An Act to amend 78.12 (4) (b) 2.; to create 78.12 (4) (b) 1m., 78.12 (4) (b) 1n. and 78.201 of the statutes; Relating to: applying the motor vehicle fuel tax supplierâs administrative allowance to diesel fuel, a motor vehicle fuel tax refund for evaporation losses, and making an appropriation. (FE)
Summary
SB179 would change Wisconsin’s motor vehicle fuel tax administration in two main ways. First, it extends the existing 1.35% administrative allowance that motor fuel suppliers may retain on gasoline tax collections to diesel fuel as well. Second, it creates a new refund program for retail dealers who sell gasoline, diesel fuel, or both, allowing them to claim a refund equal to 0.5% of the state motor vehicle fuel tax paid on fuel purchased for resale to account for shrinkage and evaporation losses.
The bill also sets out detailed filing and documentation rules for the refund. A retailer would have to file a claim with the Department of Revenue within 12 months of purchase and submit invoices or a list of purchases. Suppliers would be required to provide invoices containing specified information, including the tax amount as a separate item when possible, and retailers using purchase lists would need to keep invoices for four years and make them available for inspection. The bill applies prospectively to motor vehicle fuel taxes due and payable on the effective date and would take effect on the first day of the third month after publication.
Impact
If enacted, SB179 would amend s. 78.12 of the Wisconsin statutes and create new s. 78.201, changing how motor vehicle fuel tax collections are handled for both suppliers and retailers. It would increase the amount suppliers may retain on diesel fuel tax collections and reintroduce a state refund mechanism for retailers to offset evaporation and shrinkage losses, which had existed for gasoline retailers before 2019. The bill would also impose new administrative duties on the Department of Revenue and on suppliers and retailers regarding claims, invoices, recordkeeping, and refund determinations, and it includes an appropriation component tied to the fiscal effects of the change.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have had mixed but ultimately substantial support in both chambers, with the Senate passing it 19-13 and the Assembly concurring 56-37. That voting pattern suggests the measure was viewed favorably by a majority, likely because it provides tax administration relief to fuel suppliers and retailers, but it also drew meaningful opposition. The later Senate nonconcurrence in the Assembly substitute indicates that while the underlying concept had support, amendments or changes made in the Assembly were not accepted by the Senate.
Contention
The main points of contention likely centered on the fiscal impact of reducing or refunding fuel tax revenue and on whether the state should restore a refund that had been eliminated in 2019. Supporters would likely emphasize fairness to retailers and suppliers, especially for losses from evaporation and shrinkage and the administrative burden of collecting fuel taxes. Opponents likely focused on the loss of state revenue, the appropriateness of extending the supplier allowance to diesel, and whether the refund program creates additional complexity or preferential treatment for fuel industry participants. The Senate’s refusal to concur in the Assembly substitute suggests disagreement over amendments rather than the core policy alone.
Crossfiled
An Act to amend 78.12 (4) (b) 2.; to create 78.12 (4) (b) 1m., 78.12 (4) (b) 1n. and 78.201 of the statutes; Relating to: applying the motor vehicle fuel tax supplierâs administrative allowance to diesel fuel, a motor vehicle fuel tax refund for evaporation losses, and making an appropriation. (FE)