House approves tax on adult‑oriented businesses to fund offender treatment; constitutional concerns linger

The Utah House on Feb. 12 passed House Bill 2‑39, a measure that would impose a targeted tax on adult‑oriented businesses and explicit services to generate revenue for treatment of convicted sexual offenders.

Sponsor Duane Bordeaux told colleagues the legislation is intended to address gaps in treatment for offenders under the Department of Corrections, saying the department can currently treat only about 15 percent of incarcerated offenders and that additional funding would "better protect the community." Bordeaux argued the fee is a precedent of so‑called sin taxes and said intent language drafted with the attorney general would be spread in the House Journal if the bill advances.

Supporters emphasized the bill's earmarks: revenues would fund counseling for those convicted of sexual offenses, restitution for victims and monitoring and prosecution work through partnerships such as the attorney general’s Internet Crimes Against Children task force and Department of Corrections programs.

Opponents repeatedly raised constitutional doubts. Representative Frank pointed to a legislative review note warning of possible First Amendment challenges and asked the sponsor to explain how courts would evaluate such a tax. Representative Yer said she believed the bill “crosses the limits” of First Amendment protections and predicted it would be “come back to haunt us” in litigation. Representative Daniels echoed the constitutional concern, warning that “the power to tax is the power to destroy.” Representative Hughes said he found the revenue source “dirty money” and said he would not support creating a dependence on that revenue.

Bordeaux responded that the bill was intended to be narrowly tailored to a compelling state interest — treatment and public safety — and that the drafting attorney and the attorney general believed the law would survive a challenge. He also publicly declared a potential conflict of interest, saying he works in the industry covered by the bill and asking that the conflict be noted on the House floor record.

The House closed voting on the bill and recorded 51 yes votes and 16 no votes; the bill passed and will be forwarded to the Senate for further consideration.

The next step is Senate consideration; the sponsor asked that the bill’s explanatory intent language be spread upon the pages of the House Journal and that language was ordered printed.