Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate rejects amendment to require strict standards in sales-tax-exemption review
Summary
Senator Peterson proposed requiring at least one beneficiary business to meet three of five economic standards before an exemption could remain; after prolonged floor debate, the Senate called for division and the President Pro Tem ruled the amendment failed and HB242 proceeded to third reading.
Senator Peterson offered an amendment to House Bill 242 on Feb. 7 that would require, when the Tax Review Commission evaluates a sales-and-use tax exemption, that at least one business receiving the exemption meet three of five enumerated standards (substantial capital investment, bringing new dollars to the state, paying above-average wages, receiving the same incentives as a relocating business, or showing a clear positive return on investment). Peterson described the amendment as a modest standard to guide the commission’s recommendations.
Senator Stevenson rose in opposition, saying the change would convert a noncontroversial bill into a mandate that could strip discretion from the Tax Review Commission and force recommendations irrespective of local economic circumstances. Other senators debated whether the commission’s prerogative would be undermined and whether the criteria could produce inappropriate automatic repeal recommendations.
After a voice vote produced unclear results, a division was demanded. The President Pro Tem ruled the amendment failed following division. Senators returned to the bill itself, called the question, and moved HB242 to third reading.
Floor debate focused on the balance between setting objective standards for exemptions and preserving the commission’s ability to weigh local economic factors over time. Senator Peterson said the amendment merely provided guiding criteria and that the Legislature would retain final authority.
