Modifies provisions relating to incentives for interstate business relocation
Summary
HB 1350 repeals and replaces Missouri’s existing statute governing incentives for interstate business relocation. The bill focuses on economic activities moving between border counties in Missouri and Kansas, and it expands the covered activities beyond jobs to include professional sports teams, franchises, organizations, and events tied to sports facilities. Under the bill, if a job or other qualifying economic activity relocates from a Kansas border county to a Missouri border county, Missouri tax credits, state funding, or withholding-tax retention incentives generally may not be issued for that activity under several existing economic development programs.
The bill also creates a certification-based trigger for when these restrictions take effect or are suspended. The Missouri Department of Economic Development director must determine whether Kansas is offering or withholding comparable incentives for activities relocating across the border, then notify state leaders in writing. If Kansas prohibits incentives for such relocations, Missouri’s restriction on incentives becomes effective; if Kansas is providing incentives, Missouri’s restriction is suspended. The bill includes notice requirements to the revisor of statutes and extends the sunset date of the section to August 28, 2035, if it does not expire earlier.
Impact
HB 1350 would amend Missouri’s economic development incentive laws by limiting the state’s ability to subsidize relocations from Kansas border counties into Missouri border counties when the move is tied to covered tax credit, funding, or withholding-tax retention programs. It affects multiple existing incentive statutes, including tax credit programs under sections 100.700 to 100.850 and 135.100 to 135.258, funding under section 620.1023, and withholding-tax retention programs under sections 620.2000 to 620.2020. The bill also broadens the definition of covered economic activities to include sports-related entities and events, not just jobs, and it creates a mechanism for the Department of Economic Development to monitor Kansas policy and determine when Missouri’s restrictions apply.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears to be policy-driven and protective of Missouri’s border economy rather than overtly partisan. The bill’s structure suggests support for discouraging incentive-driven cross-border relocation and for responding symmetrically to Kansas policy. Because no transcripts or vote history are provided, there is no documented public debate in the supplied record to indicate broader support or opposition.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely whether Missouri should restrict incentives for businesses, jobs, and sports-related activities relocating from Kansas border counties, especially if Kansas is also using or withholding incentives. Another potential issue is the bill’s reciprocal trigger mechanism, which ties Missouri policy to Kansas executive action and requires certifications from the Department of Economic Development and unanimous written affirmation from state leaders. The inclusion of professional sports teams, franchises, and events may also raise questions about whether the bill is aimed only at traditional business relocation or also at high-profile sports and entertainment development.