COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH
OVERSIGHT DIVISION
FISCAL NOTE
L.R. No.: 2757-03
Bill No.: SCS for SB 960
Subject: Taxation and Revenue - Property; Auditor, State; Counties; Political Subdivisions; Education, Elementary and Secondary
Type: Original
Date: March 5, 2004
FISCAL SUMMARY
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on General Revenue Fund |
$0 | $0 | $0 |
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on Other State Funds |
$0 | $0 | $0 |
Numbers within parentheses: ( ) indicate costs or losses.
This fiscal note contains 4 pages.
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on All Federal Funds |
$0 | $0 | $0 |
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
| Local Government | $0 | $0 | $0 |
ASSUMPTION
Officials from the Department of Revenue and the State Tax Commission assume this proposal would have no impact on their organizations.
Officials from the Office of the Cole County Assessor (office) assume there would be no fiscal impact to their organization from this proposal. They stated there would be a significant effect from programming and administrative costs to county collectors and clerks.
Oversight assumes there could be significant cost to local governments as a result of this proposal, but that the local governments have the ability to choose whether or not they are subject to the proposal's requirements. Therefore, Oversight has indicated no cost to local governments.
ASSUMPTIONS (continued)
Although they did not respond to our request for information, officials from the Office of the Secretary of State, the Office of the State Auditor, and the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, in response to a previous version of the proposal, assumed the proposal would have no impact on their organizations.
Oversight assumes the rule-making requirement in the current version of the proposal would require rules to be promulgated by the Office of the State Auditor and published by the Office of the Secretary of State, but that those requirements could be met with existing resources. If the requirements are greater than anticipated or if additional similar proposals are passed, Oversight assumes those costs could be addressed through the appropriation process.
| FISCAL IMPACT - State Government | FY 2005
(10 Mo.) |
FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
| $0 | $0 | $0 |
| FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government | FY 2005
(10 Mo.) |
FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
| $0 | $0 | $0 |
FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business
No direct fiscal impact to small businesses would be expected as a result of this proposal.
DESCRIPTION
This proposal would make clarifications to the property assessment law. The inflationary growth factor for subclasses would be limited to the actual increase in assessments but no greater than the lesser of five percent or the change in the Consumer Price Index. Required property tax rate rollbacks would be allocated among the subclasses based on their relative assessed valuation. Political subdivisions could vote whether to be subject to these provisions or not. Tax rate worksheets used by the State Auditor's Office would be subject to review by the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules.
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
Department of Revenue
State Tax Commission
Office of the Secretary of State
Office of the State Auditor
Joint Committee on Administrative Rules
Office of the Cole County Assessor
Mickey Wilson, CPA
Director
March 5, 2004