Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the NM Legislature. The LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports
if they are used for other purposes.
Current FIRs (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) are a vailable on the NM Legislative Website (legis.state.nm.us).
Adobe PDF versions include all attachments, whereas HTML versions may not. Previously issued FIRs and
attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR Whitaker
DATE TYPED 2/04/05
HB 433
SHORT TITLE Local Government Gross Receipts Time Limits
SB
ANALYST Hadwiger
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
LFC Files
Responses Received From
Taxation and Revenue Department (TRD)
Department of Finance and Administration (DFA)
FOR THE REVENUE STABILIZATION AND TAX POLICY COMMITTEE
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
This bill amends Sections 7-19D-12 and 7-20E-21 to remove the sunset dates by which time a
municipality or county could enact an ordinance imposing the municipal or county capital outlay
gross receipts tax. The bill includes an emergency clause. Under present law, an ordinance to
impose either of the taxes would have to be enacted prior to July 1, 2005.
Significant Issues
The municipal capital outlay gross receipts tax may be imposed in increments of 1/16
th
of one
percent (0.0625 percent) but cannot exceed a total of 1/4
th
of 1 percent (0.25 percent). The
county capital outlay gross receipts tax may be imposed in increments of 1/16
th
of one percent
(0.0625 percent) but cannot exceed a total of 1/4
th
of 1 percent (0.25 percent). Both capital out-
lay gross receipts taxes require voter approval. Revenues received from both capital outlay gross
receipts tax options can be used for a wide variety of projects.
DFA indicated that removal of these sunset dates is a statewide, immediate and serious problem
for many local governments due to their financial condition and the slow economy. DFA further
noted that it is important to allow local governments the option to enact ordinances to seek local
option taxes on a continuing basis so that they can start, continue and complete projects that are
important. These enacted ordinances must still pass public referendums in order to take effect
and local governments must have already imposed all of their respective general, infrastructure
and supplemental (municipalities) gross receipts tax increments before they are eligible to im-
pose these options.
pg_0002
House Bill 433 -- Page 2
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The Taxation and Revenue Department provided the following tables to show jurisdictions that
have imposed this tax:
Table 1: M
unicipalities that have already imposed the municipal capital outlay gross receipts
taxes.
Taxable
Estimated Revenue:
Gross Receipts Tax Rate Municipal Capital Outlay Enactment
City
(FY 2004)
Gross Receipts Tax (0.25%)
Date
Alamogordo
484,204,089
0.25% 1,210,510
07/04
Angel Fire
67,196,409
0.25% 167,991
07/02
Aztec
104,792,261
0.25% 261,981
07/04
Clayton
32,870,413
0.25% 82,176
07/04
Clovis
586,865,693
0.25% 1,467,164
07/04
Espanola (1)
279,215,777
0.25% 698,039
01/03
Mesilla
26,572,830
0.25% 66,432
07/03
Red River
33,858,445
0.25% 84,646
07/02
Taos Ski Valley
40,562,105
0.25% 101,405
07/04
Tucumcari
65,643,246
0.25% 164,108
01/04
(1) Espanola lies within both Rio Arriba County and Santa Fe County. Gross receipts amounts are shown together.
Table 2: Counties that have already imposed the county capital outlay gross receipts taxes.
Taxable
Estimated Revenue:
Gross Receipts Tax Rate County Capital Outlay Enactment
County
(FY 2004)
Gross Receipts Tax
Date
Guadalupe (Remainder)
13,257,756 0.250% 33,144
01/04
McKinley (Remainder)
351,151,893 0.250% 877,880
01/02
San Miguel (Remainder)
38,443,007 0.125% 48,054
07/03
Santa Fe (Remainder)
569,467,553 0.250% 1,423,669
01/03
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
The Taxation and Revenue Department indicated there would be minimal impact on their opera-
tions if HB433 were adopted.
DH/sb:yr