Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Revenue topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Budget committee hears sales-tax shortfalls and stakes from major industrial projects in St. Charles Parish
Summary
Paula Johnson, the parish sales-tax collector, told the Budget Review Committee that a project expected to yield $8 million in sales tax has remitted only $1.4 million; CFO Mr. White outlined a pipeline of large projects (including St. Charles Clean Fuels, Shell and Valero) that could deliver short-term construction sales tax and larger long-term property-tax gains, but timing and permitting remain uncertain.
Miss Paula Johnson, the sales-tax collector for St. Charles Parish, told the Budget Review Committee that while some large industrial projects show high estimated tax liability on filings, the parish is not always realizing those amounts in cash collections. "Based on what they filed in their filings, we should have gotten $8 million in taxes and when we looked at their account that we only got $1.4," she said, describing a project that is about 65% complete.
That shortfall led the committee to probe how taxable purchases can be taxed outside the parish. Johnson said the situs of sale can shift liability — for example, expensive equipment shipped through the Port of New Orleans can be taxable in Orleans Parish if title and possession transfer there, or fabrication done in another parish can move taxable sales off St. Charles.
Chief Financial Officer Mr. White told the committee the district is tracking both one-time construction sales-tax receipts and longer-term property-tax gains when exemptions expire. "The thing that I'm most interested in really is the start dates for these projects because that'll be very important to us," he said, adding that long-term property tax returns will flow after exemption periods end.
Mr. White reviewed several of the largest projects the district is monitoring. He said the St. Charles Clean Fuels entries in state application materials total about $8.8 billion across two ITAP applications and a quality-jobs submission, and that IMTT-related infrastructure work could also be included in that total. Mr. Greson confirmed the project has received an air permit but noted that final investment decisions and other permits remain outstanding.
The committee also discussed planned power-plant work. Waterford 5 and 6 were described as the most important near-term projects for the school system’s revenue outlook: Waterford 5 is projected to be online in 2029 and Waterford 6 in 2030, with a commonly cited combined cost of roughly $3 billion for the two units. Mr. White estimated that, based on construction-period taxable purchases representing about 30% of project cost, the school system’s share of construction-period sales tax across the Waterford projects could be about $27 million.
Other projects discussed included a Shell Chemical expansion — described as just under $1 billion with a July 1, 2025 start and a December 31, 2027 end date in the materials presented — and Valero Services (about $1.5 billion) with various plant expansions. Johnson cautioned that privately funded projects do not always disclose the same level of detail as public entities, complicating transparency and timing of taxable purchases. She also flagged open litigation and audit work on some taxpayers.
Committee members asked about ITP (investment-tax/property-tax) expirations and their effect on future property-tax rolls. Mr. White estimated roughly $250 million of project cost will come off ITPs next year, depreciating to about $150 million in taxable value; he said the net effect on property-tax rolls depends on many other factors and would not necessarily be dramatic.
The committee directed staff to monitor permitting, start dates and audit opportunities and to provide periodic updates. The group set follow-up reporting and agreed to keep industrial-project monitoring on the agenda at future meetings.
