HB 1192 authorizes a new local transient guest tax for a narrowly defined city in Missouri: a city with more than 2,700 but fewer than 3,000 inhabitants, located in a county with more than 50,000 but fewer than 60,000 inhabitants, and with a county seat population between 17,000 and 21,000. Based on the bill caption, this appears intended to apply to Knob Noster. The tax would apply to charges paid by transient guests staying in hotels, motels, or campgrounds, and the bill defines both “campground” and “transient guests” for purposes of the section.
The city could impose the tax at a rate of up to 5% per occupied room or campground site per night. The tax would be added on top of existing lodging charges and other taxes, and it must be stated separately on the bill. Revenue from the tax would go to the city’s general revenue fund rather than being dedicated to a specific program or project.
The bill does not create the tax automatically. Before it can take effect, the city’s governing body must submit the question to voters at a state general or primary election, and a majority of voters must approve it. If approved, the tax would become effective on the first day of the second calendar quarter after the election.
The overall sentiment in the available context appears neutral to mildly supportive, since the bill is framed as a local option tax subject to voter approval rather than a mandatory statewide levy. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the supplied materials.
The main point of contention, if any, is likely the use of a lodging tax for general revenue purposes rather than for tourism, infrastructure, or other dedicated uses. Because the bill is highly specific to one city and requires voter approval, any concern would likely center on local tax burden for hotels, motels, campground operators, and transient visitors, versus the city’s need for additional general revenue.
HB 1192 would add section 94.451 to Missouri law in chapter 94, creating a new city-specific authority to levy a transient guest tax on hotel, motel, and campground stays. It would affect local taxing authority for the targeted city and impose new compliance obligations on lodging businesses to collect and separately state the tax. The bill would not change state tax rates generally, but it would authorize a new local revenue source contingent on voter approval.
The available materials suggest a generally neutral to favorable posture toward the bill, because it is a permissive local tax measure that can only take effect if approved by local voters. No committee discussion or vote history is provided, so there is no recorded opposition or support to indicate stronger sentiment. The bill’s structure suggests an effort to balance local revenue needs with direct voter consent.
The likely areas of contention are the imposition of an additional tax on transient lodging and the fact that the proceeds would be used for general revenue rather than a dedicated purpose. Lodging businesses, campground operators, and visitors may view the tax as an added cost, while city officials may support it as a flexible funding source. Because the bill is narrowly tailored to one city and requires voter approval, any disagreement would likely focus on local tax policy rather than broader state-level concerns.