Missouri House Bill HB4

Missouri 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/19/25
• Refer: 2/20/25
• Report Pass: 3/26/25
• Engrossed: 4/3/25
• Refer: 4/8/25
• Engrossed: 4/7/25
• Report Pass: 4/24/25
• Enrolled: 5/9/25
• Passed: 6/30/25

Caption

Appropriates money for the expenses, grants, refunds, and distributions of the Department of Revenue and Department of Transportation

Impact

HB4 proposes an extensive budget that includes important allocations for public safety and infrastructure improvements, notably in highway and bridge maintenance. The provision for motor fuel tax distribution indicates a continued commitment to funding local and state roads, providing funds that could potentially mitigate road deterioration and enhance overall vehicular safety on state highways. Furthermore, the proposed financial structure within the bill allows flexibility in fund allocation, enabling departments to adjust their expenditures according to emerging needs, reflecting a responsive legislative approach to budgeting.

Summary

House Bill 4 is an act to appropriate funds for the expenses, grants, refunds, and distributions related to the Department of Revenue and the Department of Transportation in Missouri. The bill outlines the fiscal plans for the state period ranging from July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2026. A significant portion of appropriated funds will be allocated toward transportation improvements, including road and bridge construction and maintenance, aimed at enhancing public infrastructure and safety across the state. The bill emphasizes the importance of transportation as a critical component of state development, echoing a proactive approach to meet the growing demands for reliable transit systems.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB4 appears generally positive among proponents who argue that increased funding for transportation infrastructure is essential for the state's economic growth and public safety. Supporters highlight the need for substantial investments in roads and bridges, which are essential for the smooth functioning of state commerce and daily travel. Conversely, some contention exists regarding the implications of increased taxation, particularly concerning motor fuel, as critics suggest that this might disproportionately affect low-income individuals who rely heavily on transportation for work and personal needs.

Contention

Notable points of contention involve the prioritization of funding and the mechanisms for raising projected revenues through taxes. Some stakeholders express concerns about the potential for increased financial burdens on residents, questioning whether the proposed allocations will adequately address the infrastructure deficit while also serving the community’s diverse transportation needs. Debates also center around how local governments will utilize their share of the motor fuel tax, with differing views on the adequacy of funding for non-urban areas, which often are less prioritized in statewide infrastructure plans.