Missouri House set for debate on flat tax, rate cuts as session moves into final weeks
House Majority Leader Alex Riley speaks April 10 at a news conference in the Missouri House. (Tim Bommel/Missouri House Communications)
Missouri House Republicans aren't ready to give up on dual goals of enacting a flat income tax and cutting the overall rate, and have loaded a Senate bill with their latest plan — flat tax and capital gains cut now, rate cuts later.
On April 7, the state Senate approved a bill exempting capital gains — profits from property or investments held for more than a year — from state income tax. Individuals would get the break right away, while corporations would be allowed the exemption when revenue triggers lower the top individual income tax rate to 4.5%. The current top rate is 4.7%.
CONTACT US
One vote and that bill, sponsored by House Speaker Pro Tem Chad Perkins, is on its way to Gov. Mike Kehoe. The House passed the original version on a party-line vote in February.
But there's no rush to bring it to a vote, even though Perkins has said he is ready.
'We have been hanging on to that bill for a little while, the House bill, to preserve options as we go into these last three weeks of session,' House Majority Leader Alex Riley of Springfield said Thursday.
Next week, Riley said, the House will debate a bill loaded with property tax changes as well as the flat tax at a rate of 4.7%, an immediate capital gains exemption and a 10-step income tax rate cut. The changes made in the bill, originally passed in the Senate as a simple exemption for National Guard active duty pay during state activations, boosted the estimate cost from $47,282 to as much as $1.7 billion when fully implemented in 2037 or later.
'We just want to see what opportunities we have over these last three weeks of session,' Riley said.
State Sen. Adam Schnelting of St. Charles, the sponsor of the bill, isn't pleased with the changes.
'We're at that stage in the game where things aren't moving as quickly or as often as people would like, and so when you send something to the other chamber, it's just natural at this point for them to load it up,' Schnelting said.
Items added to Schnelting's bill in addition to an income tax cut would:
Decrease the percentage of the value of vehicles and other personal property to 32% and remove the value of personal property from tax rate adjustments based on reassessments.
Increase the income tax limits and credit amounts for the refundable credit known as the circuit breaker. The credit is for property taxes paid by homeowners and renters who are 65 or older or who have a qualifying disability.
Limit new local property tax revenue from the increased value of real estate to 3% or inflation, whichever is less.
The political stakes behind the tax cut are adding pressure to make some kind of reduction this year. During the 2024 campaign, Kehoe and his Republican primary opponents all campaigned on a promise to eliminate the state income tax.
Since 2014, when lawmakers enacted a tax cut over the veto of then-Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon, Missouri's top income tax rate has fallen from 6% to 4.7%. Two future tax cuts, to a 4.5% rate, are already in state law and will take effect if general revenue growth hits targets.
But revenues have declined more than 1% so far this fiscal year and the two-step test for the trigger is unlikely to be met this year or in fiscal 2026, which begins July 1, according to estimates from the Office of Budget and Planning.
The next rate cut to 4.6%, put into law in 2022, is not likely before Jan. 1, 2028, when Kehoe will be seeking re-election.
The proposal going to the full House would not speed up the steps, but it would add a new layer of cuts that would eventually take the rate to 3.4%.
The proposal is a prudent one at a time of revenue uncertainty, said state Rep. Mike McGirl, a Potosi Republican who will handle it during the House debate.
'You have to achieve a certain amount of revenue in order for a trigger to work,' McGirl said. 'So whatever revenue is lost by that trigger is actually a wash. Now anything over the trigger is new revenue.'
Democrats, who hold fewer than one-third of the seats in the Missouri House, will be unable to defeat the proposal on their own. But they will argue that it makes permanent cuts to the state's future revenue at a time when the fiscal needs of the next year are not clear.
Missouri is heavily dependent on federal revenue for roads, health care and education programs. Any federal changes that alter the rate for state matching funds would rapidly increase demands on the state treasury.
'We're not sure what we're going to be getting from the feds,' said state Rep. Del Taylor of St. Louis, the ranking Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee. 'We are expecting some pretty lean years, and some of it is self imposed by all these tax cuts and tax cuts on capital gains.'
State Rep. Adrian Plank, a Columbia Democrat, said he likes proposals such as increasing the income limits on the circuit breaker but is dismayed it is paired with cuts that favor wealthy individuals.
Most of the benefits from a cut in the capital gains rate for individuals would go to a small slice of taxpayers. The 23,800 federal income tax returns for 2022 from Missouri reporting incomes greater than $500,000 a year represent 0.8% of all returns but 65% of the capital gains income.
'If I was in control, I would say, let's give the working class tax breaks and make the people who have all that privilege pay their fair share,' Plank said.
Meanwhile, the capital gains tax cut bill passed by the Senate, which includes numerous other tax reductions, sits idle awaiting the House to send it to the governor.
Perkins said he's not concerned the delay on his bill will put a tax cut in danger.
'We've got a little bit of time left and it's all over here in the House,' Perkins said. 'We can make it happen quickly when the time comes.'
The cost estimate for Perkins' bill forecasts it would reduce revenue by about $240 million in the coming fiscal year, with an ongoing reduction of about $350 million annually when the corporate capital gains cut kicks in.
The official estimate, however, has been challenged as too low by the left-leaning Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.
The institute's estimate is based on IRS data from 2022 that showed $13.3 billion in long-term capital gains reported on individual returns from Missouri. Using the state's top tax rate of 4.7%, applied to taxable income more than $8,911, the institute estimated the revenue from that much income would be about $625 million.
The Missouri Department of Revenue stands by its estimate that the individual capital gains cut would reduce revenue by about $110 million annually.
The corporate capital gains cut would reduce revenue by about $180 million annually. Delaying the corporate cut until individual rates decline was one of the concessions negotiated by Democrats in the Senate. Democrats also won the tax changes targeting lower-income Missourians to balance the package.
The change to the circuit breaker credit limits in the Senate-passed version of Perkins' bill would reduce revenue by about $72 million. A sales tax exemption for adult diapers would reduce revenue by $17 million annually and a similar exemption for baby diapers would cost the state about $1.7 million a year.
Missouri collected $13.4 billion in general revenue in the most recent fiscal year. Estimates published in December project $13.6 billion of general revenue in the year that starts July 1.
On Tuesday, the Senate will debate a state operating budget that would spend $15.7 billion from general revenue, a plan that is balanced by using money from the accumulated surplus. There is another $770 million of general revenue dedicated to capital improvement projects in bills awaiting a hearing in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
State Sen. Lincoln Hough, a Republican from Springfield and chairman of the appropriations committee, said the budget proposal leaves a healthy cash balance.
In a 2022 tax cut bill he sponsored, Hough wrote the two-step trigger for future tax cuts. The next cut will occur when revenue in a fiscal year exceeds the highest of the previous three years by $200 million and the revenue five years previously by more than the intervening rate of inflation.
'My job is not just to look at this fiscal year, but it's really to look at that runway and what it looks like in the future,' Hough said.
Hough voted for Perkins' bill when it passed the Senate. But he's not willing to go along with putting new rate cuts into law while the state faces both revenue and federal funds uncertainty.
'It's easy to cut taxes, or say you want to cut taxes when we still have money,' Hough said. 'What happens in three or four years? What happens in two years? What happens if the federal government changes the reimbursement rate on our expanded Medicaid population?'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bill to amend medically assisted suicide law draws emotional debate from Maine lawmakers
Jun. 9—AUGUSTA — A proposal to allow doctors to waive the waiting period for terminally ill patients who want to be given life-ending drugs drew an emotional debate from lawmakers in the Maine Senate Monday before it was rejected by one vote. The fate of the bill is unclear after the Senate voted the proposal down 18-17. It passed 74-64 in the House of Representatives last week and faces another round of votes in each chamber before it could be sent to Gov. Janet Mills for her signature. The bill would amend a 2019 law known as the Death with Dignity Act, which legalized physician-assisted suicide in Maine. It allows certain terminally ill patients to have the option to receive life-ending medication so they have control over their death. Maine's law currently requires a 17-day waiting period from when a person requests the medication to when they can receive the prescription. The change under consideration, LD 613, would allow a doctor to waive all or a portion of the waiting period if they determine it would be in the patient's best interest. Mills supported the original Death with Dignity Act, but it's unclear if she would support the change. Spokespeople for the governor did not respond Monday to questions about whether she has taken a position on the bill. The proposal allowing for the waiting period to be waived drew emotional debate from lawmakers who spoke about how they've personally been affected by illness and death. "This is not an abstract issue for me," said Rep. Kathy Javner, R-Chester, who has metastatic breast cancer, during last week's House debate. "I am living this reality and stand before you today, not in despair, but in hope that we can preserve the dignity and meaning of life, even in the shadow of death." Javner, who was against the change, said removing the waiting period would take away the time that families and physicians currently have to reflect and consider alternative options. "Let us not respond to suffering with surrender," Javner said. "Let us respond with compassion, with presence, with resources for pain management, with palliative care, with love." Senate Minority Leader Trey Stewart, R-Presque Isle, talked about his mother, who died at age 50 from colorectal cancer, during Monday's Senate debate. Stewart said his mother "broke out" of hospice care in order to be at home with her family at the end of her life. "I will always be grateful for that extra month we got," Stewart said. "I worry about the scenarios about what if they don't get it right and what opportunities are we forestalling through this," he added. "This was the promise that was made originally with this policy, that there wouldn't be that knee-jerk opportunity because of this protection." Maine is among 10 states and Washington, D.C., where physician-assisted suicide is legal for people with terminal illnesses, according to Death With Dignity, an organization in Portland, Oregon, that advocates for the laws as a means of improving how people with such diagnoses die. Waiting periods for medication vary state to state and can range from one day to more than two weeks, according to Death With Dignity. Some states do allow waiting periods to be waived if the patient is unlikely to survive. Maine's Death with Dignity Act has been used by 218 people since it was enacted, according to Michele Meyer, D-Eliot, the sponsor of LD 613. But another nine people have died during the waiting period because their illnesses progressed too rapidly, Meyer said last week. She said the bill does not change the law's criteria that the patient be terminally ill with a six-month prognosis confirmed by two doctors and that they have the capacity to make informed decisions. "This is simple and straight forward," Meyer said. "It corrects a rare situation that never should have existed in the first place. Some of us will not know the gift of a long, healthy life. ... Medical aid in dying offers decisionally capable adults an option to avoid prolonged suffering." In the Senate Monday, Sen. Tim Nangle, D-Windham, talked about his father's lung cancer and the pain he suffered. Nangle said he didn't know if his father, who lived in another state, would have used the Death with Dignity Act, but he said the option for the time waiver should be there. "This is about their choice," Nangle said. "What do they want to do?" Copy the Story Link


Hamilton Spectator
28 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Auditor general's report on company behind ArriveCan to be released today
OTTAWA - The latest probe into the company behind the controversial ArriveCan app is among four reports being released today by Canada's auditor general. Karen Hogan looked into all contracts awarded and payments made to GC Strategies for its work on the app to determine whether they were in line with government policy and whether the government got value for taxpayers' money. In September, the House of Commons unanimously agreed to ask Hogan to look into the contracts and her report is set to be tabled in the House around 10 a.m. ET. As of March 2024, GC Strategies — a two-man team which last week was banned from entering into contracts or real property agreements with the federal government for seven years — had received $100 million in federal government contracts since 2011. Hogan's previous report on the app's development found it did not deliver the best value to taxpayers and concluded that three federal departments disregarded federal policies, controls and transparency in the contracting process. GC Strategies received nearly a third of the $60 million total cost of the ArriveCan project, despite being awarded contracts through non-competitive processes. Hogan also will table a report today on Canada's plans to purchase F-35 fighter jets and whether the Department of National Defence ensured the aircraft would be delivered on time and on budget. Another report will look at whether the government provides adequate office space for public servants while minimizing costs to taxpayers. Canada's environment commissioner Jerry DeMarco will also table four reports today, including an audit of the National Adaptation Strategy, the federal government's $2.1 billion initiative to help communities withstand the impacts of climate change. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 10, 2025.
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
In the battle of Trump v Newsom, the president is winning the public
In the on-going Battle of Los Angeles, California governor Gavin Newsom may have the law on his side – but his adversary president Donald Trump has the most powerful imagery. The conflict began in Los Angeles on Friday, when mobs of protestors attacked agents of the US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE), who were trying to serve warrants on specific illegal immigrants at a Home Depot and also at a clothing store. On Saturday, during a protest in front of a nearby Department of Homeland Security (DHS) office, members of the crowd lit fires and threw rocks at federal officers, who defended themselves with tear gas and non-lethal ammunition. Later that day, president Trump authorised the deployment of 2000 members of the National Guard to protect the federal ICE agents; since then 700 American Marines have been added to the federal force. Governor Newsom and other leaders of the Democratic-dominated California have claimed that Trump's actions were not needed because local and state authorities had the situation under control. And yet on Sunday, following three days of violence and arrests, the Los Angeles Police Department declared downtown Los Angeles an 'unlawful assembly' area. And on Monday the state of California sued the Trump administration, claiming that Trump 'illegally acted to federalise the National Guard,' in the words of Newsom. Typically a governor requests a president to federalise and mobilise the National Guard to deal with riots or natural disasters. For example, consider the Los Angeles riots of 1992. It was sparked by the acquittal of four white police officers who beat a black motorist named Rodney King and it led to more than fifty deaths and a billion dollars of damage; in response a Republican California governor Pete Wilson asked a Republican president George HW Bush to federalise the National Guard. Not since 1965, when president Lyndon B. Johnson sent the National Guard to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators, has a president sent troops without a governor's request. While California officials might be able to make a legal case against the Trump administration, the state and the Democratic party risk losing in the court of public opinion. Viral photographs show masked rioters waving Mexican flags in front of burning cars and debris, supporting the Trump White House's inflammatory claims about an immigrant invasion. In a shrewd public relations move, the federal Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has released mug shots under the heading: 'ICE Captures Worst of the Worst Illegal Alien Criminals in Los Angeles Including Murderers, Sex Offenders, and Other Violent Criminals.' The rogues' gallery contains illegal immigrants from a number of countries including Vietnam, the Philippines, and Mexico, charged with offenses including attempted rape, assault with a deadly weapon, grand theft larceny, distribution of heroin and cocaine, wilful cruelty to a child and other serious crimes. Democrats recently succeeded in reversing the allegedly unlawful deportation to El Salvador of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an illegal immigrant from El Salvador who was granted the right to remain in the US by a federal immigration judge. But on his return he was indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of being an MS-13 gang member who has smuggled thousands of illegal immigrants, drugs, and firearms in the US. Democratic strategists might ask whether someone like Abrego Garcia should be the face of the Democratic party. At least, unlike some of the rioters cavorting in front of burning wreckage in LA, he does not wear a mask. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.