Modifies provisions relating to the assessed valuation of residential real property
HB4 repeals and replaces existing Missouri statutes governing notice of real property assessment increases and adds a new optional property tax assessment framework for certain owner-occupied residential property. The bill requires assessors to notify record owners when assessed values increase, and in general reassessment years it requires counties to provide projected tax liability information along with the notice of increased valuation. It also expands the required contents of those notices, including parcel information, taxing jurisdictions, prior-year rates, tax rate ceilings, contact information, and total projected property tax liability. In certain large charter counties, the bill also requires online disclosure of the assessment method, basis for valuation, and any third-party data relied upon.
The most significant substantive change is a new section creating an optional assessment limitation for primary residences beginning January 1, 2026. Under that provision, the assessed value of qualifying owner-occupied residential property generally remains fixed at the most recent assessment level, or at the most recent purchase price if the property is sold after that date, until the property is sold again or substantial new construction/improvements justify a reassessment. The bill limits reassessment for improvements to situations where added value equals at least a 50% increase in assessed valuation, and it requires owners to notify assessors of new construction or improvements. Owners must opt in to receive this treatment; if they do not, their property continues under the existing assessment process.
HB4 would materially affect county assessors, county boards of equalization, and homeowners by changing how assessment increases are communicated and, for participating primary residences, how often values can rise for tax purposes. It also affects political subdivisions that levy property taxes because counties must provide more detailed projected tax information tied to those levies. The bill repeals the current versions of sections 137.180 and 137.355 and enacts new sections 137.180, 137.182, and 137.355 in their place, thereby revising Missouri’s property tax assessment and notice statutes.
No committee transcript or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded debate or roll-call evidence in the supplied materials. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears designed to increase transparency and predictability for taxpayers while also limiting assessment growth for owner-occupied homes. The absence of recorded votes or discussion means sentiment cannot be measured from legislative history in the provided record.
The main point of contention likely concerns the balance between taxpayer relief and local revenue stability. Supporters would likely favor the bill for capping assessment growth on primary residences and improving notice and appeal information, while opponents may worry that limiting reassessments could reduce property tax growth for schools, counties, and other local taxing entities, and could create inequities between long-term owners and new buyers. The optional opt-in structure and the 50% improvement threshold may also raise implementation questions for assessors and taxpayers.
HB4 would amend Missouri’s property tax assessment statutes by replacing sections 137.180 and 137.355 and adding section 137.182. It would require more detailed notice when real property assessments increase, including projected tax liability information in general reassessment years and, in certain counties, online disclosure of valuation methods and supporting data. It would also create an optional assessment freeze/cap for owner-occupied primary residences beginning in 2026, limiting reassessment until sale or substantial qualifying improvements, which would directly affect assessors, homeowners, and local taxing jurisdictions.
No committee discussion or voting record was provided, so there is no documented legislative sentiment in the supplied materials. From the bill text, the measure appears oriented toward taxpayer protection and transparency, suggesting likely support from property owners concerned about rising assessments. At the same time, the bill’s limits on reassessment for primary residences could draw concern from local governments and taxing districts that rely on property tax growth.
The likely central contention is whether the bill’s assessment limits for primary residences would provide needed relief and predictability or would unduly constrain local property tax revenue. Supporters would likely emphasize notice, transparency, and shielding homeowners from rapid tax increases; opponents would likely focus on reduced flexibility for assessors, possible revenue impacts on schools and local governments, and fairness concerns between opted-in homeowners, non-owner-occupied property, and new purchasers. The bill’s optional participation and its 50% improvement trigger may also be debated as to administrative complexity and valuation consistency.