Relative to funding for the division of travel and tourism.
The proposal enhances the funding available for the Division of Travel and Tourism by revising how the meal and room tax revenue is calculated. By adding back transfers to the Municipal Revenue Fund, the bill is expected to increase funding significantly compared to current practices. The Department of Revenue Administration indicated that this change could elevate the tourism budget from an estimated $10.2 million to approximately $14.3 million based on FY 2024 revenues. Although the bill does not stipulate immediate funding for FY 2025, it sets the framework for future budgeting decisions affecting tourism development across the state.
Senate Bill 63 (SB63) seeks to adjust the funding formula for the Division of Travel and Tourism in New Hampshire. The legislation stipulates that the budget for this division will be derived from the meals and rooms tax revenue, mandating that the funding is calculated based on at least 3.15% of the net income from this tax stream. This alteration is aimed at bolstering financial support for tourism initiatives in the state. The consideration for adjusting the formula includes previously deducted costs and the necessity to ensure that a sufficient budget is allocated for promoting travel and tourism activities throughout New Hampshire.
Overall, the sentiment surrounding SB63 appears to be positive among numerous stakeholders who recognize the importance of tourism for New Hampshire's economy. Supporters of the bill argue that enhancing funding for the Division of Travel and Tourism is vital for promoting the state's attractions, which in turn supports local businesses and communities dependent on tourism income. While some legislators may raise minor concerns regarding the allocation of tax revenue, the consensus indicates that increased financial resources for tourism promotion are necessary.
Despite the generally favorable outlook, notable points of contention may arise regarding the fiscal implications of redirecting tax revenue toward tourism funding. Opponents may argue that the change prioritizes tourism over other essential services that also rely on tax revenue, such as education or infrastructure. Additionally, debates surrounding how much of the meals and rooms tax revenue should be retained at the municipal level could lead to further discussions about balancing local needs against state-led tourism initiatives.