House plan would stabilize Missourians’ vehicle property tax values

      Missourians in recent years have been slapped with high and increasing property tax bills for their vehicles, and state lawmakers are going to try again this year to stem that.

Representative Rodger Reedy (Photo: TIm Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      The issue has been a top one for two legislators who were assessors before they came to Jefferson City.   

      One of them is Representative Rodger Reedy (R-Windsor), who sees his House Bill 1690 as a taxpayer protection act.

      “We are trying to do this to make it better for our taxpayers and to be more fair to them,” Reedy said.

      The other is Representative Brad Hudson (R-Cape Fair), who said when he was an assessor, “I would have never wanted to sit across the desk from someone and say, ‘Hey, you know that farm truck that you’ve got?  Yeah, it’s a year older, yeah it’s got more miles on it, but I’m going to hit you with a higher assessment this year and you’re going to have to pay more in property taxes because of that.’  That doesn’t make sense.  It’s not right.”

      The issue with vehicle valuations began in 2020 when the COVID pandemic halted supply lines.  Parts for vehicles were harder to come by this inflated the demand for, and therefore the values of, used vehicles.

      “So what the end result has been, you would have the same vehicle and it would be a year older but the trade-in value would show to be higher, so your assessment would be higher and you would pay more taxes on that vehicle that’s a year older,” Reedy explained.  “I basically, fundamentally think that if that vehicle’s a year older, typically you’ve got 20-30 thousand more miles on it, you should not be paying more taxes on it than you did the year before.”

      Hudson agreed, “Around COVID with supply chain issues, things going on, there was just this perfect storm that created what some would call a ‘funky market,’ or a ‘false market,’ and that actually put assessors in a position where if they were going to do their job according to state statute, many of them felt like they would have to be raising the assessed value of vehicles.”

      The state statute to which Hudson refers dictates that assessors must use the October issue of the National Automobile Dealers Association’s (NADA) Used Car Guide to determine the value of a motor vehicle.  Reedy’s bill would allow the State Tax Commission to designate a different nationally produced automobile guide to be used by assessors.  His proposal would also establish a depreciation schedule to be applied to the values set forth in that automobile guide.   

Representative Brad Hudson (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      “It makes sure that these used vehicles depreciate in value for taxation purposes,” Reedy said. 

      Hudson said the issue of inflated vehicle valuations has the potential to negatively impact every household in Missouri.

      “People from all over our state pay personal property taxes, and in many cases they pay a lot in personal property taxes, and they expect their taxes to go up when they get a new vehicle … but when they have the same vehicles, when those vehicles are older, when those vehicles have more miles on them, they don’t expect their taxes to go up because of their vehicles’ value, and they shouldn’t have to.  It’s just common sense that these vehicles should be going down in value every year,” Hudson said.

      Reedy said the problem hasn’t abated on its own the passage of time, “I can give you a case where a vehicle that had a value of $7,300 in 2021 went to $7,600 in 2022.  Even now, in ’23 that same vehicle has just dropped back to $7,500, so [the owner of] that particular vehicle will pay more taxes in 2023 than [they] paid in 2021.”

      Both lawmakers said this is exactly the kind of issue Missouri lawmakers should be addressing on behalf of their constituents.

      “It is common sense.  You have folks that are working, struggling to make ends meet, some of them on fixed incomes, they have to plan ahead, and then they get hit with a higher tax bill because of something that was beyond their control.  No, that’s not right and that’s something that the Missouri legislature should be fixing,” said Hudson.

      This year’s version of this legislation was passed out of the House 150-0 before stalling out in the Senate.  In 2022, Hudson carried a version of the bill that cleared the House 146-0 but also did not clear the Senate.

House considers further reduction in vehicle safety inspection requirements

      A state representative who several years ago championed an easing of Missouri’s vehicle safety inspection law says it’s time to make more vehicles exempt.

Representative J. Eggleston (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      Senate Bill 89, passed in 2019, rolled back that law.  Since it was enacted, safety inspections have not been required on vehicles that have fewer than 150,000 miles and are up to ten years old.  That portion of SB 89 was proposed by Representative J. Eggleston (R-Maysville)

      He says in the time since that law passed Missouri’s roads have been no less safe.

      “[SB 89] got rid of about half of the cars that needed to be inspected from being inspected … here we are, two or three years later, I’ve looked, I have not found any sudden burst of cars falling apart and causing accidents so I think we’re ready to get rid of [vehicle inspections],” Eggleston told the House Committee on Downsizing State Government.

      Eggleston’s proposal, however, wouldn’t completely eliminate inspections in Missouri.  Under House Bill 2499, all vehicles made since 2012 and having fewer than 150,000 miles would be exempt.

      “I toyed with just doing an all-out, getting rid of it all at once … but because of some of the consternation [about the 2019 proposal], I thought we’ll just ease out of it,” said Eggleston.  “So I basically said, ‘Any car that’s not being inspected today is not ever going to have to be inspected.  Any of them that are inspected today will continue’ … so over time this will just naturally phase itself out.”

      Eggleston’s idea has some support, including from O’Fallon representative Tony Lovasco (R)

      “I do think that ultimately, as technology increases, we’re going to see more and more construction improvements made and what not where [inspections are] really going to be completely superfluous very soon, and I think it does makes sense to have it just drop off naturally rather than us revisiting this every few years,” said Lovasco.

      Representative Michael Burton (D-Lakeshire) doesn’t support extending the 2019 legislation.  He said for him it’s an issue of safety.

      “Let’s talk about a cracked windshield.  That’s something that’s inspected whenever the car goes through an inspection, and I know we have laws where you can’t drive around with a cracked windshield but we also know that police officers right now are generally not pulling people over for that, but I think that can be a safety issue … same thing with seatbelts.  Whenever you get a car inspection they’re checking to make sure all the seatbelts work and what not.  That’s a safety concern of mine.”

      Eggleston said there are 35 states which have no vehicle inspection requirements, and that includes all the states that border Missouri.  He said that hasn’t made their roads less safe than those states who have such a requirement.

      “Their statistics on accidents and deaths are no different than ours.  There’s no correlation between states that have inspection programs and safety at all,” said Eggleston.  “The safety issue you were talking about, it’s perceived but I don’t think it’s actual. There’s no data to back that up.”

      The committee’s top Democrat, Gretchen Bangert (Florrisant), opposed the 2019 legislation and has reservations about taking it further.  She also dislikes that the 2019 law allows vehicles to be sold without an inspection, and wishes this bill would reverse that.

      “So I could have a car that’s a junker and has some sort of issue, and if you don’t know because you don’t get an inspection yourself and just trust me, then the car hasn’t been inspected.  That’s one loophole that I wish we could look at is if you were selling a car to another person that it would have to be inspected regardless of the miles,” said Bangert. 

      Eggleston said it is up to a potential buyer to decide whether to get an inspection on a vehicle they’re considering purchasing.

      His 2019 legislation, as a stand-alone before it was amended onto SB 89, passed out of the House 102-45.

      The committee has not voted on HB 2499.

Previous stories:

Bill rolling back vehicle inspection requirement signed into law

House votes to roll back, rather than eliminate, vehicle inspection requirements