authorizes a tax credit for providing services to homeless persons
HB 2955 creates a new Missouri income tax credit for taxpayers that provide certain services to homeless persons. Beginning with tax years starting on or after January 1, 2027, an eligible taxpayer may claim a credit of up to $10,000 per year if it is certified as a qualified provider of employment services to homeless persons, employment to homeless persons, or housing to homeless persons. The credit is nonrefundable and nontransferable, but unused amounts may be carried forward for up to three subsequent tax years.
The bill directs the Department of Economic Development to establish guidelines, applications, and certification procedures for the three categories of qualified providers. Employment-services providers must offer training or services specifically designed to help homeless persons find and secure jobs; employment providers must employ homeless persons at least 28 hours per week at or above minimum wage; and housing providers must lease, rent, or provide free adequate income-based residential housing to homeless persons. Certifications last 12 months and may be renewed, and applications for the credit are to be processed on a first-come, first-served basis.
The bill caps the total annual amount of credits at $1 million and classifies the credit as a domestic and social tax credit under Missouri’s tax credit framework. It also makes the program subject to the Missouri Sunset Act, automatically ending December 31, 2032 unless reauthorized. The department is authorized to adopt rules to administer the program, subject to state rulemaking requirements.
The bill’s impact on state law is to add a new section to Chapter 135, RSMo, creating a targeted tax incentive tied to homelessness services, employment, and housing. It would affect Missouri income taxpayers, nonprofit and charitable organizations, workforce development agencies, employers, and housing providers that serve homeless individuals, while also imposing administrative duties on the Department of Economic Development to certify eligibility and manage the credit cap.
There is little recorded public debate in the provided materials, and no committee transcript or vote history is available. Based on the bill’s structure and caption, the general sentiment appears supportive of encouraging private-sector and nonprofit assistance for homeless persons through tax incentives. The main potential points of contention are the fiscal cost of the credit, the administrative burden of certification and oversight, and whether the eligibility standards are broad enough or sufficiently targeted to ensure the credit reaches providers delivering meaningful services.
HB 2955 would amend Chapter 135, RSMo, by adding section 135.390 to create a new state income tax credit for certified providers of employment services, employment, or housing for homeless persons. It would establish certification standards, application procedures, a $10,000 annual per-taxpayer cap, a $1 million annual statewide cap, carryforward rules, and a sunset date of December 31, 2032. The bill would also place administration with the Department of Economic Development and classify the credit as a domestic and social tax credit under Missouri law.
No votes or committee testimony are included in the provided record, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from lawmakers or stakeholders. The bill’s purpose and design suggest a generally favorable sentiment toward expanding assistance for homeless persons through tax incentives, with the likely expectation that it could encourage employment and housing support from eligible providers.
The bill does not include recorded debate, but likely areas of contention include the fiscal impact of creating a new tax credit, the adequacy of the $1 million annual cap, and the administrative complexity of certifying providers and verifying compliance. Another possible issue is the scope of eligibility: some may view the standards as too narrow because they require specific certification and service criteria, while others may view them as too broad or difficult to monitor effectively. The first-come, first-served allocation method could also raise concerns about access and fairness among eligible providers.