LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
                          Austin, Texas

                           FISCAL NOTE
                       74th Regular Session

                          April 11, 1995



 TO:     Honorable David Sibley, Chair          IN RE:  Senate BillNo. 1642
         Committee on Economic Development              By: Ratliff
         Senate
         Austin, Texas






FROM: John Keel, Director

In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on Senate Bill No.
1642 (relating to industrial development corporations created by
certain cities) this office has determined the following:

The bill would replace Section 4A of the Development Corporation
Act of 1979 and repeal the current Section 4B of that act.

The bill would expand the definition of cities eligible to create
an industrial development corporation and levy a sales and use
tax under Section 4A of the Development Corporation Act of 1979
to include all cities except those who are not and have not
previously been included within the boundaries of a transit
authority.  The bill would change the composition of the board of
directors of a 4A corporation to more closely approximate the
current provisions applicable to Section 4B boards.

Under the proposed Section 4A, cities could continue to adopt a
sales and use tax, up to a rate of one-half of one percent, for
an industrial development corporation.  Cities could not adopt a
4A tax if it would result in a combined local sales and use tax
rate of more than two percent.  Cities would no longer be
authorized to adopt a Section 4B tax.

The bill would allow a city with a Section 4A corporation to hold
an election to authorize use of a 4A tax for a current Section 4B
project.  Section 4B of the Act would no longer be an additional
sales tax option for cities to adopt, but simply a list of
"expanded projects" upon which 4A cities could hold an election
to authorize undertaking of a 4B project.    




A Section 4A or 4B corporation created before the effective date 
of the bill would continue to exist as if it had been created
under Section 4A.  The bill would allow cities that created a
corporation to continue projects and collect taxes authorized
before the effective date subject to the section of the Act under
which the corporation was created.  Before January 1, 1996, a 4B
corporation would be required to amend its articles of
incorporation to state that it is governed by Section 4A.

Under the current and proposed Section 4A, cities may create only
one industrial development corporation subject to a maximum tax
rate of one-half of one percent.  As a result, it is assumed that
cities with both 4A and 4B corporations, with a combined tax rate
in excess of one-half of one percent, would be required to
abolish 4B corporations after existing 4B projects are completed.

The bill would have no significant fiscal impact on the state. 
The fiscal impact on units of local government cannot be
estimated because the number of cities that would become eligible
and subsequently create an industrial development corporation
under Section 4A, with the authority to levy sales and use taxes,
cannot be determined.  Additionally, it cannot be predicted when
cities with both 4A and 4B corporations would be required to
abolish 4B corporations-and the sales taxes levied-once 4B
projects are completed.


No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.

The fiscal implication to units of local government cannot be
determined.


Source:   Comptroller of Public Accounts
          LBB Staff: JK, SM, RR