Hancock County; levy an excise tax pursuant to subsection (b) of Code Section 48-13-51 of the O.C.G.A.; authorize the governing authority
Summary
SB 349 is a local act that authorizes the governing authority of Hancock County, Georgia, to levy an excise tax on hotel, motel, inn, lodge, tourist camp, tourist cabin, campground, and similar short-term lodging charges. The tax rate may not exceed 8 percent of the room charge, and the authority to impose the tax is tied to a local resolution adopted by the county governing body that sets the rate, identifies the projects or tourism-related purposes, and specifies how the revenue will be allocated.
The bill requires that, under the county’s resolution, at least 50 percent of the revenue collected above what would be generated at a 5 percent rate be used to promote tourism, conventions, and trade shows through the county’s designated destination marketing organization or another authorized tourism-fund administrator. The remaining excess revenue must be spent on tourism product development. In effect, the measure expands Hancock County’s ability to raise and dedicate hotel-motel tax revenue for tourism promotion and related development projects, while preserving local control over the exact rate and use of funds within the bill’s limits.
Impact
SB 349 amends the local tax authority available to Hancock County under Georgia law by allowing the county to impose an excise tax on transient lodging up to 8 percent, subject to a county resolution and the allocation rules in Code Section 48-13-51. It affects hotels and other lodging providers operating in the county, as well as visitors who pay the tax, and it directs the resulting revenue toward tourism marketing and tourism product development rather than general county purposes.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been noncontroversial and broadly supported. It passed the Senate 52-0 on the Local Consent Calendar and later passed the House 151-0 on the Local Calendar, indicating unanimous support in both chambers. The absence of committee transcript discussion also suggests the measure was treated as a routine local bill.
Contention
There is little evidence of substantive opposition in the available record. The main policy choice embedded in the bill is how much lodging-tax revenue should be devoted to tourism promotion versus tourism product development, but the bill itself leaves those details to a Hancock County resolution. Any potential concern would likely come from lodging businesses or taxpayers affected by the higher excise tax, though no recorded objections appear in the voting history or transcripts provided.