Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Business Response topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Business groups urge preserving HPIP, PEAK and aviation credit; propose sunsetting underused incentives and new small‑business credit
Summary
Representatives from the Kansas Chamber, Wichita Regional Chamber, local economic development practitioners and tax advisers told the Senate Commerce Committee they support keeping HPIP and PEAK while sunsetting underused credits, extending Angel and Aviation credits and creating a small‑business job/investment credit targeted at rural and distressed urban areas.
Business and economic development representatives told the Senate Commerce Committee they support targeted modernization of the incentive portfolio but opposed wholesale elimination of Kansas’s flagship programs.
What they said
- The Kansas Chamber and Wichita Regional Chamber said the High‑Performance Incentive Program (HPIP) and PEAK remain “foundational” tools for attracting manufacturing and capital‑intensive projects. They stressed that comparable states — including Tennessee, Indiana and Oklahoma — use similar packages.
- Chamber and business‑group proposals included a targeted “clean up” of underutilized tax credits (the chamber provided a list of about 20–21 credits it recommended for repeal or consolidation), while preserving HPIP and PEAK. They also urged renewal of the Angel Investor tax credit (scheduled to sunset) and the Aviation/Aerospace tax credit, both cited as effective in supporting start‑ups and aviation recruitment.
- A policy proposal developed in a private working group would resurrect a business‑and‑job development tax credit aimed at small firms (25 or fewer employees) and targeted at rural and economically distressed urban areas (opportunity zones). The proposed credit would provide modest per‑job or per‑investment incentives to stimulate local entrepreneurship and redevelopment.
Technical fixes proposed for HPIP
- Chris Baltimore (CBIZ) and other tax advisers urged clarifying wage‑metric rules and allowing smaller firms reasonable alternative wage standards so rural projects are not excluded by a statewide wage threshold that has risen sharply. They also recommended clarifying statute or Revenue guidance that pass‑through entities should be able to transfer unused HPIP credits under similar terms as C corporations.
Why it matters: Business groups framed the debate as one of competitiveness: states actively use incentive packages to win large projects, and uneven or abrupt changes in Kansas tools would risk losing projects. At the same time, they said the state should prune obsolete credits and improve transparency and data so lawmakers can monitor outcomes.
Committee follow‑up: Members asked for the chamber’s spreadsheet of recommended eliminations and for comparators (how other states structure comparable incentives). The panel agreed to request Commerce and Revenue follow‑up on technical HPIP transfer rules and on data reliability for HPIP and other major credits.
