HB 184-REFUND OF FISH BUSINESS TAX TO MUNIS  9:45:09 AM CHAIR MUNOZ announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 184, "An Act relating to the sharing of tax revenue from the fisheries business tax and fishery resource landing tax with municipalities; and providing for an effective date." 9:46:20 AM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, deferred to Mr. Cottongim to explain the information he provided per Representative Austerman's request. 9:47:02 AM TIM COTTONGIM, Fish Group Manager, Juneau Office, Tax Division, Department of Revenue, per the request of Representative Austerman, provided the committee with a spreadsheet that breaks out the impact of solely the export provision to each of the communities previously receiving sharing from the fisheries business tax. The export provision provides that revenues are shared back to communities from where the fish was first landed, prior to being exported from the state. 9:48:28 AM REPRESENTATIVE AUSTERMAN remarked that this spreadsheet relates the results of the 50:50 split versus the 75:25 split of the community and the state. Currently, the fisheries landing tax is split 50:50 between the communities and the state. If another 25 percent is given to the municipalities, then that's 25 percent less that goes to the state. The aforementioned would fuel the House Finance Committee argument that the fisheries don't pay their way. If the legislation reaches the House Finance Committee with the additional 25 percent of the fisheries landing tax going to municipalities, it may be something the House Finance Committee doesn't want to do. He acknowledged that the sponsor has said she will withdraw the legislation if the 25 percent increase to the municipalities doesn't remain in the legislation. Still, Representative Austerman opined that the legislation should be reviewed in regard to how the distribution of taxes would flow from the smaller communities to the larger communities based on not having the 25 percent. The original legislation, prior to the inclusion of the 25 percent increase, had problems that should be reviewed. 9:50:41 AM CHAIR MUNOZ pointed out that the legislation addresses two taxes: the fisheries business tax and the fisheries resource landing tax. The table prepared by Mr. Cottongim assumes that one of the taxes was removed from the formula. MR. COTTONGIM replied yes, the table doesn't address the piece dealing with the exported unprocessed shares. Therefore, the table didn't calculate the 75 percent at all, rather it took the current 50 percent share that's in law and changed it based on the exported unprocessed being shared directly by DOR instead of it going to DCCED to allocate. CHAIR MUNOZ related her understanding that if the legislation moves forward as currently written and isn't changed to amend either of the taxes, the return to the communities is much greater. In fact, in most cases, there would be a substantial increase in revenue. MS. COTTONGIM replied yes, adding that he didn't believe any community would experience a loss at the 75 percent share along with this provision. 9:52:37 AM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON reminded the committee that when the state received 50 percent of the tax, the state owned the harbors. However, now most of the harbors have been transferred to local municipalities and haven't been given money to help maintain the harbors. Although [the additional funds provided via HB 184] won't address all the harbor needs, it will help. If the legislation is changed, that is the taxes are decoupled, she announced that she would withdraw the legislation. 9:53:54 AM CHAIR MUNOZ announced that HB 184 would be held over.