cod, all species of crab, halibut, and black cod. At peak season, we employ more than 1,300 people.

I'd like to express my appreciation to the seafood task force that was formed during a very challenging period. The past few years have been a very challenging time for our industry due to poor market conditions caused by foreign competition. While market conditions are improving for some products, we are now being hit with higher operating costs due to higher fuel prices. We generate our own power and steam using diesel. Our vessels likewise use diesel.

Unlike the transportation industry, we cannot add a fuel surcharge to our product to cover the higher operating costs. We are price takers, not price makers. What we can do is look for ways to enhance the value of our products we produce.

In our current capital improvement planning, we are considering new equipment to add a new product line to one of our plants that would produce a higher value product.

This line would take product going— material going to the waste stream and put it into a much higher value product. But it takes a lot of investment to pursue this.

The incentives provided by Senate Bill 130 to improve product value not only benefits our company long-term, but it benefits our fishermen and the community we operate. If we can introduce— produce higher value product, we are able to pay a higher value to our fleet, and we generate more state and local taxes. We appreciate that this legislation extends and expands the program. We haven't been able to take advantage of this in recent years, but— and I like to point out that a couple decades ago when the legislation was first put forward, it would only apply to salmon. Then it was expanded to herring.

It's only in recent years that it's been expanded to pollock and cod, but it's only appropriate that it should be extended to all species to be fair and equitable to, to the industry. It shouldn't just single out certain, certain species. So we, we appreciate the opportunity and urge you to support Senate Bill 130. Thank you. Great, thank you very much.

And Mr. Wilton, I don't see any questions So appreciate your testimony. If there's anyone else who would like to testify via email, you can do so by emailing us at [email protected]. Just doing a double check here. Is there anyone in the audience or online who would like to testify? Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close public testimony on House Bill 261 and— I'm sorry, SB 130.

And then we are going to— let's see here— go to— in terms of time management, we've got a hard stop at 9:55 this morning, so it's about 20 more minutes. We do have one fiscal note for this bill that we'll walk through, take a few questions on that, and then jump right into our next bill, which is HB 104, and then we'll close it out for the day. So let's see. See here, Mr.— let's see, I think online we have Mr. Chris Becker, uh, with the Department of Revenue. Mr. Becker, if you could walk us through the fiscal notes, and if you could note the, uh, control code in the bottom right of the fiscal note just to ensure we have the correct one.

Hi, for the record, this is Chris Becker with the State of Alaska Tax So the fiscal note control code is KQIAZ. And the reference for the current fiscal note is indeterminate, but we do present 3 options, an average, a high, and a low adoption scenario for FY 2027. The average would be $1 million. The high rate adoption would be $1.06 million. And then the low rate would be $900,000.

Great. And thank you very much. Do we have any questions of the committee regarding fiscal? We've got a question from Representative Bynum. Yes, thank you, Co-Chair Foster, through the chair.

Thank you for the brief explanation of the Fiscal note. I guess one of the questions that comes to mind when we talk about the fiscal note here is that this looks like just direct impact based on the current available information. Do we take a position and/or are we looking at a positive impact to industry and additional revenues that we receive because of the tax credits being applied? If that is not clear, I can clarify, but I hope that's clear. Mr. Becker?

No, so the fiscal note just recognizes the tax impact from the increased utilization of the credit.

Representative Bynum? Thank you, Co-Chair Foster, through the Chair. Is that something that the department has actually evaluated to look at basically cause and effect of this program [Speaker:MR. WRIGHT] I mean, we typically put a program in place, we have a sunset clause, we want to be able to see— we want to be able to see that the program is actually producing the outcomes that we want to see as far as helping industry, grow industry, and then in turn see better valued return. And I know that we have a lot of information in our packet specifically from industry on how this has been beneficial, but I just was wondering if the department has evaluated the efficacy of the program as a measure for bringing additional revenues to the state. Mr. Becker.

So typically we track the efficacy of the credit just through increased utilization, with the idea of being increased utilization will increase value-added product. If that's a requirement of the credit.

So for clarification, are you saying that you feel like the program is meeting its intended purpose and goal?

Mr. Becker?

I wouldn't want to speak to the legislative intent or if it's meeting its goal, but there has been increased utilization of the credit. Okay. And then so just a quick follow-up from your opinion, and you may not be able to answer this, who is it that we should be talking to to get that viewpoint from the administration on whether or not the program is meeting its intended targets? The legislature initially set the tax credit program in place, but, you know, I would expect that we would get feedback from the department on whether or not we are meeting those targeted goals of increased production. Mr. Becker?

I am unable to answer that question. We don't have data on the utilization of increased value-added products. So I would defer to industry on that. Thank you. I think Mr. Lampkin might— would like to weigh in.

Mr. Lampkin. For the record, Tim Lampkin, staff to Senator Stevens and the Seafood Task Force. A couple things to point out: that this program was initiated with focusing on salmon, and in the mid-2010s expanded to herring, and just the past few couple years has since included Pacific cod and sablefish and so forth. That is correct insofar as these programs are relatively new and there is certainly an expectation for data to be gathered so that we can answer that very question. I am eager to see that going forward in the future.

In the meantime, that is why we put sunset provisions on programs like this. We will take the next 2 questions and then go to the next Senator Stevens, would you like to make a comment? Thank you. I think one of the key questions that has come up is Representative Galvin saying, what are the concrete examples? And I think you got some, but not all of them.

I just need to explain a couple of issues that from my personal experience. When I first came to Alaska in 1970, my family had processing plants here, and I was the general manager for 5 years. And we had a ship that would go out and buy salmon in Bristol Bay. And send it down to Seattle to be reprocessed. That's so unnecessary.

We should be doing that processing here. We are doing it here. And so you see companies that are doing now small portion controlled, a small piece of salmon that a housewife or househusband can cook immediately without having to take a whole fish and trying to figure out what to do with it. So I think where we've come now is that small portion controlled, maybe seasoned and ready to go, whatever flavor you want. And it's easy to use.

I think that's a big step forward and that adds to the value of that fish, adds value for not only the processor but the fishermen. And then I know you're in a rush, but one other thing I will mention. I was in Portugal a few years ago and they wanted me to see the processing plant there where they were doing little portions for McDonald's sandwiches. And the fellow who owned the plant, ran the plant, had lots of equipment and people working in the plant. He wanted me to see that this 50-pound block of Pollack was from Kodiak.

It had been processing Kodiak into big blocks, 50 pounds, and they would take it and put it into these giant machines that would cut it thinly, add, you know, something to it, you know, like a solution or not a solution, I'm thinking more like some kind of a product to it, they added to it so it made this little fillet that you see in McDonald's. And those are things that we could be doing here in Alaska, that we should be doing in Alaska. And if we did even more of that, as many of these companies are already doing and trying to do in moving into Pollock, that'd be a great advantage to Alaskan communities and our tax base and our processors, and would raise value to our fishermen. So I started to take your time, but I just want you to know those two instances that I have personally experienced where it would make an enormous difference if we were able to add that value here in Alaska. Great, thank you very much, Senator Stevens.

The next two questions, we've got Representative Galvin, then Hannah. Representative Galvin. Thank you, Co-Chair Foster. Through the chair, I very much appreciate hearing your examples, and I want to also shout out that understanding that $37 million in credits have grown us to $114 million in revenue, that's That's meaningful to me. I also wanted to comment that given— or ask you the question, given that we know with the expansion of opportunities with adding in more species, et cetera, was there some thought to this growing so big that maybe there should be a cap?

When I say that, I'm thinking about the education credits that we have available. A separate portion of our statutes wherein we were trying to encourage folks to invest in education. And perhaps that doesn't ring true for this because I understand when I hear something like McDonald's prep, that would take a lot of investment. So perhaps that doesn't make sense, but I wanted to ask that question if there was any consideration. The other question was, was there consideration in putting a something in this bill that would bring a report back to us on how the changes may have impacted us that would be kind of a regular report so that we could keep checking in for the next 10 years.

Senator Stevens. Well, I just say, eh, great to know, and I think the evidence is there. I mean, if processors outside the country can do this, why shouldn't we be doing it here? And there is a cap to how much equipment you want, you know, how much you can use to do the breading. It's the word I was trying to think.

How much code you want to do that breading and that reprocessing. But yes, absolutely, we should know the value of it. I appreciate the fact that we have a sunset to it. So you will know in the future whether it's worth it or not. Thank you very much.

Okay. And Representative Hannon. Thank you, Coach Foster. My question is for Mr. Becker, if he's still online. I hope he is.

Uh, he is still online. Uh, Mr. Becker, can you tell us what was collected under the fisheries business tax in, say, FY27 or FY25? Mr. Becker?

Oh, we have that data published. I can pull that up real quick.

I'll just go ahead and announce our— this afternoon's meeting. We have quite a few items on the agenda for this afternoon. That's going to be capital budget. We have amendments that we're taking up for SGR 29. That's the constitutional amendment for education funding.

We have SB 86. That's the money transmission and virtual currency. And then It looks like we probably will be taking up the next bill that's after this bill this morning. We may be trying to fit that in this afternoon, but we'll look at the schedule and see what we can do. And that's for HB 104 with regard to the confidentiality bill.

So, Mr. Becker, are you able to find the information? Oh yeah, I got pulled up right here.

Yeah, can I just go ahead and ask a question to the sponsor really quick? Okay, thank you. Um, Senator Stevens, through the co-chair, the vessel and equipment cannot be written off through this statute?

Tim, do you have an answer to that? I said Mr. Lampkin. Thank you. Tim Lampkin, staff to Senator Stevens and Seafood Task Force. Through the chair, Representative Allard, the vessel itself is not— depending on the equipment that may be eligible for the credit, they have to apply with the department, and then the department makes the determinations through regulation.

And Representative Allard, I think some folks may not have heard the question. Can you repeat that? Yes, I asked if the vessel and the equipment can be written off under this statute that they have coming forward. Thank you, co-chair. Um, Mr. Becker?

Mr. Lampkin? Tim Lampkin. For the— I'm sorry, for the revenue, it was $30 million in FY 2025.

Okay, Representative Hannon. Thank you, Mr. Becker. Do we have the FY26 data? Uh, that's not currently published. Okay, thank you.

Um, and I guess I just wanted to make sure we had on the record that even if it was costing us $1 million or $1.6 million in tax credits, right, the $30 million we're looking at, the business tax is a much bigger scale. So if we are incentivizing and potentially increasing that business tax, which is based on the value of that fish, that's gonna grow. So spending $1 million to help grow $30 million to, say, $50 million or $60 million is a good investment. We're talking about efficacy and growth. Thank you.

Okay, do we have any further questions? I think I did receive a note asking about a possible amendment deadline. I don't have it written in here. I think it's something that maybe we'll chat after the meeting and figure that out, and we'll let folks know.

But seems like we've kind of crossed, I guess, checked off a couple of the boxes here. I— so I'm— we'll let folks know. So with that, I think we are probably not going to have enough time for the next bill. That's HB 104. So figure out when we'll hear that bill next.

Senator Stevens or Mr. Lampkin, do you have anything you'd like to close us out with today? Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really appreciate— Gary Stevens from Kodiak— I really appreciate your hearing the bill. You know, I think it'll carry the industry forward. It was the key thing that the Seafood Task Force wanted to see introduced this session, and it'll make a tremendous difference.

You know, I think one thing you have to realize, of course, is that Any equipment we help, we give a tax credit for, stays in Alaska, is used in Alaska. It cannot be taken out of Alaska. So all of it will have a big impact on our state. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Great.

Thank you. Let's see, Representative Galvin. Thank you, Co-Chair Foster. It seems to me after hearing all of the testimony and from getting questions answered, of the fiscal notes that, you know, I don't think there's any more questions. I'd sure love to help move this along if possible.

I'm not sure what you think about that. [Speaker:MICHAEL] I think I've had some folks express to me an interest in wanting to do amendments. I mean, if there were no amendments, I'm certainly not opposed to that, but I'm looking around and I think— I know at least one person has told me they wanted do amendments. So, so with that, we're gonna go ahead and close out the day. I announced our afternoon's meeting at 1:30 PM, the, the items.

So I think we'll go ahead and adjourn out for the day. Time is currently 9:53 AM, and we'll be adjourned. Thank you.