Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Tax Credits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs substitute for SB 67 to preserve $11 million cap on neighborhood-housing tax credits
Summary
The Special Committee on Tax Reform voted to recommend a do-pass on the House Committee substitute for Senate Bill 67, which clarifies administrative treatment of two existing tax-credit buckets that support neighborhood housing organizations and preserves a combined $11 million cap.
The Special Committee on Tax Reform voted to recommend a do-pass on the House Committee substitute for Senate Bill 67, which clarifies how two existing tax-credit buckets that support local neighborhood housing organizations are administered, the committee said.
The substitute keeps two separate tax-credit allocations — a $10,000,000 statewide bucket and a $1,000,000 bucket — and allows unused amounts from the $1,000,000 bucket to pour into the $10,000,000 bucket but preserves a combined maximum of $11,000,000. The committee adopted the substitute and later voted 9-0 to recommend the bill for passage.
Jorgen Schleiermeyer, speaking on behalf of the Missouri Workforce Housing Association, summarized the existing program: "There is a tax credit to help local neighborhood organizations assist with housing in their area. ... One bucket is $10,000,000 statewide and another bucket is $1,000,000." He told the committee the substitute addresses an administrative, capital-side treatment and the only change is the pour-over mechanism between the two buckets.
Representative Castile, identified in the discussion as the author of the change, confirmed the description of the substitute.
Chair Coleman moved adoption of the substitute and later moved that the House Committee substitute for Senate Bill 67 be voted do pass. The committee recorded a roll-call vote of nine ayes and zero nos on the do-pass motion.
The substitute’s language, as explained in committee, prevents the two buckets from being reallocated in a way that would increase administrative fees beyond the intended limits; committee members discussed the pour-over as a one-way mechanism so unused capital allocation could transfer but not vice versa.
Committee members who spoke during the item thanked Schleiermeyer for the clarification and expressed support. The committee did not request additional amendments during the executive-session consideration.
Votes at a glance: House Committee substitute for Senate Bill 67 — substitute adopted (voice vote); do-pass recommendation — 9 ayes, 0 nos.
