COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH
OVERSIGHT DIVISION
FISCAL NOTE
L.R. No.:4303H.05C Bill No.:HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724 Subject:Political Subdivisions; Cities, Towns, and Villages Type:Original Date:April 26, 2022Bill Summary:This proposal modifies provisions relating to political subdivisions.
FISCAL SUMMARY
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON GENERAL REVENUE FUNDFUND AFFECTEDFY 2023FY 2024FY 2025
General Revenue*
(Unknown, could
exceed $1,834,605)$0 to (Unknown)$0 to (Unknown)
Total Estimated Net
Effect on General
Revenue*
(Unknown, could
exceed $1,834,605)$0 to (Unknown)$0 to (Unknown)
* The fiscal impact to the state is the potential loss of the Department of Revenue’s 2%
collection fee. Oversight has ranged the impact from $0 (debt is already considered uncollectible
and DOR would not have received the 2% fee even without this proposal) to $1,834,605 (which
represents if DOR would have collected 100% of the $91 million of outstanding debt allowed to
be reduced by this proposal). Oversight assumes the actual loss to the state for these provisions
is on the very low end of this range.
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON OTHER STATE FUNDSFUND AFFECTEDFY 2023FY 2024FY 2025Total Estimated Net
Effect on Other State
Funds $0$0$0
Numbers within parentheses: () indicate costs or losses. L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 2 of
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDSFUND AFFECTEDFY 2023FY 2024FY 2025Total Estimated Net
Effect on All Federal
Funds $0$0$0
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE)FUND AFFECTEDFY 2023FY 2024FY 2025Total Estimated Net
Effect on FTE 000
☒ Estimated Net Effect (expenditures or reduced revenues) expected to exceed $250,000 in any
of the three fiscal years after implementation of the act or at full implementation of the act.
☐ Estimated Net Effect (savings or increased revenues) expected to exceed $250,000 in any of
the three fiscal years after implementation of the act or at full implementation of the act.
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON LOCAL FUNDSFUND AFFECTEDFY 2023FY 2024FY 2025
Local Government*
Unknown, less than
$970,759
Unknown to
(Unknown)
Unknown to
(Unknown)
* The net fiscal impact to the local political subdivision is the potential loss of the Department of
Revenue’s 2% collection fee. Oversight has ranged the impact from $0 (debt is already
considered uncollectible and DOR would not have received the 2% fee even without this
proposal) to $1,834,605 (which represents if DOR would have collected 100% of the $91 million
of outstanding debt allowed to be reduced by this proposal). Oversight assumes the actual
impact is on the very low end of this range. L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 3 of
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
FISCAL ANALYSIS
ASSUMPTION
Oversight was unable to receive some of the agency responses in a timely manner due to the
short fiscal note request time. Oversight has presented this fiscal note on the best current
information that we have or on prior year information regarding a similar bill. Upon the receipt
of agency and local responses, Oversight will review to determine if an updated fiscal note
should be prepared and seek the necessary approval to publish a new fiscal note.
§§50.815 & 50.820 – County Financial Statements
In response to similar legislation from 2020, HB 1814, officials at Henry County assumed a
savings of $1,800 annually in publication costs from this proposal.
Oversight inquired with Henry County regarding this proposal. The County currently submits a
14 page document to the newspaper which lists out every dollar by vendor. Since this proposal
requires a summary of data to be published in the newspaper, Henry County’s publishing costs
would be reduced as the number of pages would be reduced that would be submitted to the
newspaper.
In response to similar legislation from 2020, HB 1814, officials at Lincoln County assumed a
savings of $2,000 annually in publication costs from this proposal.
In response to similar legislation from 2020, HB 1814, officials at Livingston County assumed a
savings of $2,500 annually in publication costs from this proposal.
Oversight assumes using the counties above as an example, if the average savings of the three
counties publication costs is $2,100 and 96 counties (2
nd
, 3
rd
and 4
th
class counties) in Missouri
published their financials in the newspaper, the potential savings could be up to $201,600
($2,100 * 96) per year. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a potential savings in publication costs
for counties to post their financials through a newspaper of general circulation in their county
that could exceed $100,000 annually from this proposal.
In response to a previous version, officials from the Office of the State Auditor assumed the
proposal will have no fiscal impact on their organization. Oversight does not have any
information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for
that agency.
In response to a previous version, officials from Boone County and Greene County each
assumed the proposal will have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations. Oversight
does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in
the fiscal note for these agencies. L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 4 of
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
§§59.310, 92.720, 92.740, 92.750, 92.760, 92.765, 92.770, 92.775, 92.810, 92.815, 92.817,
92.825, 92.835, 92.840, 92.852, 92.855, & 442.130 – Certain Property Regulations
In response to similar legislation from this year, Perfected HCS for HB 2218, officials from the
Office of the State Courts Administrator and the Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District each
assumed the proposal will have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations. Oversight
does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in
the fiscal note for these agencies.
Officials from the City of St. Louis and the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department did not
respond to Oversight’s request for fiscal impact for this proposal.
SEQ CHAPTER \h 1§64.231 – County Planning Boards
Oversight assumes this provision will have no fiscal impact for this proposal.
§105.145 – Financial statements of political subdivisions
Officials from the Office of Administration - Budget and Planning (B&P) state §105.145 of
the proposal excludes the fine for failure to submit annual financial statements for political
subdivisions with gross revenues of less than $5,000, or for political subdivisions that have not
levied or collected sales or use taxes in the fiscal year. This may result in a revenue loss for both
the state and schools.
It also provides grace from fines if the failure to timely submit the annual financial statement is
the result of fraud or other illegal conduct and allows a refund by the Department of Revenue
(DOR) of any fines already paid under these circumstances. The one-time 90% downward
adjustment DOR is allowed to make on outstanding fine or penalty balances after January 1,
2023 results in the amount of collections being reduced for both the state and DOR collection
fees. A similar downward adjustment may be made by DOR if the outstanding fines are deemed
uncollectable. These downward adjustments will likewise result in a revenue loss for both the
state and schools.
Based on information from DOR, the department started imposing this fine in August 2017. B&P
defers to DOR for more specific estimates of fines and actual collection costs.
Officials from the Department of Revenue (DOR) state §105.145- Annual Financial Statement
(Effective August 28, 2022) provides that currently local political subdivisions are required to
file annual financial statements with the State Auditor’s Office. Failure to file those statements
results in the political subdivision being assessed a fine of $500 per day per statutes, which is
deposited into local school district funds. DOR notes that the Department started imposing this
fine in August 2017. DOR receives notice from the State Auditor’s Office if a political L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 5 of
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
subdivision does not file their annual financial statement. At that time, the DOR sends a notice to
the political subdivision and thirty days later the fee starts to accumulate.
DOR collects the fine by offsetting any sales or use tax distributions due to the political
subdivisions. In essence, the DOR only gets to collect the fee if the political subdivision has a
sales or use tax. Most of these political subdivisions do not have a sales or use tax for the
Department to collect, so the DOR assumes much of what is owed is uncollectable. This is not
state money but local political subdivision funds.
Currently, a transportation development district that has gross revenues of less than $5,000 in a
fiscal year is not subject to this fine. This proposal adds language that any political subdivision
with less than $5,000 in revenue or has not levied or collected sales or use taxes in the fiscal year
in which the report is due is not subject to the fine. This will change how the DOR determines
the fine.
This proposal also adds a provision that if failure to file the report is a result of fraud or other
illegal conduct by an employee of the political subdivision, they will not be subject to the fine.
The DOR notes that per statute, the Department is allowed to retain 2% of the amount collected
for administration. Since the program began, DOR has collected $66,621 (rounded) which has
been deposited into General Revenue. All DOR collection fees are deposited into General
Revenue and are not retained by the Department.
Current records of the Department show total fines assessed of $105,253,522 and that
$3,331,032 (rounded) has been collected. The DOR is showing the assessment of the fines by the
county in which the district that owes the fine is located. L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 6 of
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
County
Total Fine
Imposed
Total Fine
Collected
Adair$751,000.00$1,500.00Andrew$63,500.00$0.00Atchison$855,000.00$0.00Audrain$1,014,500.00$0.00Barry$1,863,500.00$16,202.57Barton $0.00$0.00Bates$944,000.00$30,500.00Benton$236,500.00$0.00Bollinger$1,682,500.00$0.00Boone$259,000.00$24,588.62Buchanan$1,100,000.00$53,342.38Butler$1,624,000.00$35,414.25Caldwell$100,000.00$15,312.17Callaway$493,000.00$2,635.05Camden$1,002,000.00$22,360.55Cape Girardeau$280,000.00$0.00Carroll$3,127,000.00$0.00Carter$1,908,000.00$103,500.00Cass$4,128,500.00$5,184.54Cedar$221,000.00$28,500.00Chariton$659,500.00$39,500.00Christian$2,219,500.00$0.00Clark$652,000.00$37,500.00Clay$1,211,000.00$14,500.00Clinton$982,000.00$16,500.00Cole$633,000.00$5,097.95Cooper$1,220,000.00$17,500.00Crawford$1,335,500.00$15,500.00Dade$211,500.00$0.00Dallas$1,202,500.00$0.00Daviess$623,500.00$0.00DeKalb$643,500.00$0.00Dent$194,500.00$0.00Douglas$0.00$0.00Dunklin$1,790,000.00$14,131.34Franklin$1,357,000.00$1,064.01 L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 7 of
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
Gasconade$65,500.00$5,036.88Gentry$1,372,000.00$26.98Greene$705,500.00$0.00Grundy$847,500.00$0.00Harrison$588,000.00$0.00Henry$786,000.00$77,296.43Hickory$614,500.00$0.00Holt$1,701,000.00$10,500.00Howard$888,000.00$147,500.00Howell$642,500.00$11,000.00Iron$29,500.00$12,000.00Jackson$2,060,500.00$297,846.94Jasper$327,500.00$101,100.62Jefferson$1,203,000.00$19,301.01Johnson$589,500.00$1,500.00Knox$1,168,500.00$0.00Laclede$240,000.00$12,000.00Lafayette$283,500.00$34,028.54Lawrence$2,699,500.00$0.00Lewis$1,583,000.00$0.00Lincoln$1,051,500.00$31,000.00Linn$795,500.00$15,000.00Livingston$1,158,000.00$0.00Macon$236,500.00$0.00Madison$1,777,500.00$79,389.02Maries$118,000.00$0.00Marion$55,500.00$0.00McDonald$161,500.00$0.00Mercer$439,000.00$0.00Miller$801,500.00$4,598.44Mississippi$101,000.00$4,977.98Moniteau$0.00$0.00Monroe$42,000.00$10,000.00Montgomery$311,000.00$3,500.00Morgan $0.00$0.00New Madrid$1,631,500.00$122,693.96Newton$440,500.00$25,500.00 L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 8 of
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
Nodaway$2,637,000.00$19,500.00Oregon $0.00$0.00Osage$610,500.00$12,104.21Ozark$43,000.00$43,000.00Pemiscot$2,513,000.00$6,500.00Perry$1,613,500.00$0.00Pettis$599,000.00$0.00Phelps$333,500.00$50,000.00Pike$19,500.00$0.00Platte$890,000.00$22,500.00Polk$507,500.00$0.00Pulaski$1,327,500.00$17,000.00Putnam$3,000.00$0.00Ralls$177,500.00$38,326.99Randolph$1,177,000.00$10,500.00Ray$2,211,500.00$0.00Reynolds$595,500.00$1,184.60Ripley$342,500.00$0.00Saline$849,500.00$0.00Schuyler$449,000.00$18,500.00Scotland$757,500.00$0.00Scott$1,853,000.00$620.44Shannon$287,000.00$135,998.71Shelby$6,500.00$6,500.00St. Charles$1,361,500.00$67,084.06St. Clair$2,012,500.00$265.88St. Francois$294,000.00$0.00St. Louis$3,260,500.00$895,058.73St. Louis City$5,548,000.00$149,299.59Ste. Genevieve$0.00$0.00Stoddard$1,346,500.00$136,084.38Stone$886,022.00$88,521.99Sullivan$695,500.00$0.00Taney$1,453,500.00$8,500.00Texas$1,096,500.00$42,500.00Vernon$1,227,000.00$12,000.00Warren$10,500.00$10,500.00 L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 9 of
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
Washington$680,500.00$12,000.00Wayne$1,026,000.00$852.29Webster$429,000.00$0.00Worth$19,000.00$0.00Wright $0.00$0.00Grand Total$105,253,522.00$3,331,032.10
This proposal would result in fewer fines being assessed in the future. As stated previously,
many of these current political subdivisions do not have any sales or use tax collected, so they
may be able to avoid future penalties.
This proposal also allows for a one-time reduction of a political subdivisions current outstanding
balance. Should a political subdivision file its reports by January 1, 2023, they will be entitled to
a one-time downward adjustment of their existing fine by 90%.
The current outstanding balance is $101,922,490 ($105,253,522 owed - $3,331,032.10 collected,
rounded). This is money the Department notes is owed, but most likely uncollectable. Should it
be collected, it would be forwarded to the local school district funds. If all the fine money is
eligible for the one-time reduction, this would result in $94,728,170 ($105,253,522 * .90,
rounded) no longer being owed.
Oversight notes if all political subdivisions file their report and receive the reduction, it would
be a loss of $89,895,636 to the local school districts from not receiving the fine money, a loss to
the state of $1,834,605 in collection fees and a gain to the local political subdivisions of
$91,730,241($101,922,490 * 90%).
Reducing the future fines would help save the local political subdivisions money; however, due
to the uncollectability of most of this money, the DOR assumes no additional impact to the state.
Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a
potential loss of fine revenue stated by DOR to the General Revenue Fund for this proposal.
Also, Oversight notes that because of the new language for certain local political subdivisions
who have gross revenues of less than $5,000 or who have not levied or collected a sales and use
tax in the fiscal year or if the failure to file a financial statement is the result of fraud or illegal
conduct by an employee or officer of the political subdivision and the political subdivision
complies with filing the financial statement within thirty days of the discovery of the fraud or
illegal conduct, then the fine shall not be assessed and could result in a savings to local political
subdivisions on fine fees. Therefore, Oversight will also reflect a savings to local political
subdivisions of $0 to unknown for this proposal.
Oversight also notes this proposal is allowing a political subdivision that files its financial
statement before January 1, 2023 to receive a one-time 90% reduction of their outstanding
balance of their fines owed. L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 10 of 18
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
Oversight also notes that the loss in fine revenue collected by DOR would result in a savings to
the local political subdivisions who would no longer need to pay the fine revenue. It would also
result in a loss of revenue to School Districts on these fines no longer being collected.
Therefore, Oversight will reflect a savings to local political subdivisions on the fines no longer
being collected and a loss of 98% of the fine revenue no longer going to the school districts for
this proposal. Oversight notes that the Department of Revenue is allowed to retain two percent of
the fine revenue collected (per §105.145.11). Oversight assumes a large majority of the
$101,922,490 of outstanding fines to be uncollectible. Therefore, Oversight will range the fiscal
impact from this proposal from $0 to DOR’s estimates.
In response to similar legislation from 2021, SB 547, officials from the City of Corder, the City
of HughesvilleCity of O’Fallon each assumed the proposal will have no fiscal impact
on their organizations. Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore,
Oversight will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for these cities.
§§140.980, 140.981, 140.982, 140.983, 140.985, 140.986, 140.991, 140.1009, & 140.1012 –
Land Bank Agencies
In response to similar legislation from this year, HB 2177, officials from the cities of O’Fallon
and Springfield each assumed the proposal will have no fiscal impact on their respective
organizations. Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight
will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for these agencies.
Oversight assumes this proposal is permissive, allowing cities and certain unincorporated
communities to establish a land bank agency. Oversight assumes this would take further action
by local political subdivisions and therefore, will not reflect a direct fiscal impact.
§164.450 – Bonded Indebtedness of School Districts
In response to similar legislation from this year, SB 1034, officials from the Office of the State
Courts Administrator
Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Oversight will reflect a zero impact in
the fiscal note for this agency.
Oversight assumes this amendment relates to certain school districts within St. Charles County
only, and may create a fiscal impact to such districts. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a $0 or
Unknown cost to these school districts.
§230.205 – Alternative County Highway Commissions in Certain Counties
Oversight assumes no fiscal impact for this provision of the proposal. L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 11 of 18
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
Upon review of legislation from a prior year (HB 1403, 2020), Oversight inquired of the
Missouri Association of Counties (MAC) as to how many alternative county highway
commissions are currently being utilized. MAC stated they are unaware of any being utilized or
of any that have been utilized in the past several years.
§233.095 – Special Road Districts
In response to similar legislation from this year, HB 1541, officials from the cities of Springfield
and St. Louis each assumed the proposal will have no fiscal impact on their respective
organizations. Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight
will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for these cities.
§407.475 – Charitable Organizations
Officials from the Office of Administration - Budget and Planning (B&P) assume this
provision limits the regulation of charitable organizations. If, with this section, charitable
organizations are no longer required to file certain tax returns, there may be a reduction to GR
and TSR by an unknown amount, and may impact the calculation under Article X, Section 18(e).
Officials from the Department of Revenue (DOR) assume this provision would prohibit a state
agency or official from imposing an annual filing/reporting requirement on an organization
regulated or specifically exempted from regulation under sections 407.450 to 407.478, if those
annual filing/reporting requirements are more stringent, restrictive, or expansive than the
requirements of section 407.462.
Depending on whether this proposal applies to state tax filing and tax reporting requirements,
this proposal may impact DOR as it pertains to tax administration. If the DOR could no longer
require tax returns of certain organizations this could result in a significant but unknown loss to
general revenue and total state revenue.
In response to similar legislation from this year, SS No. 2 for SCS for SB 968, officials from the
Attorney General’s Office, Department of Natural Resources, Department of Corrections
Department of Higher Education and Workforce Development, Department of Health and
Senior Services, Department of Mental Health, Department of Public Safety, Missouri
Department of AgricultureMissouri Department of Conservation, and the Office of the
State Courts Administrator
respective agencies.
Oversight will reflect the possible scenario described by B&P if charitable organizations are no
longer required to report and file tax returns on unrelated business taxable income as a result of
this provision. Therefore, the state may see a reduction in tax revenue of an unknown amount.
Oversight will show the impact as a $0 or (Unknown) potential loss of general revenue funds.
§473.742 – Salary Schedule for Public Administrators L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 12 of 18
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
SEQ CHAPTER \h 1In response to similar legislation from this year, HB 2450, officials from
the Public Administrator’s Office for the City of St. Louis
fiscal impact on their organization. Oversight does not have any information to the contrary.
Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note.
Oversight notes each county has a public administrator including the City of St. Louis.
Oversight is unclear what their current salaries are based on the number of letters that are opened
annually. Oversight assumes this proposal would potentially increase the salaries in 2
nd
, 3
rd
and
4
th
class counties based on assessed valuation. Oversight took the highest salary cap at 39 letters
opened of $25,000 and calculated the difference in salary that would be increased based on the
assessed valuation in the chart below. Using the Total Assessed Valuation by County in the 76
th
Annual Report from the State Tax Commission, Oversight also organized the 2
nd
, 3
rd
, and 4
th
class counties into salary classifications based on the assessed valuation. From this chart,
Oversight assumes there could be a salary increase that could exceed $1,721,000 in salary
collectively. Adding additional payroll taxes and workers’ compensation would yield a potential
costs that could exceed $1,927,692 and Oversight will reflect this amount in the fiscal note for
this proposal.
A
ssessed Valuation
C
ounty
C
lass
N
umber of
C
ounties*
H
ighest
S
alary
A
ssessed
S
alary
D
ifference
i
n Salary
P
otential
A
djusted Salary
$
8,000,000 to $40,999,999
3 1 2
5,000
$ 2
9,000
$
4
,000
$
4
,000
$
$
41,000,000 to $53,999,999
0 0 2
5,000
$ 3
0,000
$
5
,000
$
-$
$
54,000,000 to $65,999,999
0 0 2
5,000
$ 3
2,000
$
7
,000
$
-$
$
66,000,000 to $85,999,999
3 2 2
5,000
$ 3
4,000
$
9
,000
$
1
8,000
$
$
86,000,000 to $99,999,999
3 2 2
5,000
$ 3
6,000
$
1
1,000
$
2
2,000
$
$
100,000,000 to $130,999,999
3 1
0
2
5,000
$ 3
8,000
$
1
3,000
$
1
30,000
$
$
131,000,000 to $159,999,999
3 1
3
2
5,000
$ 4
0,000
$
1
5,000
$
1
95,000
$
$
160,000,000 to $189,999,999
3 8 2
5,000
$ 4
1,000
$
1
6,000
$
1
28,000
$
$
190,000,000 to $249,999,999
3 1
2
2
5,000
$ 4
1,500
$
1
6,500
$
1
98,000
$
$
250,000,000 to $299,999,999
3 9 2
5,000
$ 4
3,000
$
1
8,000
$
1
62,000
$
$
300,000,000 to $449,999,999
3
, 4
1
5
2
5,000
$ 4
5,000
$
2
0,000
$
3
00,000
$
$
450,000,000 to $599,999,999
3
, 4
1
4
2
5,000
$ 4
7,000
$
2
2,000
$
3
08,000
$
$
600,000,000 to $749,999,999
3
, 4
6 2
5,000
$ 4
9,000
$
2
4,000
$
1
44,000
$
$
750,000,000 to $899,999,999
3 1 2
5,000
$ 5
1,000
$
2
6,000
$
2
6,000
$
$
900,000,000 to $1,049,999,999
2 2 2
5,000
$ 5
3,000
$
2
8,000
$
5
6,000
$
$
1,050,000,000 to $1,199,999,999
2 1 2
5,000
$ 5
5,000
$
3
0,000
$
3
0,000
$
$
1,200,000,000 to $1,349,999,999
0 0 2
5,000
$ 5
7,000
$
3
2,000
$
-$
$
1,350,000,000 and over
0 0 2
5,000
$ 5
9,000
$
3
4,000
$
-$
9
6
1
,721,000
$
P
ayroll taxes
7
.65%
1
31,657
$
W
ork Comp
4
.36%
7
5,036
$
G
rand Total
1
,927,692
$
*
Number of Counties were based off of the Total Assessed Valuation by County in the 76th Annual Report from the State Tax
C
ommission L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 13 of 18
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
Bill as a Whole
Officials from the Department of Commerce and Insurance, the Department of Economic
Development, the Department of Social Services, the Department of Elementary and
Secondary Education, the Department of Labor and Industrial RelationsMissouri
Department of Transportation, the Office of Administration, the City of Claycomo, the City
of Kansas City, the St. Louis County Board of ElectionsPhelps County Sheriff’s
Department, the St. Louis County Police Department, the Gordon Parks Elementary
School, the Little Blue Valley Sewer District, the South River Drainage DistrictSt.
Charles County PWSD #2, Joint Committee on Administrative RulesState Tax
Commission each assume the proposal will have no fiscal impact on their respective
organizations. Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight
will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for these agencies.
Other than what is noted in the above provisions, officials from the DOR assume the proposal
will have no fiscal impact on their organization with regard to the rest of the sections in this
proposal. Oversight
reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note.
Officials from the Office of the Secretary of State (SOS) note many bills considered by the
General Assembly include provisions allowing or requiring agencies to submit rules and
regulations to implement the act. The SOS is provided with core funding to handle a certain
amount of normal activity resulting from each year's legislative session. The fiscal impact for
this fiscal note to the SOS for Administrative Rules is less than $5,000. The SOS recognizes that
this is a small amount and does not expect that additional funding would be required to meet
these costs. However, the SOS also recognizes that many such bills may be passed by the
General Assembly in a given year and that collectively the costs may be in excess of what the
office can sustain with its core budget. Therefore, the SOS reserves the right to request funding
for the cost of supporting administrative rules requirements should the need arise based on a
review of the finally approved bills signed by the governor.
Oversight assumes the SOS could absorb the costs of printing and distributing regulations
related to this proposal. If multiple bills pass which require the printing and distribution of
regulations at substantial costs, the SOS could request funding through the appropriation process.
Oversight only reflects the responses received from state agencies and political subdivisions;
however, other cities, counties, local election authorities, circuit clerks, public administrators,
local law enforcement, schools and utility districts were requested to respond to this proposed
legislation but did not. A listing of political subdivisions included in the Missouri Legislative
Information System (MOLIS) database is available upon request. L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 14 of 18
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
FISCAL IMPACT – State GovernmentFY 2023
(10 Mo.)
FY 2024FY 2025GENERAL REVENUELoss – DOR – 2% of collection fee on
future potential fines no longer assessed
because LPS no longer required to file
due to changes in the bill (§105.145)
p.9
$0 to
(Unknown)
$0 to
(Unknown)
$0 to
(Unknown)
Loss – DOR – 2% collection fee that
may have been collected if not for the
one-time decrease of 90% of the
outstanding balance from the local
political subdivision if they submit a
timely financial statement by 1/01/23
(§105.145) p. 9
$0 or up to
($1,834,605)$0$0
Loss – §407.475 DOR – if, with this
bill, charitable organizations are no
longer required to file certain tax
returns p. 11
$0 or
(Unknown)
$0 or
(Unknown)
$0 or
(Unknown)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON
GENERAL REVENUE
(Unknown,
could exceed
$1,834,605)
$0 to
(Unknown)
$0 to
(Unknown) L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 15 of 18
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
FISCAL IMPACT – Local
Government
FY 2023
(10 Mo.)
FY 2024FY 2025LOCAL POLITICAL
SUBDIVISIONS
Savings – in publication costs on
financials posted in a newspaper of
general circulation (§§50.815 &
50.820) p.3
Could exceed
$100,000
Could exceed
$100,000
Could exceed
$100,000
Savings – on potential fines for certain
LPS (§105.145) p.9
$0 to Unknown$0 to
Unknown
$0 to
Unknown
Loss – School districts receiving less
fine revenue (from savings above)
(§105.145) p.9$0 to (Unknown)
$0 to
(Unknown)
$0 to
(Unknown)
Costs – Certain school districts in St.
Charles County (§164.450) pg. 10$0 or (Unknown)
$0 or
(Unknown)
$0 or
(Unknown)
Savings – on fine revenue that is
reduced with a one-time reduction of
90% on the outstanding balance due if
they submit a timely financial
statement by 1/1/23 (§105.145) p.9
$0 or up to
$91,730,241$0$0
Loss – School Districts – reduction in
fine revenue from one-time adjustment
of fine revenue (§105.145) p.9
$0 or up to
($89,895,636)$0$0
Cost – Counties - Potential salary
increases for public administrators
(§473.742) pg. 11
(Could exceed
$963,846)
(Could exceed
$1,927,692)
(Could exceed
$1,927,692)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON
LOCAL POLITICAL
SUBDIVISIONS
Unknown, less
than $970,759
Unknown to
(Unknown)
Unknown to
(Unknown)
FISCAL IMPACT – Small Business
No direct fiscal impact to small businesses would be expected as a result of this proposal.
FISCAL DESCRIPTION L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 16 of 18
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
This act modifies provisions relating to county financial statements.
PUBLISHING OF COUNTY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Sections 50.815 & 50.820)
This act changes the date counties shall prepare and publish their financial statements from the
first Monday in March to June 30th of each year. Additionally, the county treasurer shall not pay
the county commission until notice is received from the state auditor that the county's financial
statement has been published in a newspaper after the first day of April.
This act also requires second, third, and fourth class counties to produce and publish a county
annual financial statement in the same manner as counties of the first classification. The financial
statement shall include the name, office, and current gross annual salary of each elected or
appointed county official.
The county clerk or other county officer preparing the financial statement shall provide an
electronic copy of the data used to create the financial statement without charge to the newspaper
requesting the data.
Finally, the newspaper publishing the financial statement shall charge and receive no more than
its regular local classified advertising rate as published 30 days before the publication of the
financial statement.
COUNTY FINANCIAL STATEMENT PENALTIES FOR FAILURE TO FILE (Section
105.145)
Under current law, any transportation development district having gross revenues of less than
$5,000 in a fiscal year for which an annual financial statement was not timely filed to the State
Auditor is not subject to a fine.
This act provides that any political subdivision that has gross revenues of less than $5,000 or that
has not levied or collected sales or use taxes in the fiscal year for which the annual financial
statement was not timely filed shall not be subject to a fine.
Additionally, if failure to timely submit the annual financial statement is the result of fraud or
other illegal conduct by an employee or officer of the political subdivision, the political
subdivision shall not be subject to a fine if the statement is filed within 30 days of discovery of
the fraud or illegal conduct.
If the political subdivision has an outstanding balance for fines at the time it files its first annual
financial statement after August 28, 2022, the Director of Revenue shall make a one-time
downward adjustment to such outstanding balance in an amount that reduces the outstanding
balance by no less than 90%. If the Director of Revenue determines a fine is uncollectable, the
Director shall have the authority to make a one-time downward adjustment to any outstanding
penalty.
§407.475 – Charitable Organizations L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 17 of 18
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
Under this act, the state shall not impose any additional annual filing or reporting requirements
on a charitable organization that are more stringent, restrictive, or expansive than the report
already required to be submitted to the Attorney General's office unless such filing or report is
specifically required by federal law.
This act shall not apply to labor organizations, state grants or contracts, or investigations by the
Attorney General of charitable organizations as set forth in state statute.
This legislation is not federally mandated, would not duplicate any other program and would not
require additional capital improvements or rental space.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Office of Administration
Budget and Planning
Department of Commerce and Insurance
Department of Revenue
Attorney General’s Office
Office of the Secretary of State
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Office of the State Courts Administrator
Department of Labor and Industrial Relations
Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Corrections
Department of Higher Education and Workforce Development
Department of Health and Senior Services
Department of Mental Health
Department of Public Safety
Missouri Department of Agriculture
Missouri Department of Conservation
City of Claycomo
City of Kansas City
City of Springfield
City of St. Louis Budget Division
Office of the State Auditor
Joint Committee on Administrative Rules
City of Corder
City of Hughesville
City of O’Fallon
Boone County
Greene County
Henry County
Lincoln County L.R. No. 4303H.05C
Bill No. HCS for SS for SCS for SB 724
Page 18 of 18
April 26, 2022
NM:LR:OD
Livingston County
Department of Economic Development
Department of Social Services
Missouri Department of Transportation
Office of Administration
St. Louis County Board of Elections
Phelps County Sheriff’s Department
St. Louis County Police Department
Gordon Parks Elementary School
Little Blue Valley Sewer District
South River Drainage District
St. Charles County PWSD #2
State Tax Commission
Julie MorffRoss StropeDirectorAssistant DirectorApril 26, 2022April 26, 2022