House Revenue & Taxation Committee
Video
Transcript
Bills discussed (3)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1547
· 2 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “HB1547”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1397
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “I'm going to entertain today. I'm going to read them off. HB 1397, Representative Ingram is going to pass over that. SB 274,…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB274
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…HB 1397, Representative Ingram is going to pass over that. SB 274, pass. 275, pass. 276, pass. HB 1547, Representative Lovell…”
|
Pre-2017 bill |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin RTX5060
- Processing date
- October 4, 2026
I'm going to entertain today. I'm going to read them off. HB 1397, Representative Ingram is going to pass over that. SB 274, pass. 275, pass. 276, pass. HB 1547, Representative Lovell, you are recognized to explain your bill.
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
0:30
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and
committee. Arkansas, as you all probably are aware, in 2005, the legislature agreed for Arkansas to be a member of the statewide move for a streamlined sales and use tax agreement and signed on to that.
This bill, what it does today is changes wording that has changed at the agreement level that needs to put Arkansas in compliance with the agreement, and I have Tom Atchley with DF&A that can explain
Tom Atchley
Unverified
1:17
the issue. Mr. Atchley, you're recognized. Mr. Chairman, members of
Speaker 9
1:23
the committee, my name is Tom Atchley. I'm with the Department of Finance and Administration.
The bill before you is a technical corrections bill for a streamlined sales tax adoption for Arkansas as being members of the agreement. Each year we bring to you a technical corrections bill that includes those changes in the national agreement that have occurred since our last session. This year we have a listing that you'll find on your impact statement of the changes that have occurred in the last two years that we need to adopt for purposes of compliance generally
these amendments benefit our taxpayers around the country who collect our sales taxes provide simplified and streamlined rules where when they operate in multiple states they follow the same basic concepts and rules on the list this year is provision dealing with due dates of tax returns to to make sure that all states provide an extension of time to file returns when the Federal Reserve is closed,
if that happens to be the same date the tax is due to be paid. We've redefined model for seller, creating a type of seller that has registered under the agreement with our state, but is not using a certified service provider, but using their own computer systems. The listing includes providing notification, 30-day notification for tax rate changes to sellers in order they can change their computer systems, issues related to filing the simplified
returns under streamline, preventing confidentiality of taxpayers, information that's maintained by the states and by the certified service providers, and a few other minor changes. We also changed the language on direct mail, and a few definitions were added. There is no revenue impact from any of these changes. It continues existing taxation in Arkansas or makes minor changes in definitions and instructions for sellers.
Mr. Ashley, does this bill have
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
3:46
Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Atchley. Mr. Chairman, I've got an amendment that I think has been passed out that we need to adopt first, but we'll yield to questions from the committee. And just as a comment, streamlined sales tax,
It's main purpose is moving toward taxing the Internet sales. And we are, I think, maybe the 24th state that adopted the sales and use tax agreement. I think you all know the feds as well as most that it's going to take probably in the 30s of states to sign on to this agreement before the feds would move and say that Internet sales or mail order sales and all are taxable
and it's collectible by Arkansas. Now, one change, the big change that it made was that prior to January 1, 2008, we were charging sales tax based on the origination of a sale. The big change was that it changed from origination to destination. So it switched the tax over that the merchant reseller had to charge the tax of where they delivered that product to.
Now, if the person bought it at their store like a couch and hauled it home on their own truck, And they paid local tax at that store. But if they bought a couch and had the furniture company deliver it, even out of county and to another county, they would then have to pay the tax based on where its destination was. So that was a big change. Somebody asked me this morning this question. and I did it, I guess, in 07 when I first came down here,
and then I did it in 09. And the same question comes up each time. It says, why don't we change back? Because the feds may never adopt a policy of taxing Internet sales or mail order sales. The answer is there was so much confusion on January 1, 2008, when we changed over, but DF&A has done an excellent job of putting a database out there
that you can look up an address anywhere and tell what tax applies if you deliver it to that address. The other thing is that since we've signed it, we're collecting statewide, we're collecting about $8 million that we would not have collected had we not approved this agreement. So it's people that have other states that are in agreement with this, and we believe that Walmart is because they have brick and mortar in Arkansas.
We believe that if you order from their mail order, then they collect the tax and remit it to the state. So we're gaining about $8 million in tax money right now. That number is going up as each state decides to the agreement, and I'll take any
Speaker 14
7:19
questions. Representative Lovell, and I understand that you and Mr. Ashley, maybe Senator Teague and Mary
Cameron are on the governing board.
Is that correct? And maybe if I left somebody off, please
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
7:32
correct me. That's correct. That position is appointed by the speaker, each speaker. I was appointed the first time by the speaker and then reappointed my second session, and then I have not been replaced for the third session, although I'm not on revenue and tax. I believe it should be someone on revenue and tax. And in addition to that, someone that's probably a freshman that would be here three,
had a chance to be in here three terms so that they could go to the meetings, nationwide meetings, and find out what's going on with it, and then be able to, well, be able to present corrections each session thereafter, so. Thank you. Just
wanted to make sure everybody was aware of that. All right, let's, we do have an amendment in front of you. Representative Burris, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr.
Representative John Burris
Unverified
8:25
Chair. Is it okay to go ahead and ask a couple questions? Would you like to adopt the amendment first?
Speaker 14
8:31
Let's deal with the amendment. Representative Lovell, do you
Speaker 20
8:34
want to make a few comments specifically on the amendment? Yes,
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
8:41
Mr. Chairman. It adds Senator Tigg, which, as you mentioned, Senator Tigg represents the Senate on the Governing Nationwide Governing Board and then it It adds some language that kind of was overlooked when we wrote the bill, but needed to be in there and with the direct mail
form definition Thank you. What's the pleasure of the Committee on the amendment? Representative Meeks, you're recognized. I move do pass Okay, the motion is do pass on the amendment. All in favor say aye Anyone opposed? Okay, amendment is adopted. Representative Barris, you're recognized for your question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank
Representative John Burris
Unverified
9:31
you, Representative Lovell and Mr. Atchison. I've got a couple technical questions.
There's a lot of language in the bill. Streamline is something that I've by no means has spent as much time as I should, but it may be a hobby. It wouldn't be the way to define it. I guess I just want to reiterate or ask you to reiterate one more time because we're operating in a lot of ways on trust. We're in this federal agreement. You say these are technical changes that have to be made. If so, that's fine. I just want to make sure and get you to say one more time and maybe explain a little more thoroughly, does this alter in any way this real structure of streamline?
Does it really fundamentally change anything? If we pass this bill, is anybody going to come up and say, you know, here's one, two, and three changed? I'm basically kind of asking you to do my job and tell me if this bill has anything in it that's going to fundamentally change what we've been doing or are
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
10:29
they just technical corrections? Pretty much it continues what we've been doing. I think the language that's been being put in and has been put in to this bill
is strictly technical changes that apply based on what the Streamline Governing Board did in the last two years. So it will not change any sort of taxation or exemptions or re-tax or tax, add something else to the tax. It all stays the same as it's been since January 1, 2008.
Representative John Burris
Unverified
11:06
Thank you. And last question. Briefly, is there any new updates on Streamline?
You kind of alluded to the fact that this has been an ongoing federal debate. We're in this agreement where we've got voluntary participants in Streamline that are paying the state, and that's led to the collection of the $8 million or so in revenue that you mentioned. But the real answer is adoption on a federal level. Are there any real updates on that situation
Speaker 27
11:29
now? Are we still in limbo? It's still in limbo. I think maybe in the last two years we've gained, what, two states, a couple states, Tom? We have gained states.
Speaker 9
11:42
As far as the federal legislation, in the fall, a bill titled the Main Street Fairness Act was introduced. It is still in committee in Washington, hopefully for debate in the near term. But that legislation is in place. It has been introduced. And the states are anxiously awaiting review and consideration. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative
Link, you're recognized for a question.
Representative Kelley Linck
Unverified
12:13
Representative Lovell, thank you very much for taking the interest in this, and without volunteering myself by any means, I'm highly interested in it as well, but when I read this code, it's quite overwhelming, so I can tell there's a tremendous amount of hours and interest that has to go into it, and kind of like Representative Burr said, perhaps somewhat of a hobby, you're really going to want to do this. My question, I guess, shows my ignorance and simplicity, but to make sure I understand right, we're gaining revenue when other states join in, so obviously we're an import state.
Would that be correct? Because we're purchasing from other states that are
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
12:58
That have signed on. Okay. Well, we're not the only important state because, you know, all the states that have agreed to this agreement collect the tax and remit it to the states that it belongs to. I've read recently that this Christmas, I think, the Internet sales went up like 13.6 percent.
The more that goes up in their mail order, the fewer taxes we collect. And it's only until we get probably a majority that we'll get, which would be 33, it would be based on or into the 30s, it would kind of push feds maybe to take a real look at passing it nationwide
so that everything that's mail order is taxed. taxed. So the money we're getting right now is from, as you said, the states that are their members. And we also believe that Walmart is submitting quite a bit of tax through their mail order system catalog that people order from. Right. Do we
Representative Kelley Linck
Unverified
14:09
have any way, obviously we can measure the import, is there any way to measure the export with the streamlined tax? Do we know what we're sending out that other states
are collecting sales tax on, or could be? Tom,
Speaker 9
14:26
you want to answer that? As far as sellers registered under the agreement, I think there are a few in Arkansas that have registered in other states and are voluntarily collecting taxes for other states. When they collect those taxes, they remit those directly to the state on a normal monthly reporting form, or in most cases, they'll file through the simplified system that was established and streamlined to file their tax return.
So there are a few companies in Arkansas that have registered to voluntarily collect. The companies that report tax to us number approximately, I think at the end of last month, was 1,406 businesses throughout the United States that are actually collecting our state and local sales taxes even though they have no requirement by law to do so. These companies are the ones that have participated in the streamlined initiative and have made the business decision to collect the taxes. The number continues to grow each month. We have new registrations, and all states that are members of the streamlined agreement,
and as Mr. Lovell said, there's 24 at this time. Each time a company registers under the agreement, all 24 states benefit. They're required to collect our taxes. They've agreed to collect our taxes on any sales that they destined to Arkansas. So it's a positive flow for state and local government. Thank you
Representative Kelley Linck
Unverified
15:45
both for the work on it. I agree it's a complicated code that I think we're going to have to have a bit of trust on. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
15:57
Representative Jean, you're recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Lovell, and this may be more of a DF&A question, on the $8 million that we've collected, is that all state or do you all have how much our counties and city governments have
Speaker 9
16:15
collected on this? MR. The total $8 million that occurred this year, or actually last year, approximately three-fourths of that was state money, and about $2 million of it is local money and goes to the cities and counties in Arkansas directly. MR.
All right. Thank you. Representative Collins, you're recognized for
Representative Charlie Collins
Unverified
16:31
a question. MR. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Lovell, I too would thank you for all the work that you've put in this. I know what a challenging thing this streamline is. And my question revolves around the destination versus point of origination, and I understand the benefit to Arkansas that we're receiving because we're a net import state, and my question is this. If we left that in place, might there be a way within the distribution of the Arkansas
tax revenues to do some type of a hybrid formula because we have some cities and locations that are net export cities, and they actually over the last couple of years have been harmed. Springdale, Arkansas, for example, is a city that has suffered a big hit because they're primarily an export city. Without throwing out the baby with the bathwater, if you will, and still getting the advantage of the state-to-state transfers, might there be a way to do that where we could apportion the revenue a little bit more equitably among their import and export cities?
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
17:38
there could be a way to do that, but I also believe that if we were to implement something like that, we would probably be disqualified from the agreement because we have to pretty much be in sync with all the states that are subject to the agreement. And if we work something out to not do it the way the Streamline Sales Tax Agreement states, and then I believe we'd probably be disqualified until we corrected it.
Thank you very much, Representative Lovell. Representative Meeks, recognize
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
18:14
for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have two questions. The first question I have is you said there are approximately 1,400 businesses that are voluntarily involved in this. What is the motivation for a business to become involved in this? because you're looking at extra man hours and effort to calculate these taxes and send them to the various states. So what advantage is there to a business to want to voluntarily come into this system?
And then my second question is, on page nine, you've added computer software maintenance contracts into the definition. And I'm just wondering if you would speak, what would be the practical impact that would have to a computer business? Are we looking at increasing their taxes or how would that play out in a practical sense? MR. As far
Speaker 9
19:04
as the computer software maintenance, we haven't defined that previously and there's been some slight change. We do not tax maintenance contracts that supply electronic updates of software.
That's not subject to tax in Arkansas. So the substance and change there is really definitional and doesn't truly impact a seller that's collecting tax under our laws. laws. It's just to make sure that our laws have the streamlined definitions and other states as they review our laws to see if we're in compliance and make sure we stay in
Speaker 40
19:34
compliance, they're looking for that definition. But it does not change taxation.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
19:39
Okay. And what about the first question on why would a business in another state get involved in?
Speaker 9
19:47
The streamlined initiative has been going on for approximately 10 years now. And it's not just been a state initiative. At least as many private sector and business community leaders have participated in the streamlined development. This is a group of people, state government and business people, that have come together over ten years to develop this agreement. And so many businesses have a vested interest in this. As you can imagine, they're also competing with other sellers that do not collect the tax, even though they do.
And so it's a process, and the technical corrections exist each year because the workflow and the work groups continue to fine-tune and change and new issues that come up with state taxation to make sure the agreement deals with those. So there's
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
20:33
no economic benefit to the businesses that are participating in this? They're just doing this because they think it's a
Speaker 9
20:41
good idea? I believe that as far as an economic benefit, I'm not aware of any true benefit by registering and beginning business in the state.
Many, though, may open up their marketing to actually send representatives and sales personnel to the states, and presently they're not doing
so. Okay. All right. Thank you. Representative Ingram,
Chair
Unverified
21:07
you're recognized for a question. Representative Lovell or Mr. Atchley, is there anything in this bill
Representative Keith M. Ingram
Unverified
21:13
that is being required of an out-of-state seller that's in addition to an in-state seller? MR. No, sir.
Speaker 9
21:23
The laws in Arkansas for our sales taxes and our compensating use taxes which out-of-state sellers collect, they are identical. And so all of the technical changes here apply to both. But as I said earlier, it's primarily language and no change in taxation and rarely have any change as far as their business practices as we implement these changes. Representative Garner, you're recognized for
Chair
Unverified
21:47
a question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First I
Representative Ed Garner
Unverified
21:51
want to say, as many who have
served on this committee know, I've been a supporter
of streamlined sales tax, so these questions are really just for clarification. In the changes that reference digital goods, is this a new sector of taxation, or are we adding that to streamlined sales tax? Are we just clarifying the definition, and does this reference include things like cable subscriptions, movies via computer or mobile device, et cetera?
Is this a new agreed-upon part of streamlined sales tax, or are we just clarifying language? Over the years,
Speaker 9
22:38
we've been questioned by other states that we had not adopted some of the definitional provisions of digital goods. We've also looked at those in consideration of our existing taxation. We tax subscription services for cable TV, mobile radio, and we had not adopted the digital definitions it was felt that other
states guiding us and in our own review that because we currently tax some of those those services and those are provided in a digital manner presently that we'd be best to go ahead and adopt those definitions it does not change taxation and if you'll note those have to be sold by subscription the same way they are today and so there's no change in taxation that's also just to add a technical change for definitional purposes. Thank
Representative Ed Garner
Unverified
23:30
you. I would make a note
on page 8 line 20 that that addition ends with the word and there's nothing following that I think I don't know if that's a technical if there's a technical need there in drafting or if it's just something that I don't know if there was supposed to be something after that or it's difficult for me to speak but I
Speaker 9
24:01
will discuss that with the drafter of the bill thank you there's
additional text after that that's not
Representative Ed Garner
Unverified
24:09
being changed yes we go right to line 22, Section 10, so I just didn't know if that needed to be there. And then the similar line of questioning on direct mail, a lot of wording on direct mail. I know that we tax that in-state. Are we doing this? We have the same kind of effort here that we had not adequately defined direct mail, and now we're adding that to be in compliance,
or is this simply technical correction of existing language regarding direct mail? Over the last two or three
Speaker 9
24:45
years, the states and the business community have worked on what is all the state laws dealing with direct mail. The business community did not like the text. They thought it should be clarified, made it easier to read and understand. All of the agreement language on direct mail was amended and removed in 2009, in the fall of 2009.
The language you find here is the replacement language. It doesn't change taxation in Arkansas. We tax printing services that result in direct mail. No change there. There's no change in sourcing or which tax a seller would collect, even if they do collect. It's just we change the language in the agreement, and so now we must change the language in our law to match that. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Speaker 62
25:31
Representative Burris, you're recognized for a question. Thank you,
Representative John Burris
Unverified
25:37
Mr. Chairman. I want to come back quickly to Representative Meeks' question and one of his points.
He was talking about why businesses would be voluntary participants. It seems like at one point I remember there being maybe 800 or so voluntary participants nationwide. That's been a couple years old, so I shouldn't have even said that probably. But I think that was pretty close. First, I guess the point for the sake of the committee that I wanted to make, because we're going to be hearing a lot more about Streamline, the question on why would businesses voluntary participate and is there an economic advantage to that, it's fair to say, I think, and this
is my question, that the reason you have a lot of voluntary participants is because of the way Streamline, the whole route of Streamline is how we define a nexus in a state, and it's defined by the brick-and-mortar establishment. So if you're a business that has a brick-and-mortar like a Walmart in all 50 states, your online sales are taxed because you have that nexus. If you're an Amazon.com with one corporate headquarters in one state, you only have a nexus in one state as opposed to 49. And so a lot of businesses, especially larger retailers, people with a nationwide presence, are encouraging Streamline because they're at an economic disadvantage
because their sales may not be taxed where online sellers, especially like Amazon, eBay, things like that, are. And so the reason for the voluntary participants is because of what they would argue the disadvantage of having a brick-and-mortar nexus in states as opposed to other corporations not. Is that a fair assessment? It is.
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
27:17
affairs. I think an additional point for those people to volunteer is they're probably from states that are in agreement with this SST agreement, which then they would reciprocate. They would get taxes from people that mail order or people that send out mail orders from Arkansas. They get taxed the same way Arkansas gets when that
Representative John Burris
Unverified
27:44
state sends something in. I appreciate the leniency, Mr. Chair, but I know this is a little bigger.
We're outside the scope of the bill to a certain extent. I realize that, but streamline is something that members on this committee are going to continue to hear about and as members of the legislature we're going to continue to hear about. I just want to make sure that question was answered as to why some people are for it and some people are against it. So
Chair
Unverified
28:14
thank you. Representative Bell, you're recognized for
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
28:18
a question. I'd like to request the Chair's indulgence just a bit. Also, I need to, for my own educational purposes and a few others have asked similar questions,
we're currently debating a sales tax holiday in Arkansas. If Sally Jones from MENA were to purchase an item from a streamlined sales tax participating vendor in another state, Do these vendors extend that holiday, assuming we adopted it in Arkansas, to all those sales that occur in Arkansas? And if so, do the surrounding states that have sales tax holidays and participate in
streamlined tax currently do that with their holidays? So it's kind of a two-part question, but mainly to help those of us understand it a little
Speaker 40
29:07
better. A sales tax holiday in Arkansas would apply to all sellers that sell to and from Arkansas to Arkansas consumers. So yes, the out-of-state sellers, they would also observe the sales tax holiday, and the department would provide all of those sellers the same information would provide
Speaker 9
29:24
in-state sellers on interpretation and rules about how to do it.
Many of the streamlined registered businesses are aware of those types of things, and actually The bill that you're referring to, I think, that's introduced this session, it includes language that matches the terms and the specifics of the streamlined agreement for a state that has sales tax holidays. Thank you. I
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
29:43
appreciate the information. I appreciate the Chair's indulgence on that. Representative Link, you're recognized for
Chair
Unverified
29:51
a question. Motion of proper time. Okay. Is
there anyone from the audience who would like to speak for the bill, against the bill?
Representative Lovell, would you like to close
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
30:07
for your bill? Mr. Chair, I'm actually closed, but I would encourage Representative Link or Representative Burris or someone to maybe go to the Speaker and request that they be made part of the Nationwide Governing Board. If you plan to be here two more sessions, it would be very beneficial to get started early. And there are schools probably two or three times a year that they have conferences on Streamline that get you familiar with that.
But with that, I'm closed. Thank you. Thanks for your service on the committee. Representative
Speaker 70
30:48
Collins-Smith, did you have a question? There was something left out in the bill. It says, and, so how will we address that if there's a vote? There may be more to
Speaker 72
30:56
the bill. I think we have an answer coming. Okay.
Chair
Unverified
31:10
Ms. Hunt, you recognize and answer the question.
Speaker 76
31:15
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. To answer your question, when an amendment is made to existing text, it amends only a certain portion of that text. There is more text in the actual code that follows that. So following that end, there will be more text. It's just not in this bill. It was not amended. Okay. Thank you.
And I probably, Representative Lovell was closed for the bill, so I probably shouldn't have, you know. Let's move on. I'm going to recognize Representative Link for a motion. Motion do pass. Okay. Do pass as amended? Yes, sir, as amended. Okay. All right, the motion is do pass as amended. Any more discussion? Okay, all in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, motion carries. Congratulations. Representative Lowell, you passed the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.
I'm going to take this. I'm going to probably embarrass her, but I'd like to welcome back Representative Collin Smith. I think she had a rough week last week, and you were missed, but we're glad you're here and well, so. Also, I was able to send about four text messages during that debate, so please don't tell any about it. Don't tell Clark Hall, because my good friend. All right. Representative Westerman, are you prepared to run HB 1552? Pass.
553? Pass. Senator Madison, are you prepared to run SB 270. Okay, I've got a couple
Speaker 14
32:55
of things I need to do. Where is my special order? Without objection, Representative Pernartz has asked for a special order for HB 1118
for March the 8th. So without objection, I'm going to put that, take that off deferred, put it on special order for March 8th.
We will be rescheduling our class picture. The last thing that I want to kind of make an announcement on, and I spoke to Representative Love
Speaker 14
33:31
a little this morning. I think as the session has
progressed and we're down to the – we've got some bills on the table that are set to cut some taxes here and there.
I'm going to challenge the subcommittees, and I know Lenderman and Westerman and Love and how they fall within your respective subcommittees over the interim, and we'll get more information after today on studying the income tax and where we are as a state and how we can move forward in addressing the competitive nature of where we are, and also with all of the numerous exemptions that are on the books today.
I think I'd like to see us take a look at all of them to see if the merit is still there as we move forward in the coming years. So we'll get some more information to you before the session is over. But we kind of want to put you on notice there to try to take a look at that stuff in the interim. All right. With no more discussion, we shall stand adjourned.
Agenda
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Representative Davy Carter Chair
Unverified
Representative Buddy Lovell
Unverified
Tom Atchley
Unverified
Speaker 9
Speaker 11
Speaker 14
Representative John Burris
Unverified
Speaker 20
Speaker 27
Representative Kelley Linck
Unverified
Speaker 17
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
Representative Charlie Collins
Unverified
Speaker 21
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
Speaker 40
Chair
Unverified
Representative Keith M. Ingram
Unverified
Representative Ed Garner
Unverified
Speaker 62
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
Speaker 70
Speaker 72
Speaker 76