SCS SB 915, 710 & 907 -- TRANSPORTATION FUNDING

SPONSOR:  Westfall (Koller)

COMMITTEE ACTION:  Voted "do pass" by the Committee on
Transportation by a vote of 13 to 8.

This substitute raises various fees to fund transportation
projects.

MOTOR FUEL TAX

The expiration date for the 1992 motor fuel tax is repealed, and
the tax is increased by an additional six cents.

SALES TAX

The general sales tax rate is increased by 3/8 percent.  Twenty
percent of the revenue derived from the sales tax increase will
be credited to the State Transportation Fund for multimodal
purposes.  Four percent of the increased sales tax will be
deposited in the Missouri Qualified Fuel Ethanol Producer
Incentive Fund and the Missouri Qualified Biodiesel Producer
Incentive Fund.  Beginning July 1, 2005, 15% of the increased
sales tax will be deposited in the State Road Fund.  This amount
increases to 30%, 45%, 60% and 76% in succeeding fiscal years.

AVIATION FUEL TAX

The substitute removes the cap on the amount of aviation jet tax
revenues which may be deposited in the Aviation Trust Fund.
Current law only permits $5 million of the aviation jet fuel tax
revenues to be placed in the fund.  The substitute changes the
expiration date on the aviation jet fuel tax section to December
31, 2008.  The substitute also modifies the language regarding
the deposit of unclaimed aviation fuel refunds.  Currently, a
person who fails to apply for a refund is regarded as making a
gift of his or her refund to the Aviation Trust Fund.

AGENCY DIVERSION

Revenues that currently go to other agencies from the State
Highways and Transportation Department Fund are eliminated.  The
State Highway Patrol and the Division of Motor Carrier and
Railroad Safety will continue to receive moneys from this fund.
This section will take effect the first fiscal year following
voter approval of the substitute.

MOTOR VEHICLE SALES TAX

Under current law, half of the sales tax on motor vehicles goes
to fund transportation projects and the other half is deposited
in the General Revenue Fund.  The substitute directs the portion
going to General Revenue Fund to the State Road Fund.

REFERENDUM

The substitute must be submitted to a vote of the people on the
first Tuesday of August 2002.  If approved, the substitute will
become effective on January 1, 2003.  Additional revenues are not
subject to Hancock restrictions.  The substitute also requires
another election in 2012 to determine whether voters want the new
taxes to continue.  If not, the rates will return to the level
existing on January 1, 2002.

FISCAL NOTE:  Estimated Net Effect to General Revenue Fund of an
Income of $11,080,551 in FY 2003, a Cost of $19,938,603 in FY
2004, and a Cost of $19,210,283 in FY 2005.  Estimated Net Income
to State Road Fund of $137,612,242 in FY 2003, $384,499,983 in FY
2004, and $391,406,103 in FY 2005.  Estimated Net Income to State
Transportation Fund of $17,951,863 in FY 2003, $44,806,330 in FY
2004, and $46,597,110 in FY 2005.  Estimated Net Income to
Missouri Qualified Fuel Ethanol Producer Incentive Fund of
$1,789,275 in FY 2003, $4,466,020 in FY 2003, and $4,644,660 in
FY 2005.  Estimated Net Income to Missouri Qualified Biodiesel
Producer Incentive Fund of $1,789,275 in FY 2003, $4,466,020 in
FY 2004, and $4,644,660 in FY 2005.  Estimated Net Income to
Aviation Trust Fund of $0 in FY 2003, $2,550,000 in FY 2004, and
$5,100,000 in FY 2005.

PROPONENTS:  Supporters say that the substitute is needed to
upgrade Missouri's transportation systems.

Testifying for the bill were Representative Koller; Missouri
Public Transit Association; Bi-State Development Agency; Troopers
Association; Associated General Contractors; State Highway
Patrol; Missouri Transportation Development Council; St. Louis
Regional Chamber and Growth Association; Forward Metro St. Louis;
Department of Transportation; Greater Kansas City Chamber of
Commerce; Consulting Engineers Council/ Missouri; Society of
Professional Engineers; Missouri Municipal League; St. Louis
County Municipal League; and Kansas City Area Transportation
Authority.

OPPONENTS:  Those who oppose the substitute say that they feel a
six cent gas tax increase is too large.  Petroleum and
convenience store operators feel they will be at a marketing
disadvantage to neighboring states with a lower tax.

Testifying against the bill were Missouri Petroleum Marketers and
Convenience Store Association; and Missourians for Tax Justice.

Robert Triplett, Legislative Analyst

Missouri House of Representatives
Last Updated October 11, 2002 at 9:04 am