Requires local auditees and vendors who collect taxes on behalf of others to have certain annual audits and to submit certain sworn statements regarding tax collections to the legislative auditor (EN NO IMPACT LF EX See Note)
Impact
The enactment of HB 680 will bolster transparency and improve the accuracy of tax collection processes by instituting a structured audit requirement. This change is expected to positively affect state laws surrounding financial accountability within local government entities. By ensuring annual scrutiny of tax collections, the bill aims to mitigate issues of delinquency and mismanagement, thereby potentially increasing the revenue collected for public services.
Summary
House Bill 680 aims to enhance the accountability of tax collectors within local governments by mandating annual audits and the submission of sworn statements regarding tax collections to the legislative auditor. The bill specifically outlines that sheriffs, who serve as tax collectors, must provide detailed financial reports, including itemizations of taxes collected, uncollected taxes, and reasons for any failures to collect. Additionally, local vendors responsible for collecting and distributing ad valorem taxes on behalf of taxing authorities are required to undergo similar annual audits and report their findings to the appropriate state officials.
Sentiment
General sentiment regarding HB 680 appears to lean towards support for increased oversight in tax collection, reflecting a broader desire within governmental circles for improved fiscal responsibility. Stakeholders, including government auditing organizations, are likely to view this legislation positively as it reinforces the importance of audits in identifying and preventing revenue losses. However, there may still be concerns about the administrative burden placed on local sheriffs and vendors due to the additional reporting requirements imposed by the bill.
Contention
Some points of contention surrounding the bill include concerns regarding the implementation of these new auditing requirements, particularly in terms of resource allocation and potential pushback from local officials who may see this as an unnecessary burden. Critics argue that while enhanced oversight is essential, the costs associated with annual audits might strain smaller tax jurisdictions. Additionally, some local governments may fear a reduction in autonomy concerning their financial matters as state oversight increases.
Relative to the legislative auditor, requires the auditor to provide for certain notifications of noncompliant auditees and requires auditees to designate an individual to file reports with the auditor and notify the auditor
Provides for the duties of the sheriffs and other tax collectors and the legislative auditor relative to amount of tax collections to be remitted to certain public retirement systems (EN NO IMPACT LF EX See Note)
Authorizes the legislative auditor to obtain certain information about employees with access to federal tax records of auditees. (gov sig) (EN NO IMPACT GF EX See Note)
Reduces frequency of enhanced audits required of certain local auditees with at least three consecutive years of enhanced audits with no findings. (8/1/18) (EN NO IMPACT LF See Note)
Provides that certain audits completed by the office of the legislative auditor shall be reported to the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget on an annual basis. (7/1/14) (EN NO IMPACT See Note)