Revenue & Tax - Senate
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (32)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
SB568
Act 1012
· 8 mentions in chapter, agenda, transcript
Matched: “SB568 Crowell TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE TAXES APPLICABLE TO…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE TAXES APPLICABLE TO LITHIUM EXTRACTION AND DEVELOPMENT; TO PROVIDE … | Crowell | Notification that SB568 is now Act 1012 |
|
HB1589
Act 676
· 7 mentions in transcript, agenda, chapter
Matched: “…and thank you committee. OK, next one that's on the list is House Bill 1589. Anyone here for it right now? Uh,”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE FINANCIAL OPERATIONS OF A COUNTY; AND TO AMEND THE … | Schulz | Notification that HB1589 is now Act 676 |
|
HB1851
Act 714
· 7 mentions in agenda, chapter, transcript
Matched: “…TO PROVIDE FOR THE PRIORITY OF UNRECORDED MUNICIPAL LIENS. HB1851 Jean TO AMEND THE SALES TAX EXEMPTION FOR FOOD, FOOD INGRED…”
|
TO AMEND THE SALES TAX EXEMPTION FOR FOOD, FOOD INGREDIENTS, AND PREPARED FOOD SOLD IN … | Jean | Notification that HB1851 is now Act 714 |
|
HB1657
Act 709
· 4 mentions in chapter, agenda, transcript
Matched: “HB1657 Beck TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS WOOD ENERGY PRODUCTS AND FOREST…”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS WOOD ENERGY PRODUCTS AND FOREST MAINTENANCE INCOME TAX CREDIT. | Beck | Notification that HB1657 is now Act 709 |
|
HB1695
· 4 mentions in transcript, chapter, agenda
Matched: “…excuse me, until 10:50. Is there anybody here right now in House Bill 1695. To present it. Do we have the amendment back? We're still…”
|
TO CLARIFY THE FORECLOSURE PROCESS FOR PROPERTY SUBJECT TO A MUNICIPAL LIEN; TO ALLOW A … | J. Richardson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB535
Act 781
· 4 mentions in transcript, agenda, chapter
Matched: “…the moment to do SB 568. Senator Hester, do you want to do SB 535? You recognize sender”
|
TO CREATE A SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTION FOR THE ARKANSAS MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS … | Hester | Notification that SB535 is now Act 781 |
|
SB530
Act 701
· 2 mentions in transcript
Matched: “…hair said, this is just a companion bill to, I think it was Senate Bill 530 that passed out this committee has already passed out this…”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS WOOD ENERGY PRODUCTS AND FOREST MAINTENANCE INCOME TAX CREDIT. | B. Davis | Notification that SB530 is now Act 701 |
|
HB1085
Act 802
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…SE TAX RATE APPLICABLE TO PURCHASES OF USED MOTOR VEHICLES. HB1085 K. Brown TO ADOPT FEDERAL LAW CONCERNING TAX-DEFERRED TUITI…”
|
TO ADOPT FEDERAL LAW CONCERNING TAX-DEFERRED TUITION SAVINGS PROGRAMS; AND TO AMEND THE INCOME TAX … | K. Brown | Notification that HB1085 is now Act 802 |
|
HB1534
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…USED IN RELATION TO A PROJECT FOR A YOUTH FARMING PROGRAM. HB1534 Schulz TO INCREASE THE HOMESTEAD PROPERTY TAX CREDIT. SB377…”
|
TO INCREASE THE HOMESTEAD PROPERTY TAX CREDIT. | Schulz | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB131
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…X REPORT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION. SB131 J. Bryant TO CONFIRM THE LAW RELATED TO THE ASSESSMENT OF A…”
|
TO CONFIRM THE LAW RELATED TO THE ASSESSMENT OF A HOMESTEAD BELONGING TO A PERSON … | J. Bryant | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB204
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…R FUTURE FUND PLAN TO A ROTH INDIVIDUAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNT. SB204 C. Penzo TO EXEMPT FROM GROSS INCOME A GAIN BY A TAXPAYER R…”
|
TO EXEMPT FROM GROSS INCOME A GAIN BY A TAXPAYER RESULTING FROM THE ACQUISITION OF … | C. Penzo | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB233
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…THE RIGHT OF EMINENT DOMAIN OR THE THREAT OF CONDEMNATION. SB233 C. Penzo TO AMEND THE INCOME TAX LAWS RELATING TO CERTAIN T…”
|
TO AMEND THE INCOME TAX LAWS RELATING TO CERTAIN TRUSTS; TO PRESERVE CERTAIN TRUST ASSETS; … | C. Penzo | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB256
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…TRUST ASSETS; AND TO EXEMPT CERTAIN TRUSTS FROM INCOME TAX. SB256 J. Dotson TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS CORPORATE FRANCHISE TAX ACT…”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS CORPORATE FRANCHISE TAX ACT OF 1979; AND TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM … | J. Dotson | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB268
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…REDUCE THE MINIMUM FRANCHISE TAX FOR CERTAIN CORPORATIONS. SB268 D. Wallace TO TRANSFER GENERAL REVENUE TO THE AGING AND ADU…”
|
TO TRANSFER GENERAL REVENUE TO THE AGING AND ADULT SERVICES FUND ACCOUNT TO BE USED … | D. Wallace | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB274
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…RVICES BENEFITING THE ELDERLY; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. SB274 D. Wallace TO CREATE A SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTION FOR CERT…”
|
TO CREATE A SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN ITEMS RELATED TO HUMAN BURIAL; … | D. Wallace | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB289
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…A CASKET, BURIAL VAULT, OR MONUMENT FROM SALES AND USE TAX. SB289 J. Dotson TO CUT THE STATEWIDE SALES TAX RATE BY ONE-EIGHTH…”
|
TO CUT THE STATEWIDE SALES TAX RATE BY ONE-EIGHTH PERCENT TO REDUCE THE SURPLUS FUNDS … | J. Dotson | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB310
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…REDUCE THE SURPLUS FUNDS COLLECTED FROM ARKANSAS TAXPAYERS. SB310 B. King TO ENABLE THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE LANDS TO CONDUC…”
|
TO ENABLE THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE LANDS TO CONDUCT CERTAIN BUSINESS ONLINE; AND TO AMEND … | B. King | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB316
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…NER OF STATE LANDS MUST FOLLOW IN SELLING CERTAIN PROPERTY. SB316 B. Johnson TO AMEND THE SALES AND USE TAX LAWS CONCERNING R…”
|
TO AMEND THE SALES AND USE TAX LAWS CONCERNING REBATES; AND TO REQUIRE THAT SALES … | B. Johnson | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB318
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…THAT SALES AND USE TAX REBATES BE ADMINISTERED AS REFUNDS. SB318 F. Love TO CREATE AN INCOME TAX EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN INDIV…”
|
TO CREATE AN INCOME TAX EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS BASED ON INCOME AND AGE. | F. Love | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB338
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS BASED ON INCOME AND AGE. SB338 Hill TO PROVIDE SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTIONS FOR STUDENT FA…”
|
TO PROVIDE SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTIONS FOR STUDENT FARMERS; AND TO PROVIDE SALES AND … | Hill | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB377
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…B1534 Schulz TO INCREASE THE HOMESTEAD PROPERTY TAX CREDIT. SB377 Hester TO CREATE THE GROCERY TAX RELIEF ACT; TO AMEND THE L…”
|
TO CREATE THE GROCERY TAX RELIEF ACT; TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE SALES AND … | Hester | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB394
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…A DISABILITY OR A PERSON SIXTY-FIVE YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER. SB394 J. Bryant TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ALLOCATION, DISTR…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ALLOCATION, DISTRIBUTION, AND USE OF REVENUES DERIVED FROM A … | J. Bryant | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB419
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…58; AND TO EXEMPT GROCERIES FROM STATE SALES AND USE TAXES. SB419 G. Leding TO CREATE A SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTION FOR CERTA…”
|
TO CREATE A SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN SALES TO A CULTIVATION FACILITY. | G. Leding | Sine Die adjournment |
|
SB423
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…TAX EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN SALES TO A CULTIVATION FACILITY. SB423 J. Scott TO EXEMPT FROM THE INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX EDUCATION…”
|
TO EXEMPT FROM THE INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX EDUCATION SCHOLARSHIPS, AWARDS, AND GRANTS FROM NONPROFIT VOLUNTEER … | J. Scott | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB465
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…AND GRANTS FROM NONPROFIT VOLUNTEER SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS. SB465 B. Davis TO PROVIDE FOR A SALES AND USE TAX REFUND FOR A SP…”
|
TO PROVIDE FOR A SALES AND USE TAX REFUND FOR A SPECULATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT; AND … | B. Davis | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB502
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…DISPOSABLE VAPOR PRODUCTS FROM A PROHIBITED FOREIGN PARTY. SB502 Crowell TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS INCOME TAX WITHHOLDING ACT OF…”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS INCOME TAX WITHHOLDING ACT OF 1965; AND TO REQUIRE THE ELECTRONIC … | Crowell | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB526
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…VE AGREEMENTS UNDER THE CONSOLIDATED INCENTIVE ACT OF 2003. SB526 Irvin TO PROHIBIT THE SALE OF DISPOSABLE VAPOR PRODUCTS FRO…”
|
TO PROHIBIT THE SALE OF DISPOSABLE VAPOR PRODUCTS FROM A PROHIBITED FOREIGN PARTY. | Irvin | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB5681
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “OK, Senator Crowe, uh, he's going to do Senate Bill 5681. this OK, hold on just a”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB57
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…INE ARTS FOUNDATION. DEFERRED BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle SB57 C. Tucker TO AMEND THE INCOME TAX CREDIT FOR CERTAIN INDIVI…”
|
TO AMEND THE INCOME TAX CREDIT FOR CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS; AND TO AMEND A … | C. Tucker | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB7
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…ILING OF A FORM 1099 IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. Page 2 of 3 SB7 C. Penzo TO ALLOW MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO REQUES…”
|
TO ALLOW MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO REQUEST A SALES AND USE TAX REPORT … | C. Penzo | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB73
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…E ARKANSAS CODE THAT RESULTED FROM INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1996. SB73 B. Johnson TO CREATE THE ACCESS TO CREDIT FOR OUR RURAL ECO…”
|
TO CREATE THE ACCESS TO CREDIT FOR OUR RURAL ECONOMY (ACRE) ACT; AND TO PROVIDE … | B. Johnson | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB82
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…IDE AN INCOME TAX DEDUCTION FOR CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL LOANS. SB82 J. Payton TO INCREASE THE SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTION FOR U…”
|
TO INCREASE THE SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTION FOR USED MOTOR VEHICLES; AND TO AMEND … | J. Payton | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin
- Processing date
- October 7, 2026
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
0:00
to order. We're going to go in the order that we have. I know there's an amendment being prepared on the top one, which I should have in a few minutes. The next one is House Bill 1851. Is there anyone here to run it? Representative Beck, I think you're going to be up next with House Bill 1657. You're running that, right? Members, this is my understanding. This is just a literal companion bill to the one that we
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
0:30
ran the other day. So I think we've had a long
discussion on it. So Representative Beck, if you'd recognize yourself and you can
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
0:43
present your bill. I'm Representative Rick Beck from House District 43. As the
chair said, this is just a companion bill to, I think it was Senate Bill 530 that passed out of this committee, has already passed out of this committee. The reason we ran a companion bill was because we were able to have the officials here from Green Bay, and we just wanted to make sure that they were here to testify
in front of everybody. And so with that, I appreciate a
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:15
due pass. Members, I think everybody understands companion bill, but do any of you all have any additional questions on this? Anyone from the audience want to speak for it, against it? Again, we've already had a very long discussion on this. You closed? Yes, sir, Mr.
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:34
Chair, I'm closed. Do we have a motion? Senator Boyd makes a motion, do pass. Senator Caldwell makes a second.
Any discussion on the motion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That carries and your bill is passed. Congratulations. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, committee. okay next one that's on the list is house bill
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:58
1589 anyone here for it right now uh senator crow had to go to education he's going to be back here in a little while so he's not here at the moment to do sb 568 senator hester do you want to do sb 535
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
2:20
You're recognized, Senator Hester. Members, you see this is just a few-sentence bill, and what it does, it brings Arkansas Museum of Fine Arts in line with the Crystal Bridges Museum in our area, meaning that they aren't paying taxes. This is just part of our, maybe not the natural state initiative, but continuing to encourage people to come and spend money in the state of Arkansas and come see all the great things we have to offer. And, you know, we offer this to one of our free museums in the state of Arkansas.
I just want to make sure we offer it to the second. The fiscal impact is roughly $20,000 a year. But we see what the value of these museums are doing for the state of Arkansas and making us a destination. I'm happy to answer any questions. Okay. Members, do you
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
3:07
have any questions? Senator Hester? Anybody from the audience want to speak for this one? Anyone want
to speak against it? You close Senator Hester? I'm
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
3:19
close. Do I have a motion? I've got Senator Dismang
made the motion do pass. Senator Boyd made a second. Any
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
3:28
discussion on the motion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That'll carry. So
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
3:35
that bill is passed. Okay at this time again I know that we have some members that are going be coming to present since we're this late in the session we'd normally not do this but i think we all understand that it's going to be easier probably for us to sit here a few minutes and
see if anybody comes in and if not i think what the uh what we should probably do is maybe recess to 1145 and try to just come
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
4:03
back in like that so okay all right
do you would something like a if we recess to 1130 does that sound good or okay because i think we've only got we've got the house bill on the top the 1695 uh i know myself worked on this
amendment with these folks. And there's a agreed upon amendment that's coming. There was one additional thing that had to be done that they're working on. That's on the wean thing that we went over. What are we mending on that? I hate to present their bill, but again, with the knowledge I have on it, I'll say it. What we're doing is actually we're making it so that the notice would have to be done just
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
4:55
like a regular judicial foreclosure so that that would come into play.
But then we're also making it so that the banks
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
5:03
and the first mortgage holders, I don't know if it was in the original bill or one of the other amendments, so that they would maintain their priority lien throughout no matter what. That will no longer happen. It will go back to the way of practice that it's been for the last few years so that that lien would not be the priority lien. So that's what's supposed to be coming. It's also my understanding as of a minute ago that it might have had 365 days on there.
They're backing that up to they've all agreed to the 120 days. Did they agree to anything on Section 10? I don't know. What's that one, Senator Dispatch? That's the history statement's portion on it. I don't know. So I know there's some folks here with probably the Bankers Association and the municipalities. You might want to just talk
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
5:55
with them during this break. I'll tell you what. don't know let's let's just sit around here and wait for till about 10:50 if
it's okay with you all and then if nobody's here at that time let's just recess till 11:30
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
6:09
to give you all some time to go do some other stuff. Thank you.
Unknown speaker
6:57
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
18:57
Okay, I said we would stop for 1050, or excuse me,
until 1050. Is there anybody here right now on House Bill 1695 to present it? Do we have the amendment back? We're still waiting, it looks like. 151, House Bill 1589, Senate Bill 568.
Okay, I see no one here, so what we're going to do is we're going to recess until 1130. Ms. Hickman here, what she's going
to do is try to text every one of the Senate and House sponsors that are on here and let them know that what we're doing and to try to get at least one or for them to send somebody down to run that if they want to. So that's what we're going to be attempting to do between that time
to try to help out. So like I say, at this time, we're just going to recess until 1130.
Unknown speaker
20:19
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
58:49
Okay, it's 11:30, so here in just a moment, but we're going to get back started, or attempt to.
Unknown speaker
59:19
Thank you.
It's like, hey, you can't get hurt. I don't know what's hurt.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:01:49
okay let me just go in order i don't i think is there anybody here right now for 1695 okay house bill 1851 is in gene and crow's name senator boyd though i think he's giving you authorization to run
Speaker 43
1:02:20
that is that correct okay okay yes sir
Speaker 22
1:02:35
okay all right we got the no problem Okay. So
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:02:48
instead, members, it's going to be House Bill 1589. So you can recognize yourself, Senator Boyd. Whoever else is going to help with this, just come sit at the table. Everybody's welcome. How are you? Good. So if you all would just recognize yourself
whenever you sit down and then you will be recognized to
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:03:12
present. And again, we're doing
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:03:14
1589. Thank you, Mr. Chair. State Senator Justin Boyd from Fort Smith here presenting House Bill 1589 with some help.
Speaker 53
1:03:24
Selina Blair, Columbia County Treasurer and President of the Treasurer's Association. So I'll just
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:03:29
start and say a couple things and then hand this over. There is no fiscal impact or taxpayer impact according to our green sheet on the bill.
Speaker 53
1:03:42
This is a lot of cleanup, it's modernization of some language in the bill, it's changing some words like monies to revenues or monetary funds, replacing the word warrant with check because now all 75 counties are no longer on the warrant system, and replacing the words holder of a warrant with the word claimant. section seven that was sections one through six section seven is probably the biggest change
it's to the annual financial report there are three major changes there are five or six counties now that have a comptroller that actually do the annual financial statement and we're giving them recognition for that it clarifies the date that the annual financial reports begins and ends which is January 1st to December 31st and it also allows, it's not required, but allows us to report those funds in the aggregate for county general road funds and the other funds in the
aggregate and we took our inspiration from that from our annual audit report that we get from legislative audit. The last section in section eight we added for ACH payments. There are a few counties that either county court or circuit or a district court did orders from the court to make payments by ACH and this just allows the county to use that as authorization to make those
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:05:20
ach payments do any of the members have any questions on this one i i do maybe and i don't i don't know just something that just jumps out at me and again i think in practicality it probably works but so in section 7 it says county clerk or a county comptroller and the
county treasurer so we've got a non-elected official that's directing that's actually directing this or you know of drafting draft okay I don't I don't assume that's a problem nobody nobody has brought that up or anything within y'all's discussion that since we're having a somebody that's not an elected official to actually request that or to do that I mean I think it was probably known that the county comptroller was the one that would be
Speaker 53
1:06:21
doing it but and in most counties the comptroller is underneath the county judge so they do have an elected official over them
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:06:31
okay so then after it's made out of course it's just going to be presented to the board
Speaker 53
1:06:38
itself published in the paper by March 15th of every year does
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:06:41
the board have to sign off on that or they have to approve
Speaker 53
1:06:48
that no sir we certify whenever we put it in the paper there's a statement in there that it's a true and accurate reflection
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:06:56
of the county books so the quorum court or whatever they they're not going to be involved in this either yes
sir anybody else have any thoughts on that or questions I just let me ask you this and I know this is for the the county do we
have any type of similar situations in this with school boards or municipalities or things like that, so they have a non-elected official who's directing that? Not that I'm aware
Speaker 53
1:07:37
of. Okay. Well, and I'm sure with municipalities, the city treasurer is probably the one that prepares the annual financial statements for municipalities. I just, I guess I always assume that the
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:07:51
quorum court in this case would vote or whatever, have a vote on that, so.
Speaker 53
1:07:57
By state law, the treasurer and the county clerk are responsible for that. Right. That's my issue
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:08:03
is that now we're allowing the comptroller, who's not an elected official, to do it. And again, I don't know this is an issue. I just want to make sure everybody recognizes that and sees it. So nobody here is going to, from the
audience or anything, has any other objections and we'll be fine in a minute. So are y'all finished on your finishes?
Are there any other questions in regards to that? Okay. Is there anybody in the audience that wants to speak for this bill?
Anyone want to speak against it? Anybody else have any other concerns? Are you all closed? I'm
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:08:39
closed. I would make a motion. Do pass and hope someone will give me a second. Okay,
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:08:45
so we have a motion by Senator Boyd. Do we have a second? We have a second by Senator Hester. Any other discussion on
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:08:51
the motion? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that'll pass. Thank you.
Unknown speaker
1:09:02
We'll be right back.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:11:32
All right. Okay, members, we're going to hear House Bill 1851. Senator Boyd, you're going to present
Speaker 67
1:11:57
that? Yes, sir. Y'all want anybody else here?
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:12:02
We have someone from DFA if we need them here. Is she here?
Come on. You're going to know more than I am. So I'll just, with your permission, I'll start and introduce myself. Yes, sir. State Senator Justin Boyd-Fort Smith here to present House Bill 1851. We're going to have a couple people join us, and the only thing I'll say before they help get me started here is, again, there's no fiscal impact or no taxpayer impact based on the green sheet. Okay. If you all would just introduce yourself.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:12:32
Alicia Austin Smith with DFA. Shane
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:12:39
Broadway ASU system. Okay you're recognized Senator Boyd to do House Bill
Speaker 84
1:12:45
1851. There's not an amendment on that. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Members of the committee I'll try to be brief because I'm going to probably yield to her most of this but since 1941 or the legislature back in 1941 passed a sales tax exemption for schools K-12 schools and college cafeterias. Obviously the model of managing those cafeterias has changed over the last 80 years
and many of us, including some school districts, contract that service out. It's better for us in terms of contracting out instead of doing it ourselves. And this just ensures that those who do contract for those services out, that that sales tax exemption remains intact. That's simply what it does. It really updates the 1941 law to what current practices are. That's correct.
Speaker 86
1:13:38
I'll add to that that it clarifies that just because that contractor that the school is
working with is a for-profit business, that in itself does not take them out of the exemption. So it's neutral and it's clarifying the law. Okay.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:13:54
Any questions from the members? Anyone from the audience want to speak for this? Anyone want to speak against
Speaker 49
1:14:00
it? Are you all closed? I'm closed. I would make a motion do pass and hope someone will
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:14:08
give me a second. Okay. We don't guarantee that. But you going to make the motion or not?
So Senator Boyd makes a motion do pass. Senator Hester is a second. Do we have any discussion on the motion? All in favor,
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:14:23
say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, so that one's also passed. Thank you, Mayor. Yes, sir. And we'll just continue to wait just
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:14:31
a little bit longer. I know Senator Kroll is in education and he's trying to get there also. Thank you.
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:15:22
Senator Kroll: Okay, Senator Kroll, he's going to do Senate Bill 568 first.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:16:16
Okay, hold on just a second here. We have a handout, I think, to the members.
Chair
Unverified
1:16:49
All right, Senator Kroll, you're recognized. If you all would just introduce yourself and then you can begin. Senator Steve
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
1:17:05
Kroll, District 3. Hugh McDonald, Secretary
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:17:08
of Commerce. Jennifer Emerson, Deputy Director,
Speaker 101
1:17:11
AEDC. Again, members, this is Senate
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
1:17:14
Bill 568. You're recognized, Senator Kroll. Yes, what Senate Bill 568 does is it's a very comprehensive, Very complicated bill about lithium and upstream and downstream possibilities that are going
to come with the production of lithium. One of the things we tried to work very hard at was to incentivize the producers to keep the lithium in state and build the other businesses within the state borders instead of shipping those out to Texas and whatnot. There's a little section in there that talking to the producers and working with Hugh, Senator, or I mean Secretary, the producers really wanted
to make sure that the counties got their severance tax, so we made sure we squared that in really well, kept it going to Central Services, kept it going to every place it had to be, kept the GR hole and then started once their growth happens to start going back to the counties to take care of their roads. So with that, I mean, it is pretty
Speaker 104
1:18:25
straightforward, tax incentives. Secretary, if you would like to add.
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:18:31
Yes, thank you, Senator. Appreciate it. It's all about trying
to support this industry, which is a nascent industry, as we know in this country. China dominates the industry globally, and we've done some analysis with a company called Benchmark Minerals, and they're a global expert in terms of the lithium space and critical minerals, and there's been a lot of money, capital spent in the United States on the downstream end of the
lithium value chain, EV, cars, assembly plants for EVs, and the battery, big gigafactories for batteries. Where the United States has a gap in its supply is in more of the upstream side, the mining, refining, processing, conversion, and leading into the cathode, for example, the cathode industry, which is a critical component of all batteries, cathodes, anodes,
separators, as well as grid storage. And so we, the sales tax exemption associated with this was really to incentivize further processing of that value chain, pull the brine out of the ground, extract it from the brine, process it into lithium hydroxide, lithium carbonate, and then further process that into cathode factories, for example, is probably the best example. Zinc bromide also, which also uses
lithium for large grid storage fuel cell batteries. So that's the intent of the bill. And I think if you look at the maps
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
1:20:28
in front of you that we had handed out, you can see the whole area that lithium is available. The advantage of Arkansas and the reason we're trying to attract them here is we have the policies with the oil and gas industry. You know, 414, Louisiana starts their legislative session right now.
Texas is in. So we expect that they're going to also do a package, but we definitely want to be first to market and high, the most impactful to market to make sure that they do come here. Because as of right now, there has not been soil turned or a contract on a building. So we want to make sure we get them here. Okay.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:21:13
Are you finished, Senator Crowe? All right. All right. Senator Dismain, you have a question?
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:21:23
all right thank you if you can all right because we're doing a little bit of everything with this it is
very comprehensive so I appreciate the acknowledgement of that and it is very complicated and I don't think very simple and I was even trying to decipher the green sheet and I was having a little bit of a difficulty trying to understand what all it is we're doing so we are going to provide a sales tax exemption we're going to provide a severance tax exemption on new bromine.
Did I read that correctly? Yes. So the cities and counties aren't going to get
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
1:21:55
those funds or are they? As of right now the cities and counties get 25 percent. That stays the same. It would be on only new production. So the current production, the salt water production that the current companies that are here, that would stay the same. It would be on the new production. So once they get these plants built and start pulling the salt water, that's where there would be that five-year break. But they would not lose any money whatsoever.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:22:27
Well, I understand. They would lose the revenue for the five-year period for anyone that new comes into the market, and I mean, as someone that's experienced some new production, there are traditionally very severe impacts to your infrastructure when we have projects this size come in. And one of the offsets for that, for those in the Fayetteville shale, was the severance tax. It was the only reason that people from central Arkansas supported the severance tax.
And so there will be a cost associated with at least, would
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:23:09
you agree? or whoever. Certainly there will be some infrastructure impacts, yes.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:23:13
Okay, and then the last one is we've got even an income tax credit that's going to be made available to them, and I think that's in the recycling, but it is a little more comprehensive than that, because I was kind of having a hard time understanding when I read the bill. For instance, if I go to page two, line 30, it says lease payments, this is where we define eligible facility, and that definition is
used, I believe it's used almost in all sections. So whether we're talking about sales tax or income tax credits and whatever else, lease payments. Are we actually saying that the lease payments made to mineral owners is going to be able to be part of the total calculation for the $100 million investment to be able to create the incentive? Or are these lease payments on buildings that maybe they don't own.
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:24:08
My interpretation would be lease payments on the buildings, the infrastructure that's required for the new facility, the qualifying facility. That may need
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:24:15
to get cleaned up because the way that it reads, because then I go to facility on three, we talk about extraction and lease payments are a portion of extraction. And so that may be an issue with the way that it's worded because surely we wouldn't make the lease payments made to landowners, those speculative of payments, part of what then would be, you know, calculated in the overall.
But I think it's the way that it's written is what it says, and I'd ask DFA just full disclosure beforehand, and they felt as though that the lease payments made to the mineral owners were what you were targeting with that, that were at lease payments. And then so throughout it, it talks about extraction. So throughout the bill, it talks about extraction and that being part of what's accumulated as part of the overall number that would need to be realized to be able to achieve the sales tax or the income tax. Are you all aware of any other type of production that we do in the state of
Arkansas that allows for extraction to have an incentive tied to it? I am
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:25:17
not aware of an extraction-related incentive. We have a lot of areas
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:25:25
in the state that would like to be more competitive with what we have. The state of Arkansas has a completely different perspective on those various entities and exactly the opposite perspective in a lot of ways. Why would we, in this particular instance, want to incentivize extraction,
whereas we don't in any other normal mining process?
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:25:46
Senator, I think it's a very reasonable question, a good question,
and I can't speak for the industry, but how they look at it is the extraction process and the refining process is, if you extract, when you extract the brine, you still have a product that has zero market value.
And so that is part of the process. The rest of the process is hundreds of millions of dollars investment that they have to invest to actually create that product and make it worth something in the marketplace. So they would say it's part of the overall process. And so we have not separated out the mining component from the incentive. I'd also say that as Senator Crowell has mentioned,
we expect Texas to do something as well. The brine concentrations in Texas are in some areas are actually stronger, higher concentrations than they are in the smack over formation in Arkansas. So we have Texas to compete with. Certainly it is a nascent industry in this country that the current administration is trying to develop. We know that the new Secretary of Energy
wants to develop the smack over formation. He stated that in his confirmation hearings. So, and frankly, the price of lithium today, China, which dominates the lithium supply chain is flooding the market, driving the price down. So frankly, you know, an incentive on the mining portion we think is also appropriate to get to bring the industry,
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:27:49
develop the industry here in Arkansas. Senator Boyd. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, Senator Kroll, thank you for bringing this bill. You know, we always hear about everything's bigger in Texas. I certainly hope that lithium production is not one of those things, ultimately. And I do have a question that might sound silly, but it is a serious question because we've got to think about everything. So deer hunting has a $300 million to $800 million a year economic impact.
I understand from Senator Hickey that they grow some really nice deer in southern Arkansas and the average deer hunter drops about $2,100 in the economy every year. When they come there, I just want to make sure that, you know, we've thought about, you know, you start doing all this or we're going to impact another important industry to Arkansas
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
1:28:44
negatively. That is a great point. The wells that when they go down they frack out. So it is one well for many many acres. In fact
the And I don't have a photo of it, but the proposed Tetra plant has three wells and it covers somewhere around I Want to say 2,800 acres. So there will be minimal disruption to anything like that Senator Hester? So, you
Speaker 123
1:29:15
know, we've been, like, apparently, you
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
1:29:21
know, on the cusp of this happening for years now.
I keep understanding that the landowners and the, you know, the operators can't come to terms. Like, is your hope that we do this and the taxpayer steps in the middle to help them come to terms?
Speaker 125
1:29:41
Is that what the intent of this is? I think the number one
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:29:48
issue right now, I think, for the producers, I don't want to speak for them, but it's royalty, getting the royalty clarity. That's number one.
This is a low-margin business in the first place. We're developing it in the United States. And we have an opportunity in Arkansas to actually be a dominant player in the lithium development and further refinement. So that's the intent, to try to build, not just extracting it. If all the minerals are extracted and sent somewhere else, we're trying to prevent that. That will happen, but we're also doing everything we can to incentivize for Exxon,
who develops, who refines lithium into a lithium carbonate, a battery quality product, that that product can be sold to a cathode manufacturer without a sales tax on it if they build that cathode facility here in Arkansas. Follow up. Yes, sir. Yeah, and
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
1:30:55
so the benefit to the state of Arkansas then is just the advancement of increase of just jobs.
Speaker 125
1:31:04
I mean, not just, you know what you understand, like
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:31:09
that's the benefit. Jobs, capital investment, tax revenue, yeah, a new industry that has fallen into our lap that we want to develop and develop where as much as that investment and much of those jobs happen here in the state of Arkansas.
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
1:31:26
Kind of an example is talking to the producers. They are going to go through millions of gallons of water through their pipes a minute.
And so they have to fix. They're going to have to fix these engines. And right now, the only place they can go is in West Texas. But talking to all the producers, they're probably going to have 13 to 20 of those being fixed at a time. That's a business that can produce about 100 jobs in the state if somebody were to choose to put that right here in this state. So that's just one example of the ones that they've given examples of. I don't think I have to do this, but I'm going to go ahead based on a question you had.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:32:10
Of course, this is in my area. I'm not a sponsor of this, but I do own equities and real property that's located within this zone. Again, it's general in nature and not specific, But you asked some questions about, you know, the conflict that the landowners are holding. And his answer was no, that it was not to try to drive that. But since that could be an issue with some of my stuff, I'm going to go ahead and make that disclosure. Again, general in nature and nothing, but out of an abundance of cost, you know, I want to do that here. So just because of Senator Hester's question.
Senator Dismayne, do you have a... Yeah, and
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:32:45
it's really based back on, so I would agree, the number one issue between this being a viable deal and not being a viable deal isn't what we do with this bill. It's what the terms are for the royalty interest. I mean, and that's not determined at this point. And I would argue that we are in some ways, because we're going to allow so many incentives to take place, allow those royalty rates probably to be higher than the otherwise because the state of Arkansas is going to be subsidizing them to some degree. Because, I mean,
And you've got a limited number of impacts that are based on a percentage basis. As an example, if you look at the Fayetteville shale right now, the state of Arkansas benefits more in its severance tax collection than the actual royalty owners that own property in that section, even if their royalty interests were more. Do you not believe it would be better for us to wait and see what happens with the royalties? Because we could do all this for nothing if the royalty owners or the mineral owners don't come to terms on what those leases should look like and how they move forward?
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:33:52
The royalty decision is clearly the number one issue right now for the producers. I think either the applications have been filed before the Oil and Gas Commission or they'll soon be filed, so I think we're going to have a decision on that within the next couple of months. I don't think this is getting the cart before the horse. I think it is also, it is sending us a message to the industry, the global manufacturing industry, that Arkansas is serious about this. We want to recruit the
industry to the state and the investment and the jobs that come with that.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:34:33
But in other parts of our code, in other industry or other sectors that do mining, we pretty much have dictated and allowed the courts to dictate what those royalty interest and amounts are and how they're to be paid, should we do the same thing legislatively for y'all and maybe we should drop into this bill what those royalty rates should look like
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:34:56
so that the industry has certainty? Getting out of my expertise, but Oil and Gas Commission sets the royalty and don't
Speaker 126
1:35:06
believe the courts unless there's a dispute of some case. We have allowed our statutes to
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:35:10
be interpreted by a federal court that essentially sets the way that royalties are to be paid in Arkansas. We haven't done this for this industry, and maybe we should. That way that there is certainty for the industry coming in if the goal is for the industry as opposed for the state, which I think you kind of see that with the way that it's written. I mean, I completely agree with the concept of making sure when these things get out of the ground that we're creating incentives
to attract all the ancillary industry that may want to benefit from it coming out of the ground. I'm concerned being first means that we'll probably end up being last. We've seen that in other places of legislation where we've passed, thinking that we were going to get ahead of everyone else. In fact, we had to create a cleanup bill for the data centers because other states, we were the first. Other states followed back up and did better incentives than we did. Are you concerned at all that by launching this legislation that we're going to create competition,
pretty much show our full hand to the rest of
Speaker 128
1:36:17
the world that's trying to track this same industry? I think
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:36:23
it's a good question. I've heard Louisiana is going to do something. I would expect Texas will do something. Certainly, they're watching us. we will watch them for the next time where there's an opportunity to refine this incentive. - Senator Caldwell, do you have a question, sir?
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
1:36:43
- Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Dismayne pretty much hit what I was going to ask, talking about the amount of tax benefit that we're giving this industry and kind of a rate of return on what we're going to get back. the mention Fayette-Michelle and the fact that we make a lot of money off that. At what point in time will the state, the counties, the cities, the schools see the tax benefit of having this industry,
especially with the amount of incentives that you're wanting us to give them, basically when we start getting a payback for the money
Speaker 128
1:37:25
that we've invested? Just like any incentive, I think whenever
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:37:30
you start seeing those jobs appear, the capital investment appear, we start getting the payback. And all of this is subject
Speaker 134
1:37:40
to a meeting positive cost-benefit analysis by AEDC.
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
1:37:45
And my debate on capital investment has been that we're making all those tax exempt. We're not getting payback on that other than we will get a few jobs out there, and I'm not opposed to that. I want this to happen. But by the same token, I don't want to give the farm away. Again, put our hands on the table so that somebody comes up with a better deal than what we do. It is something. But, again, giving all the tax incentives and tax breaks out there,
at some point we can have a billion-dollar investment, but if it's all tax-free, the state has no investment in that. And
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:38:26
this is just sales tax exemption, so there still would be property taxes paid. Payroll taxes would be paid accordingly. Any other questions
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:38:38
from the committee? Senator Dismayne, do you have another question? No, sir. You done Senator Caldwell?
Speaker 90
1:38:46
Anyone else? Okay. Anyone from the audience want to speak for this bill? I do have a question for DFA on the lease payment. All
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:39:00
right. Well, let's go back to that. And I apologize. I am 10 minutes late from meeting. I called. So I'm trying to. Mr. Gehring, if
Speaker 137
1:39:08
you don't mind. Senator, I do appreciate because I was late presenting. So I do appreciate your patience with me. Senator
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:39:14
Dissemang had a question. I believe it was in the thing about making sure that it was just going to be
you know, the lease on the buildings, right, Senator Dismanke? Yeah. It's a good question that maybe needs an amendment unless you all say
that it's specific enough. Page 2, line 30. If you'd introduce yourself,
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:39:37
Mr. Gehring. Yes, Paul Gehring, DFA. Page 2, line 30 mentions or has two words, lease payments. It's in the eligible facilities cost, as we define that, which then we'd further define what facility is. And in those definitions, we mentioned the words extraction,
and you can't have extraction without a lease. Would you all interpret that to be lease
payments for royalty interest or lease payments on structures and? When we were reviewing the
Speaker 141
1:40:04
bill, Senator Dismang, it certainly appears that the intent is to be limited to facility costs, which are actual costs of the facility and not necessarily lease payments to royalty owners. Do we think
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:40:19
anyone's going to contest that because that would be a sizable
amount and again that is maybe a little conflicting
Speaker 141
1:40:27
which what I thought I understood earlier. But certainly if the bill were to be amended to clarify that particular issue that would provide greater guidance for DFA to have a level greater
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
1:40:42
liberal confidence. We could do that. We could also clarify it in the rules as well that would be
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:40:49
associated with this I personally I personally would rather have it in the in the legislation I mean
which is we can we can get that over here if we need to
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:40:59
I mean make all this happen if if that if there's gonna be other problems that a member of course is gonna vote no on the bill and here's not gonna pass anyway so we'll just we'll kind of proceed forward from here and see which way we want to
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:41:11
go any other questions? Anyone from the audience want to speak for this? Anyone want to
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:41:18
speak against it? I'm going to ask you if you're ready to close, but I guess we're going to have to also address this
amendment, how we'd want to do it. If we'd want to sit here for another 10 minutes,
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
1:41:31
which is fine with me. Senator Nisman, I'll defer to you. How would you line
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:41:34
to handle this, sir? I would like to have a bigger discussion about what we're doing with extraction and why we're allowing that to be something that we're going to incentivize. That is just unlike any other – I am all for trying to accomplish what you want to accomplish. And so if we're in discussion now, then that's what this is. I am all for doing what you want to do as far as making sure that once we pull that stuff out of the ground,
we're trying to refine it and have it here. We've done similar things for other industry just like that in the state of Arkansas. I just don't understand why we would subject ourselves to the risk of the mine. I mean, that's just a different place to put the state in.
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
1:42:21
one that feels that way. I just think, and again, maybe this won't clarify, but it's such a different industry.
A lot of the things that come from the wells are marketable at the well. You can literally take them. This has a multi-million dollar investment to even get it to where it is refined. I mean, you're talking probably five, six, seven hundred million dollars for the plant just to get it refined. So that's what I'm seeing. Unfortunately, I know more about lithium than I've ever wanted to know in my life.
The process to get it to where they have it refined in marketable is extensive very extensive okay as far as as far as
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:43:10
the amendment goes i mean of course we've got representative gene and dalby and henley and shepherd on there
i mean i i'm sure we could we could make that happen in the house and get their guarantee on that at this late date but if there's going to be other issues here then we'll just have to go so if you
you don't mind, let's just say that we will get that amendment to just clarify that lease by the time it comes from the House. Yes, I
will get it. I will get it. But, and then you go ahead and close, and then we'll see if we
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
1:43:45
have a motion. We'll vote this thing. Okay. Gentlemen, I just, I do want to close saying that it has been reported in the USA Today that there's approximately $225 billion over the next 15 years. Once they start production, that's about six to seven years away before they can actually get to that production as we see it now, but they're going
to have to start building soon, start the process of getting these plants going, and I just, again, I know being first to market does make some people nervous, and I respect that, but I don't think if we're not first to market, it's going to end well. Right now, I do know there's nine test wells being done in Texas, and there's three being done in Louisiana. And I think from looking at these maps, it's everywhere.
And I don't want to pass that up. And so I would respectfully ask for a good vote. I will promise that I will get that amendment on there for you, Senator Desmang. But I think this is the way we need to move forward with what's got to be done for the state of Arkansas, not only with the lithium industry, but with all these subsidiary industries that are in our future. Okay, thank you
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:45:03
all. Okay, at this point, do we have a motion for the bill?
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:45:11
We have a motion from Senator... Did you make a motion? All right. Senator Crowell, as a member of this committee, make a motion, do pass. Senator Clalwell is a second. Any other discussion? Yes, sir, Senator Dismay. Again, I would
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:45:28
like to have a further discussion, probably beyond this. I want someone to tell me that this isn't going to happen unless we pay for extraction, which is the way that the bill is written. Again, that is unlike we treat any other mining operation. There are costs associated with anyone that's trying to get anything out of the ground.
I mean, the feeding lines and everything else that has to be put in place for natural gas production is also incredibly expensive but not incentivized. again, I want to have a bigger, more complete conversation about why that's included, because to this date, no one's provided me what I would call a satisfactory answer. And again, I'll also just go back to a concern of if we do this now and everyone else is pending legislation, I know what that looks like. And we will be setting a bar that everyone else will
meet and surpass, that we will come back in and we will be bidding against ourselves to kind of try to chase it back around so that that's my concern about what it is we're doing we're probably a little bit ahead i think if we were limited to everything but extraction i would be a lot more
Speaker 129
1:46:34
comfortable that's that's my part of any any other discussion
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:46:37
from the members okay we have a motion and a second do pass on this all in favor say aye any opposed motion fails so that bill does not pass we appreciate the testimony today thank you
all right so now
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:47:09
I believe there is amendment on it
Speaker 42
1:47:23
okay we're going to go into about a 10-minute recess so we're
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:47:30
gonna have a 10-minute recess before we do this
Unknown speaker
1:47:53
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:54:53
Okay, we're back from a recess, and we're going to be, Senator Kroll will be doing House Bill 1695, it's my understanding that you
Speaker 101
1:55:16
have an amendment, is that correct? Yes, sir, we've got an amendment, and I'm going to let Senator Kroll, District 3, and I'm going to let Mr. Wilkerson go over the amendment.
Go ahead and introduce yourself. Of course, John Wilkerson, General
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:55:33
Counsel of the Municipal League. Okay, let us get the amendment passed out. I guess we already have. Is this it here? Everybody
Speaker 156
1:55:42
have their amendment? Okay, if you would, please go over the amendment. Of course. So in the original version of the bill, we extended the time for a city to file a lien, perfect a lien to the county clerk from 120 to 365 days in two instances and in one instance from 60 to 180 days. We have, working with the title folks, we have scrapped that. It's going
back to the original time frame. There's no extension of time for cities to perfect a lien and record the lien and all that sort of thing. So that's the first change. Also, we have made sure, and working with the banker folks, that we are required to give notice to any existing lien holders. Truth be told, I thought that was already sort of in there inherently, but they know foreclosure a lot better than I do, and they weren't comfortable. I'm just relying on my ignorant legal opinion, and I certainly understand that. So we've made it clear that we have to give notice
to lien holders. We appreciate everybody's work over the weekend to get that done. And then finally, there is a portion here that would allow cities to petition the land commissioner to avoid a sale of property to those that have existing liens. It was kind of our way to make sure that we can give notice to the state and land commissioner about what we're seeing out there with people buying property that just keep repeating the same lien issues. But in working with Senator Dismang, he pointed out that that was a new process and maybe was not
the best solution. So we took that out as well. And with those amendments, there's no known opposition. I think we've satisfied everybody's concerns. Appreciate everybody's working
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:57:10
on this thing. Like I say, I know you've spent a lot of hours on the weekend, because I think y'all
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:57:17
were on the phone with me for an hour and a half, so I know y'all probably got 10 to
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:57:22
15 in it. Anyway, as far as members, does any of the members here have any questions? Senator Petty, and I will be going to the audience in a minute.
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
1:57:32
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was just trying to sort through this. Is there anybody signed up from the mortgage bankers or anybody to represent them? Well, they can come to the table if they want.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:57:43
It's my understanding that they said that they're good with it at this point. They've been heavily involved all weekend working with it. Okay. Well,
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
1:57:50
what I wanted to clarify, I know that there was a conversation with Senator Dismayne and whether or not this amendment incorporates any of his concerns. It does. It does. It does.
Speaker 156
1:58:01
He had two concerns. One, two concerns from last time, the extension of time for cities to perfect the lien and
record the lien, and then the land commissioner notice provision. All right, and that
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
1:58:11
would not have affected the mortgage bankers or any of those? Okay, any other questions from the members? Okay, I've got some people signed up here
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:58:25
for and against, but I don't know if some of this has changed. Do we need to adopt the amendment? Oh, I'm sorry, we're on the amendment. So that was the amendment itself.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:58:39
Thank you for reminding me of that, Senator Boyd. Senator Boyd makes a motion to adopt a minute. Senator Caldwell is a second. All in favor say aye.
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
1:58:49
Aye. Okay, that'll carry. Okay, so now if you'll present
Speaker 156
1:58:52
your bill as amended. Same as last time, we are trying to work to find ways to help cities navigate the dilapidated properties issues, neglected properties. One of the issues that Senator Dismang raised as well was about how the language that looks to be new which is actually old language we we did some more research on that and you know we were very
comfortable even even more so than before to say that we this process doesn't work until the city there is an actual nuisance and so we we found the law and ag opinion as well so we feel comfortable with that but again this is just about allowing cities and towns to have a foreclosure process really first and foremost is to allow them to have a foreclosure process which there was a foreclosure language we could foreclose but there was no process in place so the biggest thing it does is allow us for that foreclosure process to be in place. That's what we worked on over the weekend. Okay, let me do something a little
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:59:44
out of the ordinary, and I wasn't going to do this
since Senator Dismang was not here, but since his name has been brought up, Senator Dismang has a disclosure. He went to another meeting. Unless he comes back, he won't be voting on it, but since his name's been brought up, I'm going to read this disclosure out of abundance of caution again, so just trying to keep everything. He said House Bill 1695, Section 10 contains language about the potential setting aside of a property by the Commissioner of State Lands. I am part owner of an entity that has purchased COSL property in the past.
Commissioner of State Lands property in the past. So anyway, we've read that disclosure. Again, I don't even see that he's going to be able to vote on it, but I want to do that the way that I feel is probably correct. Sorry about that. No, no problem. Okay. So you all presented your bill. As amended, is there any questions
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
2:00:39
in regards to the bill itself? Senator Petty.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I just want to be clear. Again, the concern out of the banking community was that you were somehow with this language as drafted, you were jumping your
place in line ahead of bankers. And this, as amended, does not change the priority in terms of the lien itself. I think the biggest concern for the bankers, and I'd let them speak as well,
Speaker 156
2:01:04
is that they weren't being notified of the foreclosure process. Again, I thought that that was already sort of in the law, but they felt more comfortable putting it in there, which, of course, makes sense. As far as the priority liens, it doesn't change any of that as it is. The foreclosure process does create a priority status,
but it's only under special circumstances that we could ever even jump ahead of the bankers or the other liens. So they were comfortable with that. And I won't speak for them, but we don't know that there's going to be a whole lot of overlap between us foreclosing on a dilapidated property and them having a foreclosure and a mortgage. So we're hopeful that there won't be much overlap anyway. But if there is, the process is set out that I think everybody's comfortable. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, any other questions from the committee?
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
2:01:57
Okay. Anyone want to speak for this bill? Again, there's some people signed up. if you're here and you want to speak for it just come forward or if any of you all that have
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
2:02:07
worked on this want to say that you're good with it i know i'm getting thumbs up so okay so all right so is is there anybody that's supposed to speak against it
okay if you'll come forward and and recognize yourself. Paul, I know you know the drill. If you'll just touch the, so your
red light will come on, recognize yourself, and then you can begin. Yes, sir. Thank you, committee. So I've had a
Paul Calvert
Unverified
2:02:45
little experience. You want to introduce yourself? Yes, sir. My name is Paul Calvert. I'm not representing anyone other than myself. - Sure. - So I've had a little experience with liens being filed against my properties. There's supposed to be an appeal process. And in my experience, the liens that were filed against my property, I believe all of them were unlawful.
And when I went to appeal, they had already filed, the lien that I did appeal, they had already filed the lien before the deadline for the appeal. And so I had to pay it because it was attached to my taxes and it would be delinquent taxes. And when I went to the appeal, the judge threw my case out and part of his justification of throwing the case out was the fact that I had sold the property and I had paid the lien.
So in my experience, we don't have a good enough process or at least not effective process for dealing with, for adding accountability for liens that are filed, at least in my experience personally. And so this bill is going to expand the, or double the amount that the cities can take from property owners when they file liens for various issues that's on page, at least the previous bill is page three,
I don't know where it is, where it lands after the amendment. and it restates in the code, I think it moves, it simply moves it over where it talks about the city of the first class, city of the second class, or a corporate town may order the removal or raising of a property, basically they can tear down a house. And they can do it without a court order, from what I understand.
They merely have to vote on a city council And in my experience, they voted and they carried out, they imposed the lien on me prior to giving me an opportunity to appeal. And then when I appealed, the judge threw my case out and part of his justification for throwing my case out was that I had already paid the lien. And so I've got major heartburn over the fact
that they can tear a house down without a court order. They can't search a house unless they have a warrant from a judge. But apparently they can tear a house down without getting an order from a judge or without a trial. So I would ask you all to vote against this. And before we expand their power, let's maybe fix some of the issues we have right now and with the abuses that are going on
because I've attempted to use this appeal process and I didn't get anywhere with it because the judge threw my
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
2:05:54
case out. Okay. Any questions from the members? Most of your issues are going to be in regards to the tax liens. Is that right, Mr. Calvert, is kind of what you were talking about? Yeah, so
the... Kind of a different, a little bit of a different animal
Speaker 175
2:06:09
with those, but I see what you're tying them
Paul Calvert
Unverified
2:06:12
together. Right, so the liens are attached to property taxes when they're filed.
And so then a normal lien you'd pay when you sell the property, but the liens that the city imposes, they're attached directly to your taxes. And if you don't pay them, they send your property
Speaker 170
2:06:28
to the land commissioner's office to be sold. And I think the
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
2:06:33
part about them where they are able to declare a property that's uninhabitable or things of that, they've had that authority. They have. They have had that authority, right. It's not new. It's not new language, so I just think we need to make sure
that that's specific since we're being live-streamed, that people don't think that we're changing that part. Yeah, we're not adding that. You're correct. So your argument is current statute that's on the books that you think that there needs to be
Paul Calvert
Unverified
2:06:59
some work on that? Well, that or just some better oversight in how it works. Yes, sir. So that is current law, but we are expanding their ability to, we're doubling their ability to file to, as far as the amounts they can
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
2:07:13
file against your property. Yes, sir. They are within, and that is new language. There are current increases on that
because it's been quite a few years, so that would be correct. So
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
2:07:25
any other questions in regards to that? Senator Petty? And this may be
Speaker 88
2:07:30
more for the presenters, but. Well, if it's, At this point, it's
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
2:07:34
just for... Oh, for him? Yes. So is your understanding that in
order for a property to be torn down, currently, as it's written in statute, it has to be
court-ordered in these situations? No, under current law, I think cities are able to tear down a house without a court-order.
I'm saying we should require a court-order. So that part is not being changed. It's not being changed. It's being shifted over, and part
Paul Calvert
Unverified
2:08:01
of my beef with it is that it's still in law, but we're expanding the ability of, we're doubling their amounts that they can charge the homeowner after having torn the house down without a court order. So you can tear my house down without a court order, and then you can charge me for it, and now it's gonna be double what they could charge me for.
I mean, all of this without a court order, if I understand the law correctly. And my experience, and I haven't had a house torn down, but I've had cleanups done where a tenant left stuff in the yard, and they would do a cleanup, and then they would charge me for it, which is unlawful, but they did. And then when I attempted to appeal one of these liens, my case was thrown out, and part of their justification was that I had paid the lien already. - Okay, but in this case, we're talking about
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
2:08:58
this bill and you may have, you know, something to look at in the future with your court-appointed or court-ordered issue, but that's not
Paul Calvert
Unverified
2:09:09
addressed in this current bill. Other than the amounts are expanded, and that is part of, so the, I believe the lien that was filed against my property would have been part of the expanded amounts. So
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
2:09:27
unrelated to this, I have bought some land that had some existing buildings on it.
There's three different tracks unrelated, no lien situation, but each one of them were between $15,000 and $18,000 to tear down. So I think those numbers are probably in line with market. And as Senator Hickey said, probably needed to be updated. I don't disagree, except that we're tearing down houses without a
Paul Calvert
Unverified
2:09:51
court order, so that makes it a bigger problem. If it was after a court order, I'd charge them whatever's right, if that makes any sense. Sure. I appreciate the question.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
2:10:05
No, Jay, and just one more clarification. Up to or no more than, I want
to make sure that everybody thinks that we may be double in the amounts. It's just going to be, there's a potential that it could go up to that. so I just again I just want to make it clear and appreciate your comments right right yeah yes sir I think
Paul Calvert
Unverified
2:10:25
you are correct though that you still be up to so if it only costs 5,000 it doesn't go up to 15 yes
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
2:10:32
sir so just I don't want anybody to had any false pretenses on that so yes sir thank you sir thank you
yes sir let me turn this off yes sir thanks for being here today all right anyone else
want to speak either way we have some people here Wes did you you don't you you're you're just saying you're good you are saying you're good Hauser you're yeah you are thumbs up on stuff all right I think everybody's in spoke for against did what they wanted to do so
do you all want to close I
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
2:11:15
would just we've made a lot of changes I think we got to where everybody's agreeable obviously and I feel sorry for the witness and I think that's a little bit not to do with this bill but I would close and ask
for a good vote and I would make a motion do
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
2:11:33
pass all right Senator Crowe is making a motion do pass as amended Senator Caldwell is a second Any other discussion as far as on the motion?
All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that bill passes.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
2:11:47
Thank you all. Anyone here else want to say anything, present any other bills? I think with that, we're adjourned.
Agenda
CALL TO ORDER - Senator Jimmy Hickey
HB1695 J. Richardson TO CLARIFY THE FORECLOSURE PROCESS FOR PROPERTY SUBJECT TO A MUNICIPAL LIEN; TO ALLOW A MUNICIPALITY TO PETITION TO SET ASIDE THE SALE OF PROPERTY TO CERTAIN PERSONS; AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE PRIORITY OF UNRECORDED MUNICIPAL LIENS.
Recess till 12:30
Reconvene
HB1851 Jean TO AMEND THE SALES TAX EXEMPTION FOR FOOD, FOOD INGREDIENTS, AND PREPARED FOOD SOLD IN A PUBLIC, COMMON, HIGH SCHOOL, OR COLLEGE CAFETERIA OR DINING FACILITY.
HB1657 Beck TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS WOOD ENERGY PRODUCTS AND FOREST MAINTENANCE INCOME TAX CREDIT.
HB1589 Schulz TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE FINANCIAL OPERATIONS OF A COUNTY; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ANNUAL COUNTY FINANCIAL REPORT.
SB568 Crowell TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE TAXES APPLICABLE TO LITHIUM EXTRACTION AND DEVELOPMENT; TO PROVIDE A SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTION FOR LITHIUM RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE SEVERANCE TAX ON LITHIUM.
SB535 Hester TO CREATE A SALES AND USE TAX EXEMPTION FOR THE ARKANSAS MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS AND THE ARKANSAS MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS FOUNDATION.
RECESS Till 10:50
RECONVENE
RECESS TILL 11:30
RECONVENE
ADJOURNMENT
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — REVENUE & TAX - SENATE, Apr 7, 2025 | Agenda | 3 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
Chair (Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr)
Unverified
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
Senator Bart Hester
Unverified
Speaker 43
Speaker 22
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
Speaker 53
Speaker 67
Speaker 84
Speaker 86
Speaker 49
Chair
Unverified
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
Speaker 101
Speaker 104
Hugh Mcdonald
Unverified
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
Speaker 123
Speaker 125
Speaker 126
Speaker 128
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
Speaker 134
Speaker 90
Speaker 137
Speaker 141
Speaker 113
Speaker 129
Speaker 36
Speaker 42
Speaker 156
Senator Jim Petty
Unverified
Paul Calvert
Unverified
Speaker 175
Speaker 170
Speaker 88