Honorable Harvey Hilderbran, Chair, House Committee on Ways & Means
FROM:
John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE:
HB1894 by Quintanilla (Relating to customs brokers.), As Introduced
Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for HB1894, As Introduced: a positive impact of $9,500,000 through the biennium ending August 31, 2013.
Fiscal Year
Probable Net Positive/(Negative) Impact to General Revenue Related Funds
2012
$4,700,000
2013
$4,800,000
2014
$4,900,000
2015
$4,900,000
2016
$5,000,000
Fiscal Year
Probable Revenue Gain from General Revenue Fund 1
Probable Revenue Gain from Foundation School Fund 193
Probable Revenue Gain from Cities
Probable Revenue Gain from Transit Authorities
2012
$4,400,000
$300,000
$800,000
$200,000
2013
$4,500,000
$300,000
$800,000
$200,000
2014
$4,600,000
$300,000
$800,000
$200,000
2015
$4,600,000
$300,000
$800,000
$200,000
2016
$4,700,000
$300,000
$800,000
$200,000
Fiscal Year
Probable Revenue Gain from Counties and Special Districts
2012
$100,000
2013
$100,000
2014
$100,000
2015
$100,000
2016
$100,000
Fiscal Analysis
The bill would amend Chapter 151, Tax Code, relating to customs brokers. Provisions of the bill would implement recommendations from the report, "Strengthen Sales Tax Enforcement Related to Customs Brokers and Increase the Charge for Export Stamps," in the Legislative Budget Board's Government Effectiveness and Efficiency Report, submitted to the Eighty-Second Texas Legislature, 2011.
The bill would eliminate the requirement that the comptroller provide an alternate method of documentation the website for such documentation is unavailable. The bill would provide that the comptroller may suspend or revoke a customs broker license if the licensee does not comply with statute or issues false documentation. The bill would add requirements for documentation of exported property in numerous ways: personal identification indicating foreign residence would be required to have a unique identification number; the purchaser and customs broker or authorized employee would be required to sign documentation in the presence of each other; the documentation would be required to disclose in English and Spanish that state law requires that both the sales receipt and all property for which exemption is being claimed be presented to the broker or authorized employee, that the form must be signed in the presence of each other by both the purchaser and the broker or authorized employee and that the form is being signed under penalty of perjury; that the form contain a signature block that requires the broker's license number and the purchaser's identification number; that the purchaser be required to acknowledge each disclosure item by signing next to each item. The bill would require that the export form be notarized.
The bill would provide that a customs broker or authorized employee may issue or deliver documentation only for property that is listed on a single receipt, and that such documentation must include a declaration that the customs broker or authorized employee inspected the property and the original receipt for the property. The bill would require that customs broker premises and advertisements must include notice in English and Spanish that the purchaser must produce all property at the time the form is signed. The bill would increase the export stamp fee from $1.60 to $3.20. The additional $1.60 would be distributed as follows: $0.50 to be spent by the comptroller only for enforcement of laws relating to customs brokers and $1.10 to be deposited to the credit of the foundation school fund. Money unspent by the comptroller would be credited to the general revenue fund. The bill would repealed the statutory section relating to the timing of refunds.
The bill would take effect September 1, 2011.
Methodology
The estimated number of export certificates was adjusted to reflect the change expected from the elimination of the ability to combine multiple receipts for refund claims, multiplied by $3.20, and from this the amount of export stamp revenue expected under current law was subtracted to estimate the amount of revenue gain from the increase in the stamp fee. To this was added the gain from the reduction in refund claims associated with single receipts for small purchases that would not warrant refund requests and due to more stringent documentation requirements. The bill would have no administrative cost.