Prohibits the use of any glyphosate or any insecticide belonging to the neonicotinoid class of pesticides
HB1020 would create a new section in Missouri law prohibiting, beginning January 1, 2026, the use of equipment to apply any glyphosate or neonicotinoid pesticide in the state. The bill defines neonicotinoid pesticides broadly to include pesticides or insecticides in that chemical class, including those identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. It also exempts existing stock of neonicotinoid pesticides already possessed or purchased before the effective date.
The bill establishes enforcement and penalty provisions administered by the Department of Agriculture. A knowing violation could result in a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per violation, and repeat violators meeting the bill’s chronic violator standard could face penalties of up to $25,000 per violation. The department could also recover investigation costs, and penalties collected would be remitted to the school district where the violation occurred. The bill further authorizes the department to deny, suspend, revoke, or modify licenses, permits, or certifications issued under existing pesticide-related statutes for violations of the new section or related rules.
HB1020 would significantly alter Missouri pesticide regulation by banning the application of glyphosate and neonicotinoid pesticides with equipment, which would affect farmers, applicators, landscapers, and other pesticide users. It would add a new enforcement mechanism to chapter 281, expand the Department of Agriculture’s authority, and create new civil penalties, cost-recovery provisions, and licensing consequences. The bill would also direct penalty revenue to local school districts rather than the state’s general fund.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the available record does not show formal support or opposition from hearings or floor action. The bill’s caption and structure indicate a strong regulatory approach aimed at restricting pesticide use, suggesting it would likely draw interest from environmental and public-health advocates as well as concern from agricultural and pesticide-use stakeholders. However, no documented vote history or transcript is available here to confirm the balance of sentiment.
The main point of contention is the breadth of the prohibition, which would bar both glyphosate and the neonicotinoid class of pesticides, two widely used products in agriculture and land management. Opponents would likely focus on the practical impact on crop protection, weed control, and compliance costs, while supporters would likely emphasize environmental and health concerns associated with pesticide exposure and pollinator impacts. Another likely issue is enforcement: the bill gives the Department of Agriculture broad discretion to investigate, penalize, and affect licenses, permits, and certifications, which could be viewed as either necessary oversight or overly punitive regulation.