SB 16 repeals and replaces Missouri’s corporate income tax statute to create a scheduled phaseout of the tax. Under the bill, the corporate income tax rate remains 4% for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2020, but starting with tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2026, the rate must be reduced in 0.8 percentage-point increments, with no more than one reduction per calendar year.
The bill sets a final endpoint for the phaseout: for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2030, no corporate income tax would be imposed. It also preserves an existing exclusion stating that the section does not apply to out-of-state businesses operating under sections 190.270 to 190.285, which relate to certain transportation network or similar business operations under Missouri law.
Impact
SB 16 would substantially amend Missouri’s corporate tax code by replacing the current long-term corporate income tax rate structure with a mandatory phaseout schedule. If enacted, it would reduce state corporate income tax revenues over time and ultimately eliminate the tax entirely for tax years beginning in 2030 and later. The bill directly affects corporations subject to Missouri taxable income, while maintaining the existing statutory carve-out for out-of-state businesses covered by sections 190.270 to 190.285.
Sentiment
The available context suggests the bill is framed positively by its sponsor and caption as a tax-cutting measure intended to phase out the corporate income tax. No committee transcript or recorded vote information is provided, so there is no documented opposition or support in the supplied materials beyond the bill’s stated purpose. Overall, the bill appears to be presented as a pro-business tax reduction proposal.
Contention
The main point of contention likely concerns the fiscal impact of eliminating corporate income tax revenue versus the potential economic benefits of lowering taxes on businesses. Supporters would likely favor the gradual reduction and eventual repeal as a way to improve competitiveness and attract investment, while critics may worry about lost state revenue and the effect on funding for public services. The only explicit statutory limitation in the text is the continued exclusion for certain out-of-state businesses, but no specific dispute over that provision is shown in the provided record.