Home » History/Preservation »Politics/Policy »STL Region »Taxes » Currently Reading:

Bill Before Missouri Legislature Could Stall Revitalization Efforts in St. Louis

Tax credits can be an effective tool to accomplish certain goals. For example, the federal mortgage deduction is meant to encourage home ownership.  But in truth the fed is subsidizing home ownership.  Tax credits are a trade off — a credit in exchange for something of value.

But an amendment tacked on to Missouri’s jobs bill (SB45) could severely limit the state’s Historic Preservation Tax Credit that has helped St. Louis, Kansas City and towns throughout Missouri since taking effect on January 1, 1998.  The landscape in Jefferson City is changing daily so I know I don’t have the latest.  But know that the very tax credits which have been a key player in renovation projects downtown and throughout the city, may get limited.  We need this tax credit to continue the redevelopment of historic buildings in St. Louis and in communities across the entire state.

Further reading:

Tax incentives that produce results (jobs, reinvestment in established areas, etc) should be expanded – cut capped.

 

Currently there are "9 comments" on this Article:

  1. Justin says:

    Posting this on twitter. Thanks for the write up, typical MO politics. Unfortunate.

     
  2. Adam says:

    And props to Jeff Smith for filibustering the bill because of the caps. He’s taking some heat from it from Nixon supporters.

     
  3. dumb me says:

    What I don’t understand is why would they want to cut a program which has been such a success? I guess that’s why I am dumb. Dumb me.

     
  4. Jimmy Z says:

    It’s dogma over logic – lower taxes are ALWAYS better in the minds of some . . .

     
  5. dumb me says:

    Well then I must really be dumb because a tax credit lowers taxes. Why would someone in favor of lower taxes want to remove this program?

    This program lowers taxes and increases investment. I would think conservatives would love this concept. What am I missing? Dumb me.

     
  6. studs lonigan says:

    To some extent, the hostility to programs like the Historic Tax Credit stems from a rural vs. urban antagonism. A popular outstate perception of the HTC is that it exclusively benefits fat cats in Missouri’s Sodom and Gomorrah, (St. Louis and Kansas City) while the “real Missourians” in the rest of the state don’t get invited to the godless orgy. It is a blatant and cynical distortion that plays effectively for idiots like Brad Lager.

    The fact is, small towns from Carthage to Hannibal have also benefited from the HTC and have jump-started Main Street initiatives, created jobs, tourism and its dollars, saved historic buildings and gained additional private investment they would never have seen without the HTC. The state’s department of economic development has unvarnished numbers and figures to back all this up, but no one is more immune to facts and argument than empty-suit politicians who rely on a tired-ass “us vs. them” dynamic.

    I too appreciate Jeff Smith’s gumption and dedication to this issue. He told me long ago that he would filibuster if needed and it is gratifying to see him come through. We need more voices like his in Jeff City.

     
  7. john w. says:

    “Real Missourians” are from Missour-ah. Missour-ee is for me.

     
  8. disappointed in Nixon says:

    I was terribly disappointed, but not surprised, to see Governor Nixon’s reaction and lack of support for this vital redevelopment tool. Earlier today Show-Me-Progress reported that FiredUp Missouri had a post mocking Jeff Smith for his lisp and mannerisms because of his filibuster. FiredUp has since taken the post down but it made me furious that they would attack Jeff personally while he was defending this legislation which is so important to his district. I’m very appreciative that Jeff has stayed strong on this.

     
  9. Clark says:

    Yeah, that was stupid on Fired Up’s part. Interestingly, Speaker Richard is laying down the law to some degree, saying that he won’t stand for a stiff cap, nor will he allow a cap and appropriation to take the place of the current process for awarding credits. He still says he would allow a $150 million cap, which would cut the current use of the credit and therefore revitalization efforts in general.

     

Comment on this Article:

Advertisement



[custom-facebook-feed]

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe