LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 77th Regular Session February 26, 2001 TO: Honorable Frank Madla, Chair, Senate Committee on Intergovernmental Relations FROM: John Keel, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE: SB530 by Bernsen (Relating to the presumption that certain vessels and other watercraft are located in this state only temporarily for ad valorem tax purposes.), As Introduced ************************************************************************** * Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for * * SB530, As Introduced: positive impact of $0 through the biennium * * ending August 31, 2003. * * * * The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal * * basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions of * * the bill. * ************************************************************************** General Revenue-Related Funds, Five-Year Impact: **************************************************** * Fiscal Year Probable Net Positive/(Negative) * * Impact to General Revenue Related * * Funds * * 2002 $0 * * 2003 0 * * 2004 (990,014) * * 2005 (1,019,714) * * 2006 (1,050,306) * **************************************************** All Funds, Five-Year Impact: *************************************************************************** *Fiscal Probable Probable Probable Probable * * Year Savings/(Cost) Revenue Revenue Revenue * * from General Gain/(Loss) Gain/(Loss) Gain/(Loss) * * Revenue Fund from School from Cities from Counties * * 0001 Districts * * 2002 $0 $0 $0 $0 * * 2003 0 (990,014) (318,966) (281,857) * * 2004 (990,014) (29,700) (328,535) (290,313) * * 2005 (1,019,714) (30,591) (338,391) (299,023) * * 2006 (1,050,306) (31,509) (348,543) (307,993) * *************************************************************************** Fiscal Analysis The bill would create presumptions for a particular class of personal property relative to its use in interstate, international, or foreign commerce, as well as such property's situs in Texas for property tax jurisdiction purposes. A presumption that certain personal property is in interstate or international commerce and not located in the state for more than a temporary period could result in an undetermined amount of property value being exempt from property taxation that would otherwise be taxable by local units of government under current law. The Comptroller's office contacted three coastal appraisal districts for information relative to the bill. Orange CAD indicated that, for tax year 2000, property of the type described in the bill was on the appraisal roll at $60 million (producing approximately $1.2 million in local revenue). The taxable status of that property is currently a subject of litigation. San Patricio CAD responded that property valued at as much as $140 million has been located in the county, but it has always been within a federal trade zone exempt under state and federal law. Cameron CAD cited similar instances of property located in federal trade zones. Methodology To illustrate the potential fiscal impact of the bill, the property value data obtained by the Comptroller's office for Orange County was used as a base to project to all affected jurisdictions. The taxable value and local average tax rate in the county were extrapolated through fiscal year 2006 using a combined three percent growth rate in values and tax rates. Fiscal implications would exist for the state, school districts, and counties. Although the exemption would take effect January 1, 2002, school districts, counties and cities would not experience an impact until fiscal year 2003. Under the current school finance system, there is a relatively complete offset for school districts for their losses after a one-year lag. The state offset would begin in fiscal 2004. Local Government Impact The fiscal impacts on units of local government are reflected in the above table. Source Agencies: 304 Comptroller of Public Accounts LBB Staff: JK, DB, SD, WP, BR