| TO: | Honorable Fred Hill, Chair, House Committee on Local Government Ways & Means |
| FROM: | John S. O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board |
| IN RE: | HB2058 by Miller (Relating to the authority to impose a county hotel occupancy tax.), As Introduced |
| Fiscal Year | Probable Net Positive/(Negative) Impact to General Revenue Related Funds |
|---|---|
| 2008 | $0 |
| 2009 | $0 |
| 2010 | $0 |
| 2011 | $0 |
| 2012 | $0 |
| Fiscal Year | Probable Revenue Gain/(Loss) from Hamilton County |
|---|---|
| 2008 | $34,000 |
| 2009 | $35,000 |
| 2010 | $36,000 |
| 2011 | $38,000 |
| 2012 | $39,000 |
The bill would amend Section 352.002 of the Tax Code, relating to the authority of certain counties to impose a county hotel occupancy tax. Under the provisions of the bill, a county would be allowed to impose a county hotel occupancy tax if it has a population less than 9,000 and through which runs the Bosque, Leon, and Lampasas Rivers.
The bill would take effect immediately upon enactment if it receives two-thirds vote in each house; otherwise, it would take effect September 1, 2007.
According to the Comptroller of Public Accounts, only Hamilton County would meet the criteria established under the provisions of the bill.
Currently, unless otherwise specified, counties authorized to impose a county hotel occupancy tax may not impose the tax at a rate greater than 7 percent. For the purpose of this estimate, the Comptroller gathered data on taxable hotel receipts from Hamilton County from its tax files, and multiplied the receipts by the 7 percent rate to estimate the potential maximum gain to the counties.
It is not known whether Hamilton County would approve a county hotel occupancy tax or at what rate. For the purpose of this estimate it is assumed that the county would adopt a county hotel occupancy tax at the maximum rate authorized by the bill.
| Source Agencies: | 304 Comptroller of Public Accounts
|
| LBB Staff: | JOB, EB, CT, SD
|