SB 1656 would repeal and replace section 144.014 of Missouri law to exempt retail sales of food from the state sales tax. Under the bill, food eligible for purchase with federal food stamps under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program would no longer be subject to the state sales tax imposed under Chapter 144. The bill also makes clear that the exemption applies to the state sales tax only and does not extend to local sales taxes.
The bill defines "food" by reference to items eligible under the federal Food Stamp Program and includes food sold through vending machines. It excludes most prepared food sold by establishments where more than 80 percent of gross receipts come from prepared food for immediate consumption, such as restaurants, fast food restaurants, delicatessens, eating houses, and cafés. In effect, the measure would remove the state sales tax from groceries and other qualifying food items while preserving taxation of most restaurant meals and similar prepared food sales.
Impact
If enacted, SB 1656 would significantly change Missouri’s sales tax base by exempting qualifying food purchases from the state sales tax under Chapter 144. It would repeal the existing 1 percent food sales tax structure and replace it with a full exemption for eligible food items, while leaving local sales taxes intact unless separately changed by local law. The bill would affect consumers purchasing groceries and other SNAP-eligible foods, retailers that sell those items, and the Department of Revenue’s administration of state sales tax collections.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to be framed as tax relief for basic food purchases and likely intended to reduce the cost of groceries for Missouri residents. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the available materials. The overall tone of the bill is policy-oriented and consumer-focused, with an emphasis on exempting essential food items from state taxation.
Contention
The main policy distinction in the bill is between grocery-type food and prepared food sold by restaurants and similar establishments. Supporters would likely favor the broad exemption for SNAP-eligible food as a way to reduce regressive taxation on necessities, while opponents could object to the loss of state revenue or to the complexity of defining which food sales qualify. Another likely point of contention is that the bill does not exempt local sales taxes, meaning consumers could still pay local tax on food even if the state tax is removed.