General Provisions - Commemorative Days - Purple Lights Night
Summary
HB1056 would require a county, when it has adopted a local law charging customers a fee for plastic or paper carryout bags, to impose an excise tax on any portion of that fee that exceeds the minimum amount required by the local law. The bill defines “retailer” broadly as a person engaged in the retail sale of goods and applies only in counties that already have a bag-fee ordinance in place.
Under the bill, the excess amount charged above the local minimum would be split three ways: one-third retained by the county, one-third remitted to the State’s General Fund, and one-third kept by the retailer to offset administrative costs of collecting and remitting the tax. Counties would administer and collect the tax alongside the existing local bag fee. The bill is set to take effect July 1, 2025.
Impact
HB1056 would add a new section to the Local Government Article requiring counties with plastic or paper carryout bag fee laws to layer an excise tax onto any amount charged above the local minimum fee. It would create a new revenue stream for counties and the State, while also allowing retailers to retain a portion of the excess charge for administrative costs. The bill would affect local governments that have enacted bag-fee ordinances, retailers that sell carryout bags, and the Comptroller’s administration of State revenue remittances.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, there is no clear evidence of organized support or opposition in the available record. The measure appears policy-driven and administrative in nature, with a focus on standardizing treatment of excess bag-fee charges and sharing revenue between local and State government. No committee debate or vote history is provided to indicate a broader political sentiment.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the requirement that counties impose an excise tax on fees above the local minimum, which could be viewed as limiting local discretion over bag-fee structures and increasing the cost burden on consumers. Retailers may also object to the added administrative complexity, even though the bill allows them to retain one-third of the excess amount to cover collection and remittance costs. Counties and the State may differ over revenue allocation, since the bill splits the tax proceeds between local government and the General Fund.