My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06 Exemption of Goods-In-Transit
City-of-Paris
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2001-2010
>
2007
>
11 November
>
2007 11-12
>
06 Exemption of Goods-In-Transit
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/8/2007 3:23:59 PM
Creation date
11/8/2007 3:23:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGENDA
Item Number
06
AGENDA - Type
ORDINANCE
Description
Public Hearing & Ord Opting Out of terms of HB 621 "Exemption of Goods-In-Transit:"
AGENDA - Date
11/12/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />for the exemption. In addition, the inventory would have to be transported or distributed to another <br />location no later than 175 days after the property was acquired in or imported into the state. <br /> <br />The exemption would have to be granted by all taxing units unless the governing body of a taxing unit <br />proposed by official action to tax goods in transit. Before acting to tax goods in transit, the governing <br />body of a taxing unit would have to conduct a public hearing where the public would be allowed to <br />speak for or against the action to tax the property. <br /> <br />The bill would take effect January 1,2008. <br /> <br />Methodology <br /> <br />Currently, Article VIII, Section I-j of the Texas Constitution and Section 11.251 of the Tax Code <br />provide for a "freeport exemption." This exemption, which can be granted at the option of each city, <br />county, school district, or junior college district, exempts goods, wares, ores, raw materials, and other <br />types of inventory that are brought into or acquired in the state and transported out of the state within <br />175 days of acquisition. <br /> <br />In November 2001, Texas voters approved of the amendment proposed in SJR 6, adding Article VIII, <br />Section I-n to the Texas Constitution. This amendment authorized the Legislature to exempt from ad <br />valorem taxation "goods in transit." <br /> <br />The enabling legislation proposed in the bill would provide an exemption for property acquired in <br />Texas or imported into Texas if the property is stored at a location in which the owner of the goods <br />does not have a direct or indirect ownership interest and is transported to another location either inside <br />or outside of the state within 175 days. The bill would provide a local option procedure to continue <br />taxing the property. <br /> <br />The proposed exemption could cause an undetermined revenue loss to cities, counties, school districts, <br />and junior college districts exempting goods in transit. <br /> <br />Because the state is constitutionally prohibited from imposing a state property tax, there would be no <br />direct fiscal impact on the state. However, Section 403.302 of the Government Code requires the <br />Comptroller to conduct a property value study to determine the total taxable value for each school <br />district. Total taxable value is an element in the state's school funding formula. Depending on the <br />number of school districts allowing the exemption, the state would reimburse school districts an <br />undetermined amount of funding for this exemption, after a one-year lag. <br /> <br />The bill is estimated to have an impact on the state aid districts receive based on the enrichment tier as <br />tied to the yield of the Austin Independent School District (ISD). To the extent that the bill has the <br />effect of lessening Austin lSD's revenue per weighted student per penny of tax effort, as determined <br />by the Commissioner of Education, the equalized yield on those enrichment pennies would decrease, <br />resulting in a decrease in state aid. <br /> <br />Local Government Impact <br /> <br />Because it is not known how many taxing unit governing bodies might vote to continue taxing the <br />covered items, the fiscal impact cannot be determined. The fiscal impact table provides an illustrative <br />example only. Appraisal district information about the potential value loss to the proposed bill was <br />trended over the projection period to estimate the value loss in each year. The appropriate taxing unit <br />rates were applied to estimate the levy loss. Information was not available to estimate special district <br />losses. <br /> <br />In addition, with respect to school districts, the mechanics of the school finance system would likely <br />transfer the initial fiscal impacts to the state, resulting in a zero or negligible fiscal impact to the <br />school districts. Initial school district losses are shown, even though the operation of the "hold <br />harmless" feature ofHB 1, 79th Legislature, Third Called Session (2006), would likely transfer the <br />losses to the state causing a net school district loss of zero. <br /> <br />20f3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.