Hawaii · individual fact

Hawaii prices and inflation

Compare Hawaii’s price levels, category costs, and changes in its regional price deflator.

BLS does not publish a statewide Hawaii CPI or a complete 50-state CPI cohort. The statewide comparisons here use BEA regional price parities and its implicit regional price deflator. They are explicitly labeled and are not CPI.

All-items price level1102024 · #2 of 50 · highest first
Goods price level111.62024 · #1 of 50 · highest first
Housing-rent price level125.32024 · #6 of 50 · highest first

Hawaii over time

Explore Hawaii readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Hawaii officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Hawaii effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Hawaii change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

All-items price level Hawaii · source units
HawaiiPublished U.S. benchmark

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

All-items price level2024: 11098.4106.6114.9Hawaii, 2014: 110.6Hawaii, 2015: 111.5Hawaii, 2016: 109.9Hawaii, 2017: 110.5Hawaii, 2018: 110.9Hawaii, 2019: 111.8Hawaii, 2020: 113.3Hawaii, 2021: 112.6Hawaii, 2022: 111.1Hawaii, 2023: 109.7Hawaii, 2024: 110201420192024
✦ Major events & context · 30National context · Hurricanes Katrina and Rita disrupt fuel supplies · 2005-08-29Katrina / RitaNational context · Global food and energy price surge · 2008-07-15Food / energy surgeNational context · Great Financial Crisis and Great Recession · 2008-09-15Great Financial CrisisNational context · Fed cuts rates near zero during the crisis · 2008-12-16Fed near-zero ratesNational context · American Recovery and Reinvestment Act · 2009-02-17Recovery ActNational context · Renewed global food and oil price pressures · 2011-04-11Commodity pressuresNational context · U.S. drought damages crops and raises food costs · 2012-08-10U.S. droughtNational context · Oil-price collapse lowers energy inflation · 2014-11-27Oil-price collapseNational context · Fed raises rates after the near-zero period · 2015-12-16Fed rate liftoffNational context · Hurricanes Harvey and Irma disrupt fuel markets · 2017-08-25Harvey / IrmaNational context · U.S.–China tariff escalation · 2018-07-06U.S.–China tariffsNational context · Fed cuts rates amid muted inflation · 2019-07-31Fed cuts rates in 2019National context · COVID-19 pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Fed emergency rate cut and asset purchases · 2020-03-15Fed emergency easingNational context · CARES Act pandemic relief · 2020-03-27CARES Act reliefNational context · American Rescue Plan expands pandemic support · 2021-03-11American Rescue PlanNational context · Reopening demand meets supply and chip shortages · 2021-07-09Reopening / shortagesNational context · Avian influenza disrupts egg supplies · 2022-02-09Bird flu / egg supplyNational context · Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine · 2022-02-24Russia invades UkraineNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2022 rate increases · 2022-03-16Fed rate increases beginNational context · Banking stress raises credit and inflation uncertainty · 2023-03-22Banking stressNational context · Supply recovery and slower rent growth ease inflation pressures · 2023-08-25Supply / rent easingNational context · Red Sea shipping disruption raises supply risks · 2024-02-22Red Sea shippingNational context · Federal Reserve cuts rates in September 2024 · 2024-09-18Fed rate cutNational context · Broad U.S. tariff announcement · 2025-04-02U.S. tariff announcementNational context · Federal shutdown interrupts CPI collection · 2025-10-01Shutdown / CPI data gapHawaii · Hawaii establishes the CREDIT renewable-energy coordination task force · 2025-11-07CREDIT energy task forceNational context · Iran conflict and Strait of Hormuz energy disruption · 2026-02-28Iran / Hormuz shockHawaii · Hawaii sets a deadline for performance-based electricity ratemaking · 2026-06-05Electricity ratemaking lawHawaii · Hawaii changes tax-exemption certification for county-assisted housing · 2026-07-08County housing tax exemptions● Hawaii Legislature · 3● U.S. Congress · Hawaii delegation · 2◆ Governor · 3■ Hawaii agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2005-08-012026-07-31

8 of 8 reviewed Hawaii actions match · 8 date markers shown. 30 major events shown separately.

Hawaii · 2024: 110 · Rank #2 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 100

BEA regional price parity, relative to the overall national price level. The U.S. all-items index equals 100 each year. Measures prices across places within the same year, rather than annual inflation. For all items, 103 means about 3% above the national level. Category benchmarks can differ from 100; compare Hawaii with the published U.S. category value shown. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.

View observations and export data
Hawaii All-items price level · source units
PeriodHawaiiRankU.S. benchmark
2024110#2 of 50100
2023109.7#2 of 50100
2022111.1#2 of 50100
2021112.6#1 of 50100
2020113.3#1 of 50100
2019111.8#1 of 50100
2018110.9#3 of 50100
2017110.5#2 of 50100
2016109.9#3 of 50100
2015111.5#1 of 50100
2014110.6#1 of 50100
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Hawaii · state comparison

How does Hawaii’s cost of living compare?

The U.S. all-items level is 100. Each category uses its own published U.S. benchmark. Compare the same category and year.

Hawaii · 2024110
Hawaii rank#2among all 50 states
U.S. price level100Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

All-items price level

BEA regional price parity, relative to the overall national price level. The U.S. all-items index equals 100 each year.

Measures prices across places within the same year, rather than annual inflation. For all items, 103 means about 3% above the national level. Category benchmarks can differ from 100; compare Hawaii with the published U.S. category value shown.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Hawaii
All-items price level history in Hawaii98106.6115.320142024
2024 · Hawaii: 110 · Rank #2 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 100 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Hawaii All-items price level history
PeriodHawaiiCompare
2014110.6
2015111.5
2016109.9
2017110.5
2018110.9
2019111.8
2020113.3
2021112.6
2022111.1
2023109.7
2024110

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Hawaii stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Hawaii has a dark outline.

Lower value · 86.9Higher value · 110.7Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Hawaii · 1102024 · Rank #2 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Hawaii with every state · 50 ranked
All-items price level · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California110.7—
#2Hawaii · your comparison110—
#3New Jersey108.8—
#4New York107.9—
#5Washington107—
#6Massachusetts105.8—
#7Maryland105—
#8New Hampshire104.2—
#9Connecticut103.6—
#10Florida103.4—
#11Oregon103.4—
#12Colorado103.1—
#13Alaska102.4—
#14Rhode Island102.3—
#15Virginia101.1—
#16Arizona100.7—
#17Nevada100—
#18Illinois100—
#19Delaware99.8—
#20Utah98.9—
#21Minnesota98.6—
#22Vermont98—
#23Pennsylvania97.6—
#24Texas97.1—
#25Maine97.1—
#26Georgia96.3—
#27Michigan96.2—
#28Idaho95.5—
#29Montana94.6—
#30North Carolina94.3—
#31Wisconsin94.1—
#32South Carolina93.7—
#33Indiana93.3—
#34Ohio92.8—
#35Wyoming92.7—
#36New Mexico92.2—
#37Tennessee91.9—
#38Missouri90.8—
#39Kentucky90.2—
#40Nebraska90.1—
#41Kansas90.1—
#42West Virginia89.5—
#43North Dakota89—
#44Alabama88.8—
#45South Dakota88.6—
#46Louisiana88.2—
#47Oklahoma87.8—
#48Iowa87.8—
#49Mississippi87—
#50Arkansas86.9—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Hawaii · state comparison

How much have prices changed?

This is BEA’s implicit regional price deflator, derived from regional price parities and the national PCE price index.

Hawaii · 20242.9%
Hawaii rank#21among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark2.6%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Annual change in regional price deflator

Year-over-year change in the BEA implicit regional price deflator.

An annual regional inflation measure; different from BLS CPI-U. Changes can reflect regional price parity estimates and revisions as well as national inflation.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Hawaii
Annual change in regional price deflator history in Hawaii-1.5%3.1%7.6%20152024
2024 · Hawaii: 2.9% · Rank #21 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 2.6% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Hawaii Annual change in regional price deflator history
PeriodHawaiiCompare
20151%
2016-0.4%
20172.3%
20182.5%
20192.2%
20202.5%
20213.5%
20225.2%
20232.4%
20242.9%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Hawaii stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Hawaii has a dark outline.

Lower value · 0.8%Higher value · 6.7%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Hawaii · 2.9%2024 · Rank #21 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Hawaii with every state · 50 ranked
Annual change in regional price deflator · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Montana6.7%—
#2Idaho6.2%—
#3Utah6%—
#4Nevada4.8%—
#5Michigan4.7%—
#6New Mexico4%—
#7Indiana4%—
#8Wyoming3.9%—
#9Illinois3.9%—
#10Colorado3.8%—
#11Delaware3.7%—
#12Ohio3.6%—
#13Wisconsin3.6%—
#14North Dakota3.5%—
#15Vermont3.5%—
#16South Dakota3.1%—
#17Maryland3%—
#18Minnesota3%—
#19Kentucky2.9%—
#20South Carolina2.9%—
#21Hawaii · your comparison2.9%—
#22Rhode Island2.8%—
#23Mississippi2.8%—
#24Kansas2.8%—
#25Pennsylvania2.8%—
#26Arkansas2.8%—
#27New York2.7%—
#28Arizona2.6%—
#29North Carolina2.5%—
#30Texas2.5%—
#31New Jersey2.5%—
#32West Virginia2.5%—
#33Nebraska2.4%—
#34Georgia2.4%—
#35Florida2.4%—
#36Virginia2.4%—
#37Tennessee2.4%—
#38Alabama2.3%—
#39Missouri2.3%—
#40Louisiana2%—
#41Connecticut2%—
#42Alaska1.7%—
#43Maine1.7%—
#44Oklahoma1.6%—
#45Iowa1.5%—
#46New Hampshire1.4%—
#47Washington1.3%—
#48California1.3%—
#49Oregon1.2%—
#50Massachusetts0.8%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Hawaii · state comparison

Are incomes keeping up with prices?

Real personal income accounts for national inflation and regional price differences.

Hawaii · 2024$52,272
Hawaii rank#46among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$59,195Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Real personal income per person

Regional price-adjusted and inflation-adjusted personal income per resident.

Constant 2017 dollars. This differs from household wages, disposable income, and the national real-hourly-earnings measure.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Hawaii
Real personal income per person history in Hawaii$39.81K$50.86K$61.92K20142024
2024 · Hawaii: $52,272 · Rank #46 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $59,195 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Hawaii Real personal income per person history
PeriodHawaiiCompare
2014$42,363
2015$43,533
2016$45,054
2017$45,829
2018$45,636
2019$46,712
2020$48,228
2021$50,046
2022$49,022
2023$50,923
2024$52,272

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Hawaii stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Hawaii has a dark outline.

Lower value · $48.47KHigher value · $75.5KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Hawaii · $52,2722024 · Rank #46 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Hawaii with every state · 50 ranked
Real personal income per person · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Wyoming$75,501—
#2Connecticut$74,254—
#3Massachusetts$71,629—
#4South Dakota$69,153—
#5Nebraska$65,297—
#6North Dakota$65,271—
#7Colorado$65,223—
#8New Hampshire$64,632—
#9Washington$64,421—
#10New York$64,153—
#11New Jersey$63,142—
#12California$63,028—
#13Minnesota$62,039—
#14Virginia$61,914—
#15Maryland$61,111—
#16Illinois$60,333—
#17Alaska$60,272—
#18Iowa$60,144—
#19Montana$59,203—
#20Kansas$59,172—
#21Vermont$58,893—
#22Oklahoma$58,692—
#23Pennsylvania$58,620—
#24Tennessee$58,582—
#25Wisconsin$58,273—
#26Texas$58,219—
#27Missouri$57,850—
#28Maine$57,480—
#29Florida$57,131—
#30Louisiana$56,789—
#31Nevada$56,503—
#32North Carolina$56,310—
#33Ohio$56,232—
#34Rhode Island$55,878—
#35Indiana$55,562—
#36Oregon$55,451—
#37Arkansas$55,219—
#38Delaware$55,185—
#39Utah$55,116—
#40Michigan$53,569—
#41Georgia$52,952—
#42Arizona$52,890—
#43Idaho$52,816—
#44South Carolina$52,463—
#45Kentucky$52,290—
#46Hawaii · your comparison$52,272—
#47Alabama$52,216—
#48New Mexico$51,121—
#49West Virginia$50,051—
#50Mississippi$48,465—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about inflation, consumer prices and the cost of living from FactVote’s Hawaii candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

4 statements from 3 candidates

2026 Hawaii Governor and Lieutenant Governor — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 3 statements

Daniel Anthony

2 statements

Republican · Lieutenant Governor · HI

Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

Household energy costs

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Taxes, economy, workers, and affordability

Candidate campaign source

Household energy costs

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Daniel Anthony — candidate-owned primary source 4 ↗
View 1 more statement from Daniel Anthony
Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

Advance policies that help local residents remain in Hawaiʻi by addressing housing affordability, economic opportunity, and quality of life challenges.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Hawaiian culture and community

Candidate campaign source

Advance policies that help local residents remain in Hawaiʻi by addressing housing affordability, economic opportunity, and quality of life challenges.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Daniel Anthony — candidate-owned primary source 11 ↗

Josh Green

1 statement

Democratic · Governor · HI

Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

Governor Green is also bringing down housing costs for everyone in Hawaii by building new housing at a scale we haven’t seen in decades — including 46,000 affordable units for working families — and by cutting red tape and removing unnecessary regulations on new housing, while still protecting our e…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Housing and cost of living

Candidate campaign source

Governor Green is also bringing down housing costs for everyone in Hawaii by building new housing at a scale we haven’t seen in decades — including 46,000 affordable units for working families — and by cutting red tape and removing unnecessary regulations on new housing, while still protecting our environment.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Josh Green — candidate-owned primary source 5 ↗

2026 Hawaii U.S. House — District 1 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Ed Case

1 statement

Democratic · U.S. House District 1 · HI

Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

My goal is to preserve the best of American health care while closing the unacceptable gaps in availability, affordability, access and quality. It is critical to get this right for current and future generations, and I believe we need a renewed national debate, including within Congress, on how best…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Share by Email

Candidate campaign source

My goal is to preserve the best of American health care while closing the unacceptable gaps in availability, affordability, access and quality. It is critical to get this right for current and future generations, and I believe we need a renewed national debate, including within Congress, on how best to do so. That is why it is critical for Congress to remain focused on protecting and improving the Affordable Care Act, lowering prescription drug prices and increasing investments in biomedical research. You can view a summary of my efforts in healthcare here (https://case.house.gov/uploadedfiles/healthcare_leg_history.pdf).

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026

Ed Case campaign source 8 ↗
How statements are selected

This section matches specific inflation, consumer prices and the cost of living terms in retained, attributed source text from published Hawaii candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Hawaii incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Hawaii legislators and Hawaii’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Hawaii’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

25 matching sponsorships or proposals · 25 Hawaii incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Rep. Adrian K. Tam

Hawaii House of Representatives, District 24 · D–HI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Adrian K. Tam
Hawaii Legislature · HB 2385 · Act 215

Hawaii changes tax-exemption certification for county-assisted housing

Jul 8, 2026 · Enacted · Act 215

Rep. Tyson K. Miyake · Sponsored / Rep. Terez Amato · Sponsored / Rep. Luke A. Evslin · Sponsored / Rep. Diamond Garcia · Sponsored / Rep. Greggor Ilagan · Sponsored / Rep. Kirstin Kahaloa · Sponsored / Rep. Sue L. Keohokapu-Lee Loy · Sponsored / Rep. Darius K. Kila · Sponsored / Rep. Lisa Kitagawa · Sponsored / Rep. Nicole E. Lowen · Sponsored / Rep. Lisa Marten · Sponsored / Rep. Lauren Matsumoto · Sponsored / Rep. Julie Reyes Oda · Sponsored / Rep. Adrian K. Tam · Sponsored

Reviewed final Hawaii housing tax law · selected provisions

Affordable rental-housing incentives concern shelter costs, a component of household prices. The law does not set CPI, establish lower rents or apply a price ceiling to all Hawaii homes. HHFDC may approve and certify eligible projects under a county assistance program where at least 50% of available units serve households at or below 100% of HUD median family income. Unless HHFDC exempts a project, regulatory agreements require at least five years for moderate rehabilitation, ten years for substantial rehabilitation, and thirty years from the certificate of occupancy for new construction; new county-assisted construction instead has a fifteen-year minimum from that certificate. These conditions are not a universal entitlement to exemption. HHFDC must amend its administrative rules under chapter 91 to conform to the law. Signing does not establish that the rules, applications or certifications have been completed. Approval was July 8, 2026; sections 2 and 3 begin January 1, 2027. The act preserves its amendments through specified intervening statutory restorations, then repeals the act on July 1, 2031 and restores sections 46-15.1 and 201H-36 to their pre-act form. The separately stated June 30, 2030 certification window for the section 104-2(i)(2) project pathway is not extended to 2031 by this approval. For the separate section 104-2(i)(2) pathway, Act 215 removes the restriction that allowable general-excise and use-tax costs apply only to contracting. It retains a $30 million annual aggregate limit for that pathway’s certified projects, a July 1, 2018–June 30, 2030 approval/certification window, all units at or below 140% of HUD median family income with at least 20% at or below 80%, and protection against refusal solely because an applicant holds a Section 8 voucher. The separate ordinary rental pathway retains at least 50% of units at or below 80%, of which at least 20% of available units are at or below 60%. These are distinct pathways, not the income conditions or a newly imposed cap for every county-assisted project. Later amendments, the referenced restoration statutes, HHFDC rules, actual certifications and fiscal or housing outcomes remain separate review tasks. This approval authorizes conditional exemptions; it does not allocate $30 million in new spending, create a statewide rent cap or prove additional homes.

Approved July 8, 2026. July 9 is the bill-history posting date. Provision-specific start dates, conditions and actual implementation are separate.

Why this record is included

Affordable rental-housing incentives concern shelter costs, a component of household prices. The law does not set CPI, establish lower rents or apply a price ceiling to all Hawaii homes. HHFDC may approve and certify eligible projects under a county assistance program where at least 50% of available units serve households at or below 100% of HUD median family income. Unless HHFDC exempts a project, regulatory agreements require at least five years for moderate rehabilitation, ten years for substantial rehabilitation, and thirty years from the certificate of occupancy for new construction; new county-assisted construction instead has a fifteen-year minimum from that certificate. These conditions are not a universal entitlement to exemption. HHFDC must amend its administrative rules under chapter 91 to conform to the law. Signing does not establish that the rules, applications or certifications have been completed. Approval was July 8, 2026; sections 2 and 3 begin January 1, 2027. The act preserves its amendments through specified intervening statutory restorations, then repeals the act on July 1, 2031 and restores sections 46-15.1 and 201H-36 to their pre-act form. The separately stated June 30, 2030 certification window for the section 104-2(i)(2) project pathway is not extended to 2031 by this approval. For the separate section 104-2(i)(2) pathway, Act 215 removes the restriction that allowable general-excise and use-tax costs apply only to contracting. It retains a $30 million annual aggregate limit for that pathway’s certified projects, a July 1, 2018–June 30, 2030 approval/certification window, all units at or below 140% of HUD median family income with at least 20% at or below 80%, and protection against refusal solely because an applicant holds a Section 8 voucher. The separate ordinary rental pathway retains at least 50% of units at or below 80%, of which at least 20% of available units are at or below 60%. These are distinct pathways, not the income conditions or a newly imposed cap for every county-assisted project. Later amendments, the referenced restoration statutes, HHFDC rules, actual certifications and fiscal or housing outcomes remain separate review tasks. This approval authorizes conditional exemptions; it does not allocate $30 million in new spending, create a statewide rent cap or prove additional homes.

Retained Hawaii evidence context: income-taxes · reviewed Hawaii policy context · deficit-debt-interest · reviewed Hawaii policy context · housing-borrowing · reviewed Hawaii policy context · cpi · reviewed Hawaii policy context · real-gdp · reviewed Hawaii policy context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

to provide affordable rental housing
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Darius K. Kila

Hawaii House of Representatives, District 44 · D–HI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Darius K. Kila
Hawaii Legislature · HB 2385 · Act 215

Hawaii changes tax-exemption certification for county-assisted housing

Jul 8, 2026 · Enacted · Act 215

Rep. Tyson K. Miyake · Sponsored / Rep. Terez Amato · Sponsored / Rep. Luke A. Evslin · Sponsored / Rep. Diamond Garcia · Sponsored / Rep. Greggor Ilagan · Sponsored / Rep. Kirstin Kahaloa · Sponsored / Rep. Sue L. Keohokapu-Lee Loy · Sponsored / Rep. Darius K. Kila · Sponsored / Rep. Lisa Kitagawa · Sponsored / Rep. Nicole E. Lowen · Sponsored / Rep. Lisa Marten · Sponsored / Rep. Lauren Matsumoto · Sponsored / Rep. Julie Reyes Oda · Sponsored / Rep. Adrian K. Tam · Sponsored

Reviewed final Hawaii housing tax law · selected provisions

Affordable rental-housing incentives concern shelter costs, a component of household prices. The law does not set CPI, establish lower rents or apply a price ceiling to all Hawaii homes. HHFDC may approve and certify eligible projects under a county assistance program where at least 50% of available units serve households at or below 100% of HUD median family income. Unless HHFDC exempts a project, regulatory agreements require at least five years for moderate rehabilitation, ten years for substantial rehabilitation, and thirty years from the certificate of occupancy for new construction; new county-assisted construction instead has a fifteen-year minimum from that certificate. These conditions are not a universal entitlement to exemption. HHFDC must amend its administrative rules under chapter 91 to conform to the law. Signing does not establish that the rules, applications or certifications have been completed. Approval was July 8, 2026; sections 2 and 3 begin January 1, 2027. The act preserves its amendments through specified intervening statutory restorations, then repeals the act on July 1, 2031 and restores sections 46-15.1 and 201H-36 to their pre-act form. The separately stated June 30, 2030 certification window for the section 104-2(i)(2) project pathway is not extended to 2031 by this approval. For the separate section 104-2(i)(2) pathway, Act 215 removes the restriction that allowable general-excise and use-tax costs apply only to contracting. It retains a $30 million annual aggregate limit for that pathway’s certified projects, a July 1, 2018–June 30, 2030 approval/certification window, all units at or below 140% of HUD median family income with at least 20% at or below 80%, and protection against refusal solely because an applicant holds a Section 8 voucher. The separate ordinary rental pathway retains at least 50% of units at or below 80%, of which at least 20% of available units are at or below 60%. These are distinct pathways, not the income conditions or a newly imposed cap for every county-assisted project. Later amendments, the referenced restoration statutes, HHFDC rules, actual certifications and fiscal or housing outcomes remain separate review tasks. This approval authorizes conditional exemptions; it does not allocate $30 million in new spending, create a statewide rent cap or prove additional homes.

Approved July 8, 2026. July 9 is the bill-history posting date. Provision-specific start dates, conditions and actual implementation are separate.

Why this record is included

Affordable rental-housing incentives concern shelter costs, a component of household prices. The law does not set CPI, establish lower rents or apply a price ceiling to all Hawaii homes. HHFDC may approve and certify eligible projects under a county assistance program where at least 50% of available units serve households at or below 100% of HUD median family income. Unless HHFDC exempts a project, regulatory agreements require at least five years for moderate rehabilitation, ten years for substantial rehabilitation, and thirty years from the certificate of occupancy for new construction; new county-assisted construction instead has a fifteen-year minimum from that certificate. These conditions are not a universal entitlement to exemption. HHFDC must amend its administrative rules under chapter 91 to conform to the law. Signing does not establish that the rules, applications or certifications have been completed. Approval was July 8, 2026; sections 2 and 3 begin January 1, 2027. The act preserves its amendments through specified intervening statutory restorations, then repeals the act on July 1, 2031 and restores sections 46-15.1 and 201H-36 to their pre-act form. The separately stated June 30, 2030 certification window for the section 104-2(i)(2) project pathway is not extended to 2031 by this approval. For the separate section 104-2(i)(2) pathway, Act 215 removes the restriction that allowable general-excise and use-tax costs apply only to contracting. It retains a $30 million annual aggregate limit for that pathway’s certified projects, a July 1, 2018–June 30, 2030 approval/certification window, all units at or below 140% of HUD median family income with at least 20% at or below 80%, and protection against refusal solely because an applicant holds a Section 8 voucher. The separate ordinary rental pathway retains at least 50% of units at or below 80%, of which at least 20% of available units are at or below 60%. These are distinct pathways, not the income conditions or a newly imposed cap for every county-assisted project. Later amendments, the referenced restoration statutes, HHFDC rules, actual certifications and fiscal or housing outcomes remain separate review tasks. This approval authorizes conditional exemptions; it does not allocate $30 million in new spending, create a statewide rent cap or prove additional homes.

Retained Hawaii evidence context: income-taxes · reviewed Hawaii policy context · deficit-debt-interest · reviewed Hawaii policy context · housing-borrowing · reviewed Hawaii policy context · cpi · reviewed Hawaii policy context · real-gdp · reviewed Hawaii policy context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

to provide affordable rental housing
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. David Alcos III

Hawaii House of Representatives, District 41 · R–HI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. David Alcos III
Hawaii Legislature · HB 260

RELATING TO TAXATION.

Dec 8, 2025 · Not enacted

Rep. David Alcos III · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 260 proposed removing the 16-cent state per-gallon gasoline component and 15-cent additional highway-diesel component while retaining county levies and other listed fuel taxes. The one-cent diesel levy in subsection (a)(1) remains. The proposed changes would apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025. It directs distributors to pass savings to consumers as much as practicable. The carried-over proposal did not become law in the 2026 regular session. It does not establish a tax reduction, guaranteed pass-through or a change in the regional gasoline-price proxy.

Carried over to 2026 Regular Session. The regular session ended May 8, 2026 without this bill becoming law. The displayed date is the latest official event, including a carryover entry where applicable.

Why this record is included

The fact is the EIA West Coast excluding California regional gasoline-price proxy, not a Hawaii-only price. The proposal concerns Hawaii’s state fuel-tax component and does not change taxes in the other states represented by the regional series. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.

Retained Hawaii evidence context: West Coast excluding California regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

SECTION 2. Section 243-4, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsection (a) and (b) to read as follows: "(a) Every distributor shall, in addition to any other taxes provided by law, pay a license tax to the department of taxation for each gallon of liquid fuel refined, manufactured, produced, or compounded by the distributor and sold or used by the distributor in the State or imported by the distributor, or acquired by the distributor from persons who are not licensed distributors, and sold or used by the distributor in the State. Any person who sells or uses any liquid fuel, knowing that the distributor from whom it was originally purchased has not paid and is not paying the tax thereon, shall pay such tax as would have applied to such sale or use by the distributor. The rates of tax imposed are as follows: (1) For each gallon of diesel oil, 1 cent; (2) For each gallon of gasoline or other aviation fuel sold for use in or used for airplanes, 1 cent; (3) For each gallon of naphtha sold for use in a power-generating facility, 2 cents; (4) For each gallon of liquid fuel, other than fuel mentioned in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), and other than an alternative fuel, sold or used in the city and county of Honolulu, or sold in any county for ultimate use in the city and county of Honolulu, [] an amount, to be known as the "city and county of Honolulu fuel tax", as shall be levied pursuant to section 243-5; (5) For each gallon of liquid fuel, other than fuel mentioned in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), and other than an alternative fuel, sold or used in the county of Hawaii, or sold in any county for ultimate use in the county of Hawaii, [] an amount, to be known as the "county of Hawaii fuel tax", as shall be levied pursuant to section 243-5; (6) For each gallon of liquid fuel, other than fuel mentioned in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), and other than an alternative fuel, sold or used in the county of Maui, or sold in any county for ultimate use in the county of Maui, [] an amount, to be known as the "county of Maui fuel tax", as shall be levied pursuant to section 243-5; and (7) For each gallon of liquid fuel, other than fuel mentioned in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), and other than an alternative fuel, sold or used in the county of Kauai, or sold in any county for ultimate use in the county of Kauai, [] an amount, to be known as the "county of Kauai fuel tax", as shall be levied pursuant to section 243-5. If it is shown to the satisfaction of the department, based upon proper records and from any other evidence as the department may require, that liquid fuel, other than fuel mentioned in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), is used for agricultural equipment that does not operate upon the public highways of the State, the user thereof may obtain a refund of all taxes thereon imposed by this section in excess of 1 cent per gallon. The department shall adopt rules to administer such refunds. (b) Every distributor of diesel oil, in addition to the tax required by subsection (a), shall pay a license tax to the department for each gallon of diesel oil sold or used by the distributor for operating a motor vehicle or motor vehicles upon public highways of the State. The rates of the additional tax imposed are as follows: (1) For each gallon of diesel oil sold or used in the city and county of Honolulu, or sold in any other county for ultimate use in the city and county of Honolulu, [] an amount, to be known as the "city and county of Honolulu fuel tax", as shall be levied pursuant to section 243-5; (2) For each gallon of diesel oil sold or used in the county of Hawaii, or sold in any other county for ultimate use in the county of Hawaii, [] an amount, to be known as the "county of Hawaii fuel tax", as shall be levied pursuant to section 243-5; (3) For each gallon of diesel oil sold or used in the county of Maui, or sold in any other county for ultimate use in the county of Maui, [] an amount, to be known as the "county of Maui fuel tax", as shall be levied pursuant to section 243-5; and (4) For each gallon of diesel oil sold or used in the county of Kauai, or sold in any other county for ultimate use in the county of Kauai, [] an amount, to be known as the "county of Kauai fuel tax", as shall be levied pursuant to section 243-5. If any user of diesel oil furnishes a certificate, in a form that the department shall prescribe, to the distributor or if the distributor who uses diesel oil signs the certificate, certifying that the diesel oil is for use in operating a motor vehicle or motor vehicles in areas other than upon the public highways of the State, the tax as provided in paragraphs (1) to (4) shall not be applicable. If a certificate is not or cannot be furnished and the diesel oil is in fact for use for operating a motor vehicle or motor vehicles in areas other than upon public highways of the State, the user thereof may obtain a refund of all taxes thereon imposed by the foregoing paragraphs. The department shall adopt rules to administer the refunding of such taxes. (c) For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025, tax savings based on the repeal of the state fuel and oil tax shall be passed on from the distributor to the consumers as much as practicable." SECTION 3. Statutory material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken. New statutory material is underscored. SECTION 4. This Act, upon its approval, shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025. INTRODUCED BY: _____________________________
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Diamond Garcia

Hawaii House of Representatives, District 42 · R–HI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Diamond Garcia
Hawaii Legislature · HB 2385 · Act 215

Hawaii changes tax-exemption certification for county-assisted housing

Jul 8, 2026 · Enacted · Act 215

Rep. Tyson K. Miyake · Sponsored / Rep. Terez Amato · Sponsored / Rep. Luke A. Evslin · Sponsored / Rep. Diamond Garcia · Sponsored / Rep. Greggor Ilagan · Sponsored / Rep. Kirstin Kahaloa · Sponsored / Rep. Sue L. Keohokapu-Lee Loy · Sponsored / Rep. Darius K. Kila · Sponsored / Rep. Lisa Kitagawa · Sponsored / Rep. Nicole E. Lowen · Sponsored / Rep. Lisa Marten · Sponsored / Rep. Lauren Matsumoto · Sponsored / Rep. Julie Reyes Oda · Sponsored / Rep. Adrian K. Tam · Sponsored

Reviewed final Hawaii housing tax law · selected provisions

Affordable rental-housing incentives concern shelter costs, a component of household prices. The law does not set CPI, establish lower rents or apply a price ceiling to all Hawaii homes. HHFDC may approve and certify eligible projects under a county assistance program where at least 50% of available units serve households at or below 100% of HUD median family income. Unless HHFDC exempts a project, regulatory agreements require at least five years for moderate rehabilitation, ten years for substantial rehabilitation, and thirty years from the certificate of occupancy for new construction; new county-assisted construction instead has a fifteen-year minimum from that certificate. These conditions are not a universal entitlement to exemption. HHFDC must amend its administrative rules under chapter 91 to conform to the law. Signing does not establish that the rules, applications or certifications have been completed. Approval was July 8, 2026; sections 2 and 3 begin January 1, 2027. The act preserves its amendments through specified intervening statutory restorations, then repeals the act on July 1, 2031 and restores sections 46-15.1 and 201H-36 to their pre-act form. The separately stated June 30, 2030 certification window for the section 104-2(i)(2) project pathway is not extended to 2031 by this approval. For the separate section 104-2(i)(2) pathway, Act 215 removes the restriction that allowable general-excise and use-tax costs apply only to contracting. It retains a $30 million annual aggregate limit for that pathway’s certified projects, a July 1, 2018–June 30, 2030 approval/certification window, all units at or below 140% of HUD median family income with at least 20% at or below 80%, and protection against refusal solely because an applicant holds a Section 8 voucher. The separate ordinary rental pathway retains at least 50% of units at or below 80%, of which at least 20% of available units are at or below 60%. These are distinct pathways, not the income conditions or a newly imposed cap for every county-assisted project. Later amendments, the referenced restoration statutes, HHFDC rules, actual certifications and fiscal or housing outcomes remain separate review tasks. This approval authorizes conditional exemptions; it does not allocate $30 million in new spending, create a statewide rent cap or prove additional homes.

Approved July 8, 2026. July 9 is the bill-history posting date. Provision-specific start dates, conditions and actual implementation are separate.

Why this record is included

Affordable rental-housing incentives concern shelter costs, a component of household prices. The law does not set CPI, establish lower rents or apply a price ceiling to all Hawaii homes. HHFDC may approve and certify eligible projects under a county assistance program where at least 50% of available units serve households at or below 100% of HUD median family income. Unless HHFDC exempts a project, regulatory agreements require at least five years for moderate rehabilitation, ten years for substantial rehabilitation, and thirty years from the certificate of occupancy for new construction; new county-assisted construction instead has a fifteen-year minimum from that certificate. These conditions are not a universal entitlement to exemption. HHFDC must amend its administrative rules under chapter 91 to conform to the law. Signing does not establish that the rules, applications or certifications have been completed. Approval was July 8, 2026; sections 2 and 3 begin January 1, 2027. The act preserves its amendments through specified intervening statutory restorations, then repeals the act on July 1, 2031 and restores sections 46-15.1 and 201H-36 to their pre-act form. The separately stated June 30, 2030 certification window for the section 104-2(i)(2) project pathway is not extended to 2031 by this approval. For the separate section 104-2(i)(2) pathway, Act 215 removes the restriction that allowable general-excise and use-tax costs apply only to contracting. It retains a $30 million annual aggregate limit for that pathway’s certified projects, a July 1, 2018–June 30, 2030 approval/certification window, all units at or below 140% of HUD median family income with at least 20% at or below 80%, and protection against refusal solely because an applicant holds a Section 8 voucher. The separate ordinary rental pathway retains at least 50% of units at or below 80%, of which at least 20% of available units are at or below 60%. These are distinct pathways, not the income conditions or a newly imposed cap for every county-assisted project. Later amendments, the referenced restoration statutes, HHFDC rules, actual certifications and fiscal or housing outcomes remain separate review tasks. This approval authorizes conditional exemptions; it does not allocate $30 million in new spending, create a statewide rent cap or prove additional homes.

Retained Hawaii evidence context: income-taxes · reviewed Hawaii policy context · deficit-debt-interest · reviewed Hawaii policy context · housing-borrowing · reviewed Hawaii policy context · cpi · reviewed Hawaii policy context · real-gdp · reviewed Hawaii policy context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

to provide affordable rental housing
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Greggor Ilagan

Hawaii House of Representatives, District 4 · D–HI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Greggor Ilagan
Hawaii Legislature · HB 2385 · Act 215

Hawaii changes tax-exemption certification for county-assisted housing

Jul 8, 2026 · Enacted · Act 215

Rep. Tyson K. Miyake · Sponsored / Rep. Terez Amato · Sponsored / Rep. Luke A. Evslin · Sponsored / Rep. Diamond Garcia · Sponsored / Rep. Greggor Ilagan · Sponsored / Rep. Kirstin Kahaloa · Sponsored / Rep. Sue L. Keohokapu-Lee Loy · Sponsored / Rep. Darius K. Kila · Sponsored / Rep. Lisa Kitagawa · Sponsored / Rep. Nicole E. Lowen · Sponsored / Rep. Lisa Marten · Sponsored / Rep. Lauren Matsumoto · Sponsored / Rep. Julie Reyes Oda · Sponsored / Rep. Adrian K. Tam · Sponsored

Reviewed final Hawaii housing tax law · selected provisions

Affordable rental-housing incentives concern shelter costs, a component of household prices. The law does not set CPI, establish lower rents or apply a price ceiling to all Hawaii homes. HHFDC may approve and certify eligible projects under a county assistance program where at least 50% of available units serve households at or below 100% of HUD median family income. Unless HHFDC exempts a project, regulatory agreements require at least five years for moderate rehabilitation, ten years for substantial rehabilitation, and thirty years from the certificate of occupancy for new construction; new county-assisted construction instead has a fifteen-year minimum from that certificate. These conditions are not a universal entitlement to exemption. HHFDC must amend its administrative rules under chapter 91 to conform to the law. Signing does not establish that the rules, applications or certifications have been completed. Approval was July 8, 2026; sections 2 and 3 begin January 1, 2027. The act preserves its amendments through specified intervening statutory restorations, then repeals the act on July 1, 2031 and restores sections 46-15.1 and 201H-36 to their pre-act form. The separately stated June 30, 2030 certification window for the section 104-2(i)(2) project pathway is not extended to 2031 by this approval. For the separate section 104-2(i)(2) pathway, Act 215 removes the restriction that allowable general-excise and use-tax costs apply only to contracting. It retains a $30 million annual aggregate limit for that pathway’s certified projects, a July 1, 2018–June 30, 2030 approval/certification window, all units at or below 140% of HUD median family income with at least 20% at or below 80%, and protection against refusal solely because an applicant holds a Section 8 voucher. The separate ordinary rental pathway retains at least 50% of units at or below 80%, of which at least 20% of available units are at or below 60%. These are distinct pathways, not the income conditions or a newly imposed cap for every county-assisted project. Later amendments, the referenced restoration statutes, HHFDC rules, actual certifications and fiscal or housing outcomes remain separate review tasks. This approval authorizes conditional exemptions; it does not allocate $30 million in new spending, create a statewide rent cap or prove additional homes.

Approved July 8, 2026. July 9 is the bill-history posting date. Provision-specific start dates, conditions and actual implementation are separate.

Why this record is included

Affordable rental-housing incentives concern shelter costs, a component of household prices. The law does not set CPI, establish lower rents or apply a price ceiling to all Hawaii homes. HHFDC may approve and certify eligible projects under a county assistance program where at least 50% of available units serve households at or below 100% of HUD median family income. Unless HHFDC exempts a project, regulatory agreements require at least five years for moderate rehabilitation, ten years for substantial rehabilitation, and thirty years from the certificate of occupancy for new construction; new county-assisted construction instead has a fifteen-year minimum from that certificate. These conditions are not a universal entitlement to exemption. HHFDC must amend its administrative rules under chapter 91 to conform to the law. Signing does not establish that the rules, applications or certifications have been completed. Approval was July 8, 2026; sections 2 and 3 begin January 1, 2027. The act preserves its amendments through specified intervening statutory restorations, then repeals the act on July 1, 2031 and restores sections 46-15.1 and 201H-36 to their pre-act form. The separately stated June 30, 2030 certification window for the section 104-2(i)(2) project pathway is not extended to 2031 by this approval. For the separate section 104-2(i)(2) pathway, Act 215 removes the restriction that allowable general-excise and use-tax costs apply only to contracting. It retains a $30 million annual aggregate limit for that pathway’s certified projects, a July 1, 2018–June 30, 2030 approval/certification window, all units at or below 140% of HUD median family income with at least 20% at or below 80%, and protection against refusal solely because an applicant holds a Section 8 voucher. The separate ordinary rental pathway retains at least 50% of units at or below 80%, of which at least 20% of available units are at or below 60%. These are distinct pathways, not the income conditions or a newly imposed cap for every county-assisted project. Later amendments, the referenced restoration statutes, HHFDC rules, actual certifications and fiscal or housing outcomes remain separate review tasks. This approval authorizes conditional exemptions; it does not allocate $30 million in new spending, create a statewide rent cap or prove additional homes.

Retained Hawaii evidence context: income-taxes · reviewed Hawaii policy context · deficit-debt-interest · reviewed Hawaii policy context · housing-borrowing · reviewed Hawaii policy context · cpi · reviewed Hawaii policy context · real-gdp · reviewed Hawaii policy context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

to provide affordable rental housing
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Jill N. Tokuda

U.S. House of Representatives, Hawaii District 2 · D–HI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Jill N. Tokuda
U.S. Congress · Hawaii delegation · HR 4968

Protecting and Preserving Social Security Act

Aug 12, 2025 · In Congress

Rep. Jill N. Tokuda · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

H.R. 4968 proposes using an elderly-consumer price index for Social Security cost-of-living adjustments. The index tracks typical consumption expenditures of people age 62 and older and would be published for months ending on or after July 31 of the year after enactment. Its use for Social Security adjustments would begin with computation quarters ending on or after September 30 of the second year after enactment. Resulting title II increases would be excluded as income or resources in subsequent months when determining SSI or Medicaid eligibility and benefit amounts for recipients and their spouses or families. The bill remains in Congress. This connection concerns OASDI benefit adjustments, not an enacted increase or a change in Hawaii’s beneficiary count.

Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.

Why this record is included

The fact counts OASDI beneficiaries receiving payments. Cost-of-living adjustment proposals concern their benefit amounts, without establishing a change in eligibility or beneficiary counts; SSI and Medicare are separate programs. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.

Retained Hawaii evidence context: Social Security beneficiaries. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

101.Consumer Price Index for Elderly Consumers (a)In GeneralThe Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor shall prepare and publish an index for each calendar month to be known as the Consumer Price Index for Elderly Consumers that indicates changes over time in expenditures for consumption which are typical for individuals in the United States who are 62 years of age or older. (b)Effective DateSubsection (a) shall apply with respect to calendar months ending on or after July 31 of the calendar year following the calendar year in which this Act is enacted. (c)Authorization of AppropriationsThere are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this section. 102.Computation of cost-of-living increases (a)In generalSection 215(i)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 415(i)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: (H)the term Consumer Price Index means the Consumer Price Index for Elderly Consumers (CPI–E, as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor).. (b)Application to pre-1979 law (1)In generalSection 215(i)(1) of the Social Security Act as in effect in December 1978, and as applied in certain cases under the provisions of such Act as in effect after December 1978, is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: (D)the term Consumer Price Index means the Consumer Price Index for Elderly Consumers (CPI–E, as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor).. (2)Conforming amendmentSection 215(i)(4) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 415(i)(4)) is amended by inserting and by section 102 of the Protecting and Preserving Social Security Act after 1986. (c)No effect on adjustments under other lawsSection 215(i) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 415(i)) is amended by adding at the end the following: (6)Any provision of law (other than in this title or title XVI) which provides for adjustment of an amount based on a change in benefit amounts resulting from a determination made under this subsection shall be applied and administered without regard to the amendments made by section 102 of the Protecting and Preserving Social Security Act.. (d)No effect on eligibility for SSI and MedicaidAny increase to an individual’s monthly benefit amount under title II of the Social Security Act as a result of the amendments made by this section shall not be regarded as income or resources for any subsequent month, for purposes of determining the eligibility of the recipient (or the recipient's spouse or family) for benefits or assistance, or the amount or extent of benefits or assistance, under the Supplemental Security Income program or the Medicaid program. (e)Effective dateThe amendments made by this section shall apply to determinations made with respect to cost-of-living computation quarters (as defined in section 215(i)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 415(i)(1)(B))) ending on or after September 30 of the second calendar year following the calendar year in which this Act is enacted.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Hawaii officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Hawaii statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 6, 2026.