Louisiana Senate Bill SB65

Louisiana 2018 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/21/18
• Refer: 2/21/18
• Refer: 3/12/18
• Report Pass: 3/13/18
• Refer: 3/14/18

Caption

Provides for incentive rebates under the Quality Jobs Program. (gov sig) (EG -$3,128,880 GF RV See Note)

Impact

The implications of SB65 are significant as it seeks to streamline the application process for businesses seeking quality job incentives. By extending the deadlines for certain projects, the bill could potentially attract more businesses to Louisiana, fostering economic development and job creation. The changes may provide a clearer and more efficient path for businesses to secure financial incentives, which could have a positive influence on the state's economy.

Summary

Senate Bill 65, introduced by Senator Johns, focuses on enhancing the existing Louisiana Quality Jobs Program by revising the application period for incentive rebates. The bill aims to maintain the requirement that applications for these rebates be filed no later than twenty-four months after an advance notification is submitted. However, it introduces a provision that allows an exception for advance notifications filed within certain specified dates from 2015, enabling applicants more flexibility in filing their requests for incentives. This reflects a commitment to support economic growth by making the incentive application process more accessible.

Sentiment

The general sentiment towards SB65 appears to be supportive, particularly from those advocating for business growth and economic investment in Louisiana. Lawmakers who support this bill argue that it is necessary to keep the state competitive and to encourage businesses to expand or relocate to Louisiana. However, there may be concerns about the fiscal impact of providing these incentives, especially if they lead to significant budgetary expenditures that could affect public services.

Contention

One notable point of contention related to SB65 involves the balance between providing economic incentives and the potential long-term impacts on the state budget. Critics might argue that while the intent of the bill is to create jobs, there needs to be careful scrutiny regarding how these incentives are funded and their overall benefit to the state's fiscal health. These discussions emphasize the broader debate on fiscal responsibility and the trade-offs involved in incentivizing economic development.