HB26-1266 would repeal Colorado’s retail delivery fee structure and the related “enterprise retail delivery fees” charged on retail deliveries of tangible personal property. As introduced, the bill eliminates the base retail delivery fee in section 43-4-218 and also repeals the authority for five enterprise fees tied to retail deliveries: the community access enterprise fee, clean fleet enterprise fee, statewide bridge and tunnel enterprise fee, clean transit enterprise fee, and nonattainment area air pollution mitigation enterprise fee. The bill also removes or updates numerous statutory definitions, fee-collection provisions, and related legislative declarations that currently describe those fees and the purposes for which the revenue is used.
The bill’s practical effect would be to end the collection of these delivery-related charges beginning 90 days after final adjournment of the 2026 General Assembly, unless referred to and approved by voters. It would also revise several tax and fee statutes so that retail delivery fees are no longer excluded from purchase price calculations, and it would remove provisions that direct the Department of Revenue to collect and distribute those fees to transportation and environmental enterprise funds. In addition, the bill repeals allocation language that currently sends retail delivery fee revenue to the highway users tax fund and the multimodal transportation and mitigation options fund.
In terms of state law, the bill would substantially unwind a set of transportation- and climate-related funding mechanisms created in recent years. It would affect statutes governing transportation infrastructure, bridge and tunnel financing, transit electrification, air pollution mitigation, and enterprise fund administration. Because the repeals reach both the fee-imposition sections and the cross-references in related statutes, the bill would require conforming changes across multiple titles of the Colorado Revised Statutes and would eliminate a recurring revenue source for several state enterprises and transportation programs.
The general sentiment reflected in the available history is limited, but the bill’s introduction and sponsorship indicate an effort to roll back a fee that is currently embedded in retail delivery transactions. The committee outcome suggests the measure did not advance: it was postponed indefinitely in the House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee on March 10, 2026. That action generally indicates lack of committee support for moving the bill forward.
The main point of contention is the policy choice between removing costs from consumers and retailers versus preserving dedicated funding for transportation, bridge, transit, and air-quality mitigation programs. Supporters of repeal would likely argue that the fees add cost to deliveries and burden retailers and consumers, while opponents would likely emphasize that the fees finance infrastructure and environmental remediation tied to increased delivery activity. The bill text itself frames the existing fees as justified by delivery-related impacts, so repealing them would directly undercut that funding rationale and shift the debate to whether those programs should continue to be supported through other revenue sources.
The bill would repeal the statewide retail delivery fee and the associated enterprise retail delivery fees, removing the statutory authority for the Department of Revenue to collect and distribute those charges. It would also repeal or amend multiple cross-references in the Colorado Revised Statutes so that retail delivery fees are no longer included in purchase-price exclusions, fee administration provisions, or revenue allocation formulas. As a result, several enterprise funds and transportation-related programs that currently receive retail delivery fee revenue would lose that dedicated funding stream unless replaced by other legislation or appropriations.
The available record shows little formal debate, but the bill’s posture suggests limited support in committee. It was postponed indefinitely in the House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee, which typically reflects opposition or insufficient support to advance. The bill appears to be framed as a fee-repeal measure, so sentiment likely divides between those seeking relief from delivery-related charges and those defending the fees as a source of transportation and environmental funding.
The central contention is whether retail delivery fees are an unfair cost on consumers and retailers or a justified user fee tied to delivery-related impacts on roads, transit, bridges, and air quality. Opponents of the repeal are likely to argue that the fees fund specific mitigation and infrastructure programs and that eliminating them would weaken transportation and climate-related investments. Supporters are likely to focus on the cumulative cost of multiple delivery fees and the burden on small businesses and consumers. The bill’s repeal of enterprise fee authority across several programs makes the funding loss a major issue for agencies and stakeholders that rely on those revenues.