Committee rejects 5% secondary‑ticket assessment and ban on spec ticketing after members question consumer impact
Loading...
Summary
House Bill 21‑35 would have created a Live Music and Performance Venue Fund funded by a 5% assessment on secondary ticket resales and banned speculative ticketing. Members questioned whether the fee would be passed to consumers and who would oversee grants; the bill failed 11‑15 in committee.
Chairman Jeremy Terry (sponsor) presented House Bill 21‑35 as a way to create a dedicated revenue stream for the Live Music and Performance Venue Fund by assessing 5% on the sales price of tickets sold on the secondary resale market and by banning speculative ticketing practices. Terry said those measures together would help small venues by keeping more revenue available locally and reducing artificially inflated prices on secondary markets.
Several members pressed the sponsor on how the 5% assessment would be applied and whether resellers would simply pass the cost on to consumers. Representative Garrett and Representative Gary expressed concern that the fee resembles a tax that could increase final consumer prices. Chairman Terry explained the bill’s mechanics as an assessment deducted from resale proceeds rather than an added tax, and he argued that eliminating speculative ticketing would reduce price inflation — he cited studies suggesting spec ticketing can increase prices by 10–30%.
Members also asked who would oversee distribution of the fund; the sponsor said grants would be administered through the existing entertainment commission, but the committee recorded uncertainty about ultimate oversight, eligibility criteria and whether funds could be used for larger projects. After extensive questioning on incidence, oversight and market effects, the committee voted 11 yeas, 15 nays, and 2 present not voting; the motion failed and the measure did not advance.
Ending: The proposal elicited a policy debate about economic incidence and marketplace effects; without further specificity on administration and consumer protections, the committee did not move the bill forward.
