Authorizes a state sales tax exemption for the purchase of diapers, incontinence products, and feminine hygiene products
Summary
HB955 would create a new section of Missouri law, section 144.059, to exempt certain hygiene products from state sales and use tax beginning January 1, 2026. The bill defines three covered categories: diapers, feminine hygiene products such as tampons, pads, liners, and cups, and incontinence products designed for urinary incontinence. The exemption applies to state sales and use tax and state use tax on these items.
The bill does not eliminate local sales or use taxes. It expressly preserves local taxation authority under existing law, meaning the exemption would only affect the state portion of the tax and not county, city, or other local taxes authorized by statute. The measure is framed as a consumer tax relief provision for essential personal care items.
Impact
If enacted, HB955 would amend Chapter 144, RSMo, by adding section 144.059 and removing the state sales and use tax burden from diapers, feminine hygiene products, and incontinence products starting in 2026. Retailers would need to stop collecting the state portion of tax on these items, while local sales and use taxes could still apply. The bill would primarily affect consumers who purchase these products, as well as sellers and tax administrators responsible for applying Missouri sales tax rules.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be presented as a straightforward consumer tax exemption with no recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials. The caption and language suggest a generally favorable policy goal of reducing the cost of essential hygiene products. Because there are no transcripts or roll-call votes included, there is no documented opposition or support to characterize beyond the bill’s apparent intent.
Contention
The main policy issue in HB955 is the scope of the tax exemption. The bill removes only the state sales and use tax, not local taxes, which may be seen by supporters as a targeted and fiscally limited approach but by critics as leaving consumers still paying some tax on essential items. Another possible point of contention is the delayed effective date of January 1, 2026, which postpones relief and may reflect budgetary or administrative concerns. No specific stakeholder objections or amendments are provided in the available record.