SB0253 amends the Illinois Use Tax Act, Service Use Tax Act, Service Occupation Tax Act, and Retailers’ Occupation Tax Act to clarify how the state’s reduced 1% tax rate applies to motor vehicle modifications made to accommodate a person with a disability. Beginning July 1, 2025, the bill specifies that the 1% rate applies not only to the modification service itself, but also to tangible personal property installed in or on a motor vehicle before, during, or after the vehicle purchase when that property is used to make the vehicle usable by a person with a disability.
The bill also adds a billing requirement: the reduced rate applies only if the disability-related property is separately itemized on the vehicle sale invoice, or if it is purchased separately from the vehicle and separately itemized on a bill or invoice. The measure is framed as a revenue-code clarification rather than a broad tax change, and it takes effect immediately, with the new motor-vehicle-modification rule beginning July 1, 2025.
Impact
SB0253 would amend four Illinois sales and use tax statutes to expand and clarify the existing 1% tax treatment for disability-related motor vehicle modifications. In practice, it would affect retailers, service providers, and purchasers of adaptive vehicle equipment by specifying when parts and installed tangible personal property qualify for the reduced rate and by requiring separate itemization to receive the benefit. The bill does not change the general 6.25% tax rate, but it would alter administration and compliance for transactions involving adaptive equipment and vehicle accessibility modifications.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no documented debate or roll-call history to gauge legislative sentiment. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears narrowly targeted and likely intended to be technical and supportive of taxpayers seeking disability-related vehicle accommodations. The absence of recorded opposition or amendments in the provided materials suggests no visible controversy in the available record, though that cannot be confirmed without committee action.
Contention
The main potential point of contention is the bill’s itemization requirement. Supporters of the change would likely view it as a needed clarification that ensures adaptive equipment installed before, during, or after a vehicle purchase receives the reduced tax rate. Any concern would likely come from dealers, installers, or taxpayers worried that the separate-itemization rule could create administrative burdens or disputes over whether a particular part qualifies as disability-related property. No specific opposing arguments are documented in the provided materials.