Relating to limitations applicable to certain agreements providing for a rebate of municipal sales and use taxes or a grant or loan based on those taxes.
Impact
If enacted, HB 5169 would significantly affect how local governments manage sales tax incentives and their agreements with retailers. It establishes that agreements for tax rebates or grants can only be made if they result in a substantial change to the economic position of the retailer involved, emphasizing that there must be a legitimate economic purpose rather than just a tax incentive. This move could lead to stricter oversight of municipal agreements and discourage practices seen as overly leveraging tax codes for competitive advantage.
Summary
House Bill 5169 focuses on the limitations regarding agreements that involve rebates of municipal sales and use taxes or grants based on these taxes. The bill seeks to clarify the circumstances under which municipalities can engage in such agreements with retailers, particularly focusing on the relocation or establishment of business premises. By implementing restrictions, the bill aims to ensure that municipalities do not enter into agreements that provide tax incentives without a reasonable economic justification beyond merely securing a tax benefit.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding HB 5169 appears to be mixed, with some stakeholders viewing it as a necessary reform to prevent municipalities from excessively using tax incentives to attract businesses, potentially harming other localities. However, others may see it as a restriction on local governments' ability to incentivize economic growth in their areas. Proponents argue that clearer guidelines will foster fair competition while opponents may contend that it limits local economic strategies that could benefit their communities.
Contention
Notable points of contention in the discussions around HB 5169 involve concerns about local control versus state oversight. Some legislators support the proposed limitations to avoid possible abuses of sales tax incentives that could create unfair competition among municipalities. Critics, however, fear that the bill could undermine local governments' flexibility to attract new businesses, potentially stifling economic growth in regions that may rely on such incentives to compete with larger urban areas. The debate reflects broader tensions about the level of authority local governments should have in shaping their economic landscapes.
Identical
Relating to limitations applicable to certain agreements providing for a rebate of municipal sales and use taxes or a grant or loan based on those taxes.
Relating to the creation of the Tabor Ranch Municipal Management District; providing authority to issue bonds; providing authority to impose assessments, fees, and taxes; granting a limited power of eminent domain.
Relating to the creation of the Tabor Ranch Municipal Management District; providing authority to issue bonds; providing authority to impose assessments, fees, and taxes; granting a limited power of eminent domain.
Relating to the creation of the Denton County Municipal Management District No. 2; providing authority to issue bonds; providing authority to impose assessments, fees, and taxes; granting a limited power of eminent domain.
Relating to state and municipal motor fuel taxes; providing civil penalties; creating criminal offenses; requiring occupational licenses; authorizing the imposition of taxes; providing for increases and decreases in the rates of taxes.
Relating to the creation of the Denton County Municipal Management District No. 2; providing authority to issue bonds; providing authority to impose assessments, fees, and taxes; granting a limited power of eminent domain.
Health occupations: health professionals; permanent revocation of license or registration if convicted of sexual conduct under pretext of medical treatment; provide for. Amends sec. 16226 of 1978 PA 368 (MCL 333.16226). TIE BAR WITH: HB 4121'23