My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2018-02-15 Letter to Sylvia Luke re HB 1665, HD 1 Relating to Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT)
PublicDocuments
>
Office of the Mayor
>
Office of the Mayor Documents
>
2016-2020
>
Correspondence
>
2018
>
02-2018
>
2018-02-15 Letter to Sylvia Luke re HB 1665, HD 1 Relating to Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/13/2018 1:22:20 PM
Creation date
2/15/2018 3:01:42 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Harry Kim <br />Atayor <br />ettuttfu <br />Offirrtif <br />Wi Okabe <br />Alanaging Director <br />Barbara J. Kossow <br />Deputy Managing Director <br />25 Aupuni Street, Suite 2603 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • (808) 961-8211 • Fax (808) 9616553 <br />KONA: 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy., Bldg C • Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740 <br />(808) 323-4444 • Fax (808) 323-4440 <br />February 15, 2018 <br />Representative Sylvia Luke, Chair <br />Committee on Finance <br />Hawaii State Capitol, Room 308 <br />Honolulu, HI 9681:3 <br />Dear Chair Luke and Committee Members: <br />Re: HB 65, HD 1 Relating to the Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT) <br />Flea lig Date: 02/16/18 — 4:00 pm; House Conference Room 308 <br />HB 1665, started as a part of the Hawail Council of Mayors package, and would <br />have restored the countiesallocation of the TAT to 45%. B 1665, HD 1, on the other <br />hand, would require that the counties request reimbursement for various expenses, and <br />justify each request in order to receive ANY TAT. While it is not clear what expenses <br />would qualify for reimbursement (e.g., what percentage of overhead, salaries, <br />maintenance products used at a park that serves locals and visitors, etc.) nor how much <br />revenue the counties would ultimately receive, it is clear that the process would be a <br />bureaucratic nightmare. Even if the counties wound up getting more TAT money than <br />at present, it woul not be worth it. This bill would cripple the partnership that has been <br />created over the y _ars in an imperfect but meaningful attempt to best serve the 1.4 <br />million people of Hawaii. Therefore, you will not be surprised that we cannot support <br />1665, HD 1, and ask that it be held, or that the original intent of HB 1665 be <br />restored. <br />My understanding s that the TAT was originally established to assist the <br />counties, but the Legislature has always had the prerogative to determine how it will be <br />apportioned. Give Hawal'i County's limited resources (and seemingly unlimited <br />needs), we are fortunate that the Legislature has never wavered in allowing the counties <br />to share in the TAT and we thank you for that. <br />The TAT is a very important source of revenue to the County of Hawaii (and the <br />other counties), and we rely on it to balance our budget and maintain services for our <br />citizens and visitors. The current allocation has dealt a punishing blow to us, and <br />therefore to our taxpayers. You and 1 represent and serve the same people. <br />Decimating the budgets of the counties is not beneficial; it simply forces the counties to <br />drastically reduce services or increase other taxes for our shared constituents. <br />f Ha Ai`i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Nmploycr. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.