goals Presentation by Pat Dalton to Assn. of Metropolitan - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Local Sales Taxes – a study in competing policy goals

Presentation by Pat Dalton to

• Assn. of Metropolitan Municipalities

August 13, 2019

Why does the state control imposition of local sales taxes?

• Granting local sales taxes makes it harder for the state to equalize

local ability to pay for local government services

• 1971 prohibition against local sales taxes was a subdivision of the new

(at that time) local government aid (LGA) law

• Not granting any suburbs local sales tax authority was in recognition
• f the inequity in retail distribution within the metro area
• When granting local sales tax authority the legislature has tended to

favor use for special capital projects with regional significance

August 13, 2019 Minnesota House Research Department 2

So why has the legislature allowed any local sales taxes?

• Regional projects need a regional funding source
• The weight given to the trade-offs between the policy goals of local

autonomy and funding equity have differed between tax chairs

• Allowing local governments additional local funding tools is often

more attractive when the state has budget problems

• Political considerations play into granting some local authority
• Result is that the ease of getting special local sales tax legislation has

varied over time

August 13, 2019 Minnesota House Research Department 3

Number of local sales taxes authorized or extended by special law per year

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Number of new or extended local sales taxes

Session Year * No tax bill in that session

August 13, 2019 Minnesota House Research Department 4

History of Local Sales Tax Statute

• 1997: Minn. Stat. §297A.48 (later recodified as §297A.99) enacted

primarily to standardize the method used in writing legislation,

• 1998 and 1999: the resolution and local referendum requirements

were added to statute

• 7/2008-6/2010: local governments prohibited from spending any

money to promote or even hold a referendum on a local sales tax; in 2011 they were allowed to again hold a referendum, and in 2013 they could again spend money to provide facts but not promote

• In 2011 began requiring that the referendum be held before coming

to the legislature

August 13, 2019 Minnesota House Research Department 5

So why the big increase in authority in 2019?

• Previous tax chairs generally supported local authority if approved by

voters

• Record number of referenda on the ballots at the 2018 general

election

• Unlike previous years the majority of referenda passed
• Factors that may have contributed to the high passage rate
• Uncertain growth in state support for local projects
• Multiple projects bundled together and vague wording in referenda might

have led to more local buy-in

August 13, 2019 Minnesota House Research Department 6

Legislative response to 2018 referenda

• House had a much shorter list of allowed local taxes than Senate but

in the end the political decision was to grant authority to cities that played by the existing rules

• Virtually all cities that passed a referendum were granted authority;

including suburbs for the first time

• Some cities are required to pass a new resolution with more detail

because the House chairs felt their referenda were too vague

• Made changes to statute so going forward legislators and voters have

more information and control

August 13, 2019 Minnesota House Research Department 7

Statutory changes that increase legislative control

• Require that voter approval only occur after the legislature has vetted

the projects to be funded and the authority is granted

• Limits use of revenue to projects with clear regional benefit beyond

the jurisdictional limits

• Requires that the initial city resolution enumerate no more than 5

projects to be funded

• Local government must submit to tax chairs by January 31 of the year

in which the legislation is sought the list of projects to be funded and documentation of why each project is of regional significance

August 13, 2019 Minnesota House Research Department 8

Changes that increase local voter information and control

• Allows local government to spend money to disseminate information
• nly if each project and its cost is listed separately
• The information sent to the tax chairs on beneficiaries of each project

will also be available to interested individuals

• Requires a separate question for each project to be funded, with the

amount of revenue that a local government may raise under the special authority decreased for any project questions that fail

August 13, 2019 Minnesota House Research Department 9

What does this mean for cities in the future?

• New requirements are likely to discourage some cities from seeking

local sales tax authority

• Suburbs that can make a “regional significance” case are more likely

to get sales tax authority in the future

• Policy makers seeking to use state aids to equalize local revenues may

want to add local retail bases into the “ability to raise revenue” side

• f any future aid formulas.
• Final caveat: Statutes are not written in stone and may be changed or

circumvented by “not withstanding” language.

August 13, 2019 Minnesota House Research Department 10

Minnesota House Research Department provides nonpartisan legislative, legal, and information services to the Minnesota House of Representatives. www.house.mn/hrd 651-296-6753 600 State Office Building

• St. Paul, MN 55155

City LGA / Minnesota House Research Department July 9, 2019 11