Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Remittances topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House panel advances 2% remittance tax on some anonymous international transfers amid opposition
Summary
The House Revenue and Taxation Committee advanced HB141 (first substitute), which would impose a 2% levy on overseas remittances sent without a government ID; supporters said it targets illicit transfers, while financial-industry witnesses warned it would raise costs, duplicate federal rules and push transactions into informal channels. The committee forwarded the bill 8–2.
The House Revenue and Taxation Committee on Thursday forwarded House Bill 141 (first substitute), a measure that would impose a 2% tax on certain international money transfers from Utah when senders do not present an accepted government-issued ID.
The bill’s sponsor described the proposal as a tool to target illicit flows, including funds linked to cartel activity and fentanyl trafficking, saying the tax would not apply when senders present an authorized ID at the time of transfer. “If you show that ID upfront, you never pay the tax,” the sponsor told the committee.
Opponents — including trade groups representing fintech and money-transmission companies — urged the committee to reject the measure. Judith Rosenberg of the American Fintech Council told members the bill would raise costs and “push these transactions underground,” noting that layering state and federal levies could reduce the traceable remittance market. Kathy Tomashevsky of the Money Service Business Association said licensed transmitters already comply with KYC/AML rules and that adding a state tax and reporting regime would create confusion and a compliance burden.
Community-focused witnesses also warned of harms to low-income households. Mo Hickey of Voices Feed Our Children said many families rely on remittances for essential expenses and that even a small surcharge would disproportionately affect working families.
Committee members debated enforcement and exemptions. The sponsor and proponents emphasized that banks and credit unions would be exempt because they already verify identity; the bill lists forms of government IDs that would qualify for the exemption.
After adopting a first substitute in committee, members voted to forward the substituted bill to the House with a favorable recommendation; the Chair announced the roll-call result as 8 in favor and 2 opposed (Representatives Provo and Nguyen).
Next steps: HB141 will advance to the full House for further consideration and potential floor debate.
