Establishes the La. Debt Recovery Program at the Dept. of Revenue for the collection of delinquent debts owed to certain governmental entities (RE INCREASE SG EX See Note)
The implementation of HB 1019 is expected to have significant implications on the state’s laws regulating debt collection. By defining 'debt' broadly to include any legally collectible amounts, the bill aims to unify collection practices across different agencies. This initiative may lead to improved collection rates for the state, as it provides a more systematic approach to managing delinquent accounts, potentially increasing state revenues and reducing the burden on state budgets related to unpaid debts.
House Bill 1019 establishes the Louisiana Debt Recovery Program, aimed at enhancing the state's capacity to collect delinquent debts owed to various governmental entities. This proposed program would position the Department of Revenue as the primary entity responsible for the collection of these debts, streamlining and centralizing the process across state agencies. Any debts that remain unpaid for over 60 days would be automatically referred to this program for collection, making the process more efficient and systematic.
The sentiment surrounding HB 1019 appears to be generally positive among those seeking improved efficiency in government operations. Proponents argue that the centralized collection agency will facilitate better recovery of state funds and optimize resource allocation within the Department of Revenue. However, there could also be concerns regarding the increased power afforded to the Department of Revenue, especially regarding the potential burden placed on citizens through fees and collection practices.
Notable points of contention may arise from disagreement over the methods of debt collection authorized under this bill, particularly the imposition of a collection fee not exceeding 25%. Some may argue that this fee adds a financial burden on debtors already struggling with payments. Additionally, while the proposal allows political subdivisions to participate in the program, this could lead to disparities in how debts are managed at different government levels, potentially resulting in confusion or inequity in collection practices.