[NFBMO] Possible changes in Blind Pension Fund

Sun Jun 30 03:19:46 UTC 2024

The amendment, SJR 26, was prefiled in the Missouri state senate  on December 12, 2022. On March 23, 2023, the Senate voted 33-0 to pass the amendment. On May 12, 2023, the House voted 91-27 to pass the amendment.

Roger, I think nothing came up in your searches, because nothing in Article X Section 6 mentions the blind pension.

Here is the entire text of Section 6, with #5 being the added text. Maybe someone who can see can tell us what the struck-through text is.

Section 6 Property exempt from taxation

1. All property, real and personal, of the state, counties and other political subdivisions, and nonprofit cemeteries, and all real property used as a homestead as defined by law of any citizen of this state who is a former prisoner of war, as defined by law, and who has a total service-connected disability, shall be exempt from taxation; all personal property held as industrial inventories, including raw materials, work in progress and finished work on hand, by manufacturers and refiners, and all personal property held as goods, wares, merchandise, stock in trade or inventory for resale by distributors, wholesalers, or retail merchants or establishments shall be exempt from taxation; and all property, real and personal, not held for private or corporate profit and used exclusively for religious worship, for schools and colleges, for purposes purely charitable, for agricultural and horticultural societies, or for veterans' organizations may be exempted from taxation by general law. In addition to the above, household goods, furniture, wearing apparel and articles of personal use and adornment owned and used by a person in his home or dwelling place may be exempt from taxation by general law but any such law may provide for approximate restitution to the respective political subdivisions of revenues lost by reason of the exemption. All laws exempting from taxation property other than the property enumerated in this article, shall be void. The provisions of this section exempting certain personal property of manufacturers, refiners, distributors, wholesalers, and retail merchants and establishments from taxation shall become effective, unless otherwise provided by law, in each county on January 1 of the year in which that county completes its first general reassessment as defined by law.

2. All revenues lost because of the exemption of certain personal property of manufacturers, refiners, distributors, wholesalers, and retail merchants and establishments shall be replaced to each taxing authority within a county from a countywide tax hereby imposed on all property in subclass 3 of class 1 in each county. For the year in which the exemption becomes effective, the county clerk shall calculate the total revenue lost by all taxing authorities in the county and extend upon all property in subclass 3 of class 1 within the county, a tax at the rate necessary to produce that amount. The rate of tax levied in each county according to this subsection shall not be increased above the rate first imposed and will stand levied at that rate unless later reduced according to the provisions of subsection 3. The county collector shall disburse the proceeds according to the revenue lost by each taxing authority because of the exemption of such property in that county. Restitution of the revenues lost by any taxing district contained in more than one county shall be from the several counties according to the revenue lost because of the exemption of property in each county. Each year after the first year the replacement tax is imposed, the amount distributed to each taxing authority in a county shall be increased or decreased by an amount equal to the amount resulting from the change in that district's total assessed value of property in subclass 3 of class 1 at the countywide replacement tax rate. In order to implement the provisions of this subsection, the limits set in section 11(b) of this article may be exceeded, without voter approval, if necessary to allow each county listed in section 11(b) to comply with this subsection.

3. Any increase in the tax rate imposed pursuant to subsection 2 of this section shall be decreased if such decrease is approved by a majority of the voters of the county voting on such decrease. A decrease in the increased tax rate imposed under subsection 2 of this section may be submitted to the voters of a county by the governing body thereof upon its own order, ordinance, or resolution and shall be submitted upon the petition of at least eight percent of the qualified voters who voted in the immediately preceding gubernatorial election.

4. As used in this section, the terms "revenues lost" and "lost revenues" shall mean that revenue which each taxing authority received from the imposition of a tangible personal property tax on all personal property held as industrial inventories, including raw materials, work in progress and finished work on hand, by manufacturers and refiners, and all personal property held as goods, wares, merchandise, stock in trade or inventory for resale by distributors, wholesalers, or retail merchants or establishments in the last full tax year immediately preceding the effective date of the exemption from taxation granted for such property under subsection 1 of this section, and which was no longer received after such exemption became effective.

5. Because the availability of childcare supports the well-being of children, families, the workforce, and society as a whole, all property, real and personal, used primarily for the care of a child outside of his or her home may be exempted from taxation by general law. If a portion of the property of an individual or a for profit or nonprofit corporation, organization, or association is used for such childcare, an assessing authority may be authorized by general law to exempt from the assessment, levy, and collection of taxes such portion of the property of such individual, corporation, organization, or association that is used primarily for such childcare. 

From: NFBMO <nfbmo-bounces at nfbnet.org> On Behalf Of GeneCoulter--- via NFBMO
Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2024 3:52 PM
To: 'NFB of Missouri Mailing List' <nfbmo at nfbnet.org>
Cc: GeneCoulter at Charter.net
Subject: Re: [NFBMO] Possible changes in Blind Pension Fund

While the general assembly  was working on this the entire session I do not believe the funding source was added until the very last moment as I had repeatedly done searches  during the session checking for anything to do with  blindness or pensions. 

If Linda is correct, and I am sure that she is, this will not effect us in the short term. The amount they say that it will cost will not cause a reduction or block further increases. However, more often than not they underestimate the amount things will cost. In the long run it  sure could effect raises as the surplus will have decreased causing a reduction in the formula to determine long term increases. 

Roger is correct that there is no promise that facilities will pass savings on to families. This also does not help the smallest providers who work out of their homes. 

I personally plan to vote no but obviously that is just one guy’s opinion.

Gene Coulter

From: NFBMO <nfbmo-bounces at nfbnet.org <mailto:nfbmo-bounces at nfbnet.org> > On Behalf Of Roger Crome via NFBMO
Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2024 3:17 PM
To: NFB of Missouri Mailing List <nfbmo at nfbnet.org <mailto:nfbmo at nfbnet.org> >
Cc: Roger Crome <r_crome1 at msn.com <mailto:r_crome1 at msn.com> >
Subject: Re: [NFBMO] Possible changes in Blind Pension Fund

Hi Brian, 

The GA committee hasn’t held an emergency meeting on this yet.  Based on the information provided by Linda, it appears on the surface that the biggest impact would be cutting into the funds allocated but not spent.  So, theoretically, there shouldn’t be a perceived impact to recipients, but it is definitely worth the discussion.  The issue I see at this point is the timing.  This slipped right past us. 

I find it interesting that the amendment states the purpose of making child care more affordable, but there is no guarantee that the child care centers will pass the savings along to their customers as opposed to boosting their profit margin.  If the intent is to save on child care costs, then there should be language instead to create a tax credit or monthly stipend that the state is to distribute from these tax dollars.  It seems to me to be an organized movement of providers to increase their bottom line.  

I may be wrong, but just my thoughts.

Roger

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 29, 2024, at 1:19 PM, b.schulz--- via NFBMO <nfbmo at nfbnet.org <mailto:nfbmo at nfbnet.org> > wrote:

Hi,

If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.

But it will decrease funds in state accounts!

What is the ga members opinions?

Will it be better not to give this publicity than put unneed attention on blind pension?

bryan

From: NFBMO <nfbmo-bounces at nfbnet.org <mailto:nfbmo-bounces at nfbnet.org> > On Behalf Of Gary Wunder via NFBMO
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 5:41 PM
To: 'NFB of Missouri Mailing List' <nfbmo at nfbnet.org <mailto:nfbmo at nfbnet.org> >
Cc: Gary Wunder <gwunder at earthlink.net <mailto:gwunder at earthlink.net> >
Subject: [NFBMO] Possible changes in Blind Pension Fund

I learned yesterday of something that will appear on the August 6 ballot to amend the constitution. At the direction of President Wright, I’ve done some investigating and still have more questions than answers, but here’s what the Secretary of State’s Office says:

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to allow places where individuals, corporations, organizations, and associations provide childcare outside of the child’s home to be exempt from property tax? This is intended to make childcare more available, which would support the well-being of children, families, the workforce, and society as a whole.

State governmental entities estimate the state’s Blind Pension Fund could have annual lost revenue of up to $400,000. Local governments expect an unknown fiscal impact.

Fair Ballot Language: 

A "yes" vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to grant the General Assembly statutory authority to exempt all property, real and personal, used primarily for the care of a child outside of his or her home by general law. An assessing authority may be authorized by general law to exempt from the assessment, levy, and collection of taxes such portion of the property of such individual, corporation, organization, or association that is used primarily for such childcare.  

A "no" vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution and childcare facilities will continue to be assessed, levied, and pay taxes.

If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.

In checking with state officials who usually know about such things, I find them surprised and two promising to get back with me to provide more information.

Obvious questions: Will this alter current benefits? What will it do to future increases? To what extent should we be involved whenever discussions about property taxes are considered by the legislature? If this is a severe threat, what should we do between now and August 6?

Gary Wunder

gwunder at earthlink.net <mailto:gwunder at earthlink.net>  

_______________________________________________
NFBMO mailing list
NFBMO at nfbnet.org <mailto:NFBMO at nfbnet.org> 
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmo_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for NFBMO:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmo_nfbnet.org/r_crome1%40msn.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nfbmo_nfbnet.org/attachments/20240629/fcf873be/attachment.htm>