Requires prefiling by January 15 of any legislative instrument which produces a net decrease in taxes, fees, charges or other revenues received by the state of $10 million or more annually in any one of the 5 fiscal years; a report by the proponents on the instrument's economic effects; and a review of such report by the legislative fiscal office.
The proposed changes will directly impact the legislative process related to revenue-related bills. By requiring proponents of such legislation to prepare a comprehensive report on the economic effects of their proposals, SR110 seeks to create greater transparency and accountability in the law-making process. This includes assessments of revenue loss, potential implications for employment and household earnings, and comparisons to similar measures taken in other jurisdictions. Such directives reflect a commitment to careful legislative scrutiny, particularly for bills that could have significant financial ramifications for state funds.
Senate Resolution No. 110, introduced by Senator Heitmeier, proposes amendments to existing Senate rules concerning the prefiling of legislative instruments that aim to produce a net decrease in state revenues. Specifically, the resolution mandates that any legislative proposal anticipated to result in a revenue loss of $10 million or more annually over a five-year period must be prefiled by January 15 of the relevant fiscal year. This aims to ensure that lawmakers evaluate the potential economic impacts of such bills prior to their introduction and discussion in committee settings.
The response to SR110 expresses a generally supportive sentiment among those favoring more rigorous analysis of proposed tax decreases. Advocates argue that the heightened scrutiny will foster a more informed decision-making process, ensuring that the state can maintain fiscal responsibility while considering beneficial tax reductions. However, there may also be concerns about the increased bureaucratic complexity such a requirement could impose on legislators, which some may interpret as a potential deterrent to necessary tax reform initiatives.
Notably, potential contention arises from the balance between fostering tax relief and ensuring sound fiscal management. Critics could argue that the new procedural requirement might stifle necessary legislative action by imposing additional burdens on authors of revenue-lowering bills. There is a possibility that this could lead to further politicization of tax issues, as thorough evaluations may amplify existing partisan divides regarding tax policy. Ultimately, the successful implementation of SR110 will depend on how effectively it navigates these dynamics and whether it ultimately strengthens legislative processes or complicates them unnecessarily.