Vendor tells committee aircraft-tracking software could boost collections; lawmakers ask procurement, scope questions
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
A vendor for Sidus Hawk told the committee its platform can identify aircraft based in Utah that are registered elsewhere and could increase sales/use tax compliance; the presenter requested $400,000 per year for two years and projected a multi‑million-dollar recovery but members sought clarification on property-tax overlap and contracting models.
Sen. Daniel Brammer introduced a vendor presentation from Sam Barnes of Sidus Hawk proposing a subscription-based monitoring platform to help the state identify aircraft actually based in Utah but registered out of state.
Barnes said many aircraft owners register their aircraft in other states or use FAA privacy blocks that hide a plane from public flight-tracking services. “Our platform identifies each aircraft that's subject to a state sales and use tax, and we provide supporting owner information, flight information, purchase documents,” Barnes said, explaining the software’s audit and discovery features.
Barnes told the committee Utah shows roughly 3,900 noncommercial aircraft registered in the state and about 500 aircraft based in Utah but registered elsewhere; he said 15–18% turn over annually and estimated 600–700 transactions per year that could require tracking. He asked for $400,000 per year for two years and described a projected 5–10x return on investment in additional tax revenue and administrative savings, including work to research historical underpayments back to the statute of limitations.
Lawmakers asked about procurement, possible commission or bounty contracting models, and whether the technology would also help collect property taxes administered at the county level. Barnes said the technology offers a defensible audit trail that state tax agencies previously lacked; he said customers sometimes reassign staff after automation saves time and that the Tax Commission had been consulted about the approach.
Committee members did not vote on the request. No formal contract or procurement action was approved in the hearing; staff will include the RFA among items for later prioritization and possible procurement review.