The State of Arizona has passed a balanced budget through the Republican controlled House and Senate not only hammering down a $1.4 billion shortfall in projected tax revenues but actually expanding and reforming the state’s Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESA), and School Tuition Organization (STO) eligibility, much to Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs’ chagrin. Hobbs, despite her opposition toward the ESA program, implied her acceptance of the budget in a Saturday post to X, and on Monday evening signed the budget into law.
As reported by 12News, the budget was approved in a marathon of votes that stretched throughout the Saturday workday and landed on Hobbs’ desk where it was approved at the end of the business day. Many agencies in Arizona are now working with a budget cut of approximately 3% that arose primarily from depressed sales tax collections in 2023-24. Hobbs and her fellow Democrats have tried to assign the blame to former Republican Gov. Doug Ducey for tax cuts and expansion of the ESA program to allow all students access to the education of their choice.
In spite of this rhetoric, the GOP led legislature successfully prevented a reduction in the funds directed to putting students in underperforming schools into private schools and under the tutelage of homeschooling parents. The budget even included a 2% inflation-driven increase in the K-12 public schools budget.
Senate Majority Whip Sine Kerr explained in a statement from the AZ Senate Republicans:
“What’s not included in the $16.1 billion budget is an elimination of the historic Universal Empowerment Scholarship Accounts program or our School Tuition Organizations program providing tens of thousands of Arizona families the freedom to pick the best schools to meet their children’s unique learning needs.
We are continuing our commitment to providing every family in the state of Arizona with a quality education, no matter their zip code or economic status. Additionally, we said ‘no’ when Governor Hobbs and Democrats proposed eliminating our Arizona Freedom Schools at our public universities, which are dedicated to civics education and ensuring students are equipped down the road to lead our state to a brighter tomorrow.”
In the new budget, the ESA program sees an expansion to “allow the use of account monies to reimburse the parent of a qualified student or a qualified student for the purchase of a good or educational service that is an allowable expense.” Reforms to the ESA will be extensive with the Arizona Department of Education to work in consultation with the Auditor General to generate risk-based audits of the program and ensuring that educators being paid through the program are not subject to disciplinary action by the State Board of Education and requiring all teaching staff and personnel with unsupervised contact with the students be fingerprinted as public school teachers already are. Expansion to the STO program grew the student eligibility to include any students who “are placed in foster care … at any time before the student graduates from high school or obtains a general equivalency diploma.”
In her comments posted to X, Hobbs commented, “While this bipartisan budget delivers reforms to ESAs, they are not enough.” She added a commitment to bring “accountability and transparency” to the program referring to it as “unsustainable.”
Despite that deficit, we made important investments in delivering childcare to working families, combatting the fentanyl epidemic and securing our border, and protecting critical health and human services for vulnerable Arizonans.
— Governor Katie Hobbs (@GovernorHobbs) June 16, 2024
But I know we still have more work to do. While this bipartisan budget delivers reforms to ESAs, they are not enough. I stand committed to bringing much needed accountability and transparency to the unsustainable ESA program.
— Governor Katie Hobbs (@GovernorHobbs) June 16, 2024
In addition to the preservation and expansion of Arizona’s ESA and STO programs, the AZ Senate GOP offered the following highlights from the budget:
Reduces state spending by $1.7 billion below the 2023-2024 enacted budget (a 10% reduction).
Reduces ongoing spending by $330 million.
Protects school choice programs—both Empowerment Scholarship Accounts and School Tuition Organizations are funded for continued growth.
Protects Arizona Freedom Schools.
Does not pull dollars from the rainy-day fund.
No new taxes or tax increases.
No new debt.
Reduces ongoing funding of state agencies by 3.5%, including cuts to universities by $23 million.
Maintains law enforcement funding, while adding $5 million for local border security support and $4 million for fentanyl interdiction and law enforcement response.
Prohibits board fee increases for 2 years.
Lowers vehicle emissions testing fees by 5%.
Ends ongoing funding for COVID federal programs.
Maintains road infrastructure funding.
Adds additional full-time employees to reduce concealed carry permit application and renewal time frames.
Makes conservative policy and spending reforms to the Arizona Commerce Authority, the Arizona Department of Transportation, the Industrial Commission of Arizona, and the Board of Technical Registration.
Senate President Warren Petersen summarized the contentious budget in statement, “Following last year’s state budget, where Republican lawmakers provided inflationary relief to everyday Arizonans through $274 million in tax rebates distributed to struggling families, as well as a ban on the tenant-paid rental tax taking effect this January, Republicans are again successfully supporting our hardworking citizens while simultaneously reining in spending.” He added, “In this year’s budget, we defended more than $520 million allocated last year for much-needed transportation projects statewide. We also cut fees for Maricopa County drivers on emissions testing by 5%, and we banned fee increases on Arizonans from state boards for the next two years.”
“Arizonans can rest assured that their state has a balanced budget. I’m thankful for members of the legislature who came together, compromised, and passed this bipartisan agreement,” Gov. Katie Hobbs said in a statement reported by AZ Mirror. “But I know we still have more work to do.”
Despite the modest gains of the budget, not all Republicans supported the compromise. The Arizona Freedom Caucus seemed very displeased and took their case to the public in a post to X, writing, “It’s a perfect example of the Swamp that establishment Republicans at the Arizona Capital are saying ‘the Freedom Caucus is the problem’ on this budget The reality is that this is what happens when weak Republicans negotiate a budget in secret with Democrats.”
It’s a perfect example of the Swamp that establishment Republicans at the Arizona Capital are saying “the Freedom Caucus is the problem” on this budget 🤡
The reality is that this is what happens when weak Republicans negotiate a budget in secret with Democrats.
The result is…
— Arizona Freedom Caucus (@AZFreedomCaucus) June 15, 2024
The Caucus cited a dozen shortcomings in the budget, namely that the Democrat and Republicans who formulated it, “Fail to appropriate any new meaningful border security money for local Sheriffs, kneecap a school choice tax credit, regulate private faith-based schools, weaponize public schools’ ability to stop conservative teachers from providing instruction to ESA students, impede parents’ right to educate their children as they see fit, gift hundreds of millions of your tax dollars to the healthcare industrial complex, refuse to do anything meaningful to fix our elections, use budget gimmicks to pretend to solve the state’s deficit, rather than actually solving it, sweep $430M of water funding intended to help solve our state’s water crisis, fail to hold Hobbs accountable for her illegal pay-to-play scheme, fail to hold Mayes accountable for weaponizing the justice system against her political opponents,” and “fail to hold Fontes accountable for his totally illegal Election Procedures Manual.”
They added, “In the case of the current budget, when @AZFreedomCaucus members approached leadership, raised concerns with some of the nonstarters in the budget, offered solutions, and indicated that with changes we could achieve Republican unity… Warren Petersen and Ben Toma rejected the changes instantly without even considering them, and then spent the rest of the day attacking, defaming, and insulting the members of the Freedom Caucus for not just blindly following orders. Unfortunately, establishment Republicans’ failure to see the present battlefield for what it really is will cost us the legislature. When Democrats take control, whether it’s in November or in two years… you can look back at who voted YES on this year’s budget to figure out who to blame.”
The budget is also likely to draw a legal challenge from Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes regarding the ‘sweep’ of funding from the $1.14 billion, 18-year opioid One Arizona Agreement. The agreement, long a bone of contention between the AG, Governor, and Legislature, stems from a lawsuit that capped the Big Pharma opioid scandal and resulted in then-Attorney General Mark Brnovich signing onto to a $26 billion national settlement with Cardinal, McKesson, and AmerisourceBergen and Johnson & Johnson, which distributed, manufactured and marketed opioids respectively.
The funds are held by the AG’s Office as steward for the money designated for opioid treatment, prevention, and education. Mayes told 12 News’ Brahm Resnick, “I am not giving that money to them. It’s in my bank account at the Attorney General’s Office. It’s not going anywhere.”
In a lengthy statement posted to X, Mayes said, “I have stated publicly + very clearly that I refuse to release these funds in this way as it would violate the agreement, & I stand by those words today. This is an egregious grab, and I will do everything in my power to protect these opioid settlement funds for all Arizonans.”
A new ridesharing alternative to Uber and Lyft has emerged in several cities with Phoenix and Scottsdale on the cusp of joining the roster. Blackwolf, a new rideshare application based out of Atlanta has entered the arena to address a need not merely for ridesharing, but for a sense of security for its passengers. Presently available in Atlanta, Miami, and Ft. Lauderdale, the service boasts of drivers who are armed and CPR-trained former Law Enforcement, military, or professional security personnel. Founder Kerry KingBrown explains that creating the app came to him after “a friend who told him how she was sex trafficked,” according to the app’s website.
KingBrown, 32, is a former private investigator who worked for Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) as reported by The New York Post. Speaking with Atlanta First News the proprietor made his case for a new kind of ridesharing experience:
“Who are mostly on the news getting robbed, getting raped? The average person,” he told reporters. “What I’m creating is a necessary evil. It’s a necessity.” Speaking to NewsNation in May he said “There’s too many rapes. There’s too many people getting carjacked. There’s too many that are not vetted, There’s too many drivers who are driving the wrong vehicle.” KingBrown added, “That driver has to be vetted. That driver has to have a background. That driver has to have a proper vehicle. Normally when people want to feel safe, the price is really out of their budget.”
On the app’s Facebook page the company lays out that every vehicle is equipped with GPS tracking as well as live-streaming cameras allowing riders to share a live feed with loved ones during their trip. Both unarmed and armed drivers are available as an “Armed Executive Protection Driver” or an “Unarmed Executive Protection Driver” in the application itself. The Post reported that at present the base rate for an unarmed driver is $50 with $1.75 per mile in addition. For an armed driver, the difference is just ten dollars, bringing it to $60 with $1.75 per mile charge.
Brass tacks: here’s a comparison from Surprise, Arizona:
Uber Premium Black to Sky Harbor Airport Terminal 4 is priced at $147.31 as of this writing, upgrading to an SUV runs it up to $181.32.
Lyft Black for the same trip is priced at $125.82, with the upgrade to Black SUV at $160.12.
Following the BlackWolf formula for estimating reported by The Post, an unarmed ride would set you back $107.75 before taxes, meanwhile an armed ride would run just $117.75.
In BlackWolf’s executive summary the company states it has plans to expand its operations to Chicago and Nashville. The Post reported upcoming expansion into New York as well. The firm also painted a significant difference in the caliber of driver customers can expect. “The demand for BlackWolf underscores a growing concern for safety in traditional ride-hail services. Unlike major competitors who pretty much hire anybody who applies, BlackWolf prioritizes screening and quality, striving to ensure riders never have to worry about inappropriate driver behavior, inconsistent ride quality, or feeling unsafe,” the company said.
BlackWolf armed drivers: “Must have a minimum of 4+ years in the military, law enforcement, or security sector, must be CPR certified, and must have security credentials.” The site added, “Our pricing is very competitive with Uber Black, and it can sometimes be lower depending on the distance and time! We are for everyday Americans who want to feel safe without burning a hole in their pocketbook.” The site does clarify that as Axios reports their drivers do not provide security services at destination but only ensure safe transport noting, “customers in need of personal bodyguard security can request a licensed security driver via email. We collaborate with security companies across the country for such rides, which can then be conveniently arranged within the app as a private contract.” Recent reports from Axios and AZCentral have pointed to some hiccups in the initial June 5th launch with the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) that resulted in service in Arizona being paused, but KingBrown told Axios he is working on the issue with the hopes it will “be resolved quickly.”
“It’s a tough journey but we are here to stay and operate correctly and legally!” he told Axios in an email.
According to the outlet, ADOT spokesman Steve Elliott said that BlackWolf had submitted its application to the agency but it was incomplete. He added that the ADOT will verify that Blackwolf is ” in compliance with relevant statutes and rules” and that the application will be reviewed once it is resubmitted “with all required information.” The Department later confirmed to the Arizona Republic that the application is completed and “currently under review.”
Sheriff Mark Lamb of Pinal County, a Republican hopeful for U.S. Senate, issued a press release on Wednesday extolling the virtues of the law enforcement agencies responsible for the capture of eight terrorists tied to ISIS who had illegally entered the country and excoriating the Biden White House for its maladministration of the dangerous situation at the Southern Border.
In his release, Lamb’s office explained that the Sheriff offered his congratulations to “law enforcement at every level in the tracking and arrest of eight terrorists with ties to ISIS who had managed to cross the southern border in recent months.” As reported by The New York Post six of the ISIS-linked terrorists were Russian nationals from Tajikistan, and were arrested during coordinated raids in Los Angeles, New York and Philadelphia. Per NBC two additional terrorists with links to ISIS were also arrested after they were surveilled for “several months” by the Joint Terrorism Taskforce.
Lamb said in a statement, “One week after Joe Biden’s executive order was issued to ‘close the border’, I can report that the situation on the ground is just as chaotic and dangerous as ever.”
He warned, “the arrests of the terrorists in our major cities is just the tip of the iceberg. Those Russian nationals were identified and tracked. There are countless military-aged men who have already made their way across the border illegally and continue to do so. We have little or no idea where they reside and what they are planning.”
Cartels are pushing people through the southern border ‘more than ever’: Mark Lamb | https://t.co/UwDuys4pee
According to the Post, FBI Director Christopher Wray issued warnings to Congress regarding a potential plot on U.S. soil at the hands of ISIS-K or Islamic State Khorasan, the same group that successfully attacked a concert hall in Moscow with Tajikistani nationals killing 145 people and wounding hundreds.
“Our most immediate concern has been that individuals or small groups will draw twisted inspiration from the events in the Middle East to carry out attacks here at home,” Wray told the House Appropriations subcommittee in April. “But now, increasingly concerning is the potential for a coordinated attack here in the homeland, akin to the ISIS-K attack we saw at the Russia concert hall a couple weeks ago.”
Lamb noted that his Deputies recently made a significant drug bust working in coordination with the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol saying, “My deputies just took 80 pounds – 360,000 pills – of fentanyl and 9 nine pounds of cocaine off the street. Can you imagine the millions of people who would likely die if that fentanyl had made it in hands of Americans.” He added, “The border shouldn’t be a photo-op for politicians. Every state is now a border state, every county is a border county. Every school and neighborhood is a fentanyl war zone. We can close the border if the politicians in Washington wanted. The political establishment has shown they don’t have the willpower or experience on the ground to make it happen.”
On Tuesday, June 18, 2024, the Gilbert Town Council will hold a meeting to adopt the boundaries of a redevelopment plan which could encompass up to 18% of the town’s landmass extending from its western boundary eastward to Lindsay Road and then south to Ray Road, an area of almost 9 ½ square miles. The Town is seeking to take this action under Arizona Revised Statue § 36-1471-1491 using laws intended to curb “slum or blighted areas,” terms that could hardly be used to describe the 22nd Best Place to Live in the U.S. by Money Magazine and the 2nd Safest City in America by Law Street Media according to Gilbert’s website.
The controversial move, which seems to carry the broad support of the Town Council, would allow Gilbert to bypass property taxes over the vast swath of real estate, opening a path for the town to engage in a property acquisition and lease scheme known as a Government Property Lease Excise Tax (GPLET) according to Arizona Tax Research Association President Kevin McCarthy.
Ironically, McCarthy, who has opposed this method of redevelopment for years, told AZ Free News that he penned an op-ed for the Arizona Republic crediting Gilbert with not employing this strategy.
“Most of your suburban cities have done very little of this,” McCarthy explained. “Gilbert to date has done none of it. Ironically, I wrote an op-ed for the paper, I don’t know, six, seven years ago that was in the Arizona Republic, crediting the city of Gilbert for doing development the right way and not doing it by harvesting the property taxes that are otherwise owed, making everybody else’s property taxes higher as a result of some development, not being on the rolls and shorting the schools, their monies, that kind of thing.”
Adding another wrinkle to the matter though, is a potential legal vulnerability to the strategy which could land the town in court. McCarthy continued, “And so now we’ve got them wanting to break through and begin using this tool. But what’s different about this now than even five years ago, the last time we made a legislative effort to narrow the use of it, is that there have been court decisions in this space that we’ve been involved in with the Goldwater Institute that have found that this mechanism violates the constitution’s gift clause.”
As reported by the Arizona Republic, a 2020 ruling found that a similar GPLET scheme between the city of Phoenix and developers of The Derby Roosevelt Row, involving a promised tax break, was illegal. In 2016 the Phoenix City Council okayed a plan that would have had developer Amstar/McKinley successfully avoid paying the appropriate property taxes for 25 years. For eight years under the law, the tax would be completely waived, and it would’ve been further reduced for an additional 17 years.
McCarthy explained how the process works: “I assume what happened in Gilbert: Gilbert’s probably got a new economic development director, or maybe it’s the city manager goes to some meetings, and here’s what fund the city of Phoenix is having harvesting the property taxes that otherwise would be owed on a development. To make development easier, the way these deals are usually done is a developer goes to City Hall, and if a city has a central business district that they’ve declared as slum and blight, they know that if they want to propose an $80 million multi-use building that is 30 stories high and have some residential apartment building and then commercial on the first floor, that kind of thing they can negotiate to have it qualify as a GPLET.”
During a Town Council meeting on April 16th, Gilbert Redevelopment Program Manager Amanda Elliott explained that under the law, a municipality must have a combination of nine findings for redevelopment “to eliminate or prevent your [town’s] signs of decline”
Under the applicable law (ARS § 36-1471), the statute states that a “’Blighted area’ means an area, other than a slum area, where sound municipal growth and the provision of housing accommodations is substantially retarded or arrested in a predominance of the properties by any of the following:
(a) A dominance of defective or inadequate street layout.
(b) Faulty lot layout in relation to size, adequacy, accessibility or usefulness.
(c) Unsanitary or unsafe conditions.
(d) Deterioration of site or other improvements.
(e) Diversity of ownership.
(f) Tax or special assessment delinquency exceeding the fair value of the land.
(g) Defective or unusual conditions of title.
(h) Improper or obsolete subdivision platting.
(i) The existence of conditions that endanger life or property by fire and other causes.”
This language is explicitly presented by the Town as the basis for the redevelopment plan. Further, under the finding for the necessity of the law, the legislature explained clearly, “That the existence of these areas contributes substantially and increasingly to the spread of disease and crime, necessitating excessive and disproportionate expenditures of public funds for the preservation of the public health and safety, for crime prevention, correction, prosecution, punishment and the treatment of juvenile delinquency and for the maintenance of adequate police, fire and accident protection and other public services and facilities, constitutes an economic and social liability, substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of municipalities and retards the provision of housing accommodations.”
The law adds, “the acquisition of property for the purpose of eliminating the conditions or preventing recurrence of these conditions in the area, the removal of structures and improvement of sites, the disposition of the property for redevelopment and any assistance which may be given by any public body in connection with these activities are public uses and purposes for which public money may be expended and the power of eminent domain exercised.”
According to the Town Council, the moves toward this step have been gradual and ongoing for more than a decade.
Two Words Not Spoken: Property Taxes
During the presentation given by Elliot, the Town explicitly made the claims that the redevelopment plan “will not,” “Specify individual properties, specify commercial centers industrial complexes or neighborhoods, show up on a title report, displace residents or businesses, institute zoning changes, decrease property values or change the voter approved general plan.” However, conspicuously absent from that list is: property taxes.
McCarthy told AZ Free News that when a municipality negotiates to have a redevelopment qualify as a GPLET, “they are exempted from paying any property taxes on the improvement of the property for the first eight years, which is usually when the maximum amount of tax exposure is going to be on a property. That results in the schools not getting all the property tax money that they should get. The counties get zeroed out. The community colleges get zeroed out. The city themselves, it doesn’t get the property. If they do use property taxes, they don’t get any property taxes out of it. And the way that they execute this is that upon completion of the building, they literally deed the property back to the city.”
He added that a developer then wouldn’t have the property added to the tax rolls, “but it’s put on the tax rolls as an exempt property as any government property is, and [wont’] get a property tax bill for eight years.” In prior years, the period was as high as 25 years, but organizations like ATRA, working with the legislature, succeeded in getting that narrowed to eight. A bill was passed to lower it again to four years, but was vetoed by Governor Katie Hobbs. McCarthy noted, “Our argument to lawmakers was that at four years, it’s a lot closer to being able to pass the mathematical calculation of whether or not it’s a gift of public funds and therefore in violation of the constitutional gift clause.” The same gift clause that Phoenix ran afoul of in the Derby ruling.
McCarthy concluded, “Last thing I’ll say is that these property taxes are harvested because in many instances, these deals are agreed to by the cities because there’s a mutual benefit between the developer and the city to exempt the property from paying property taxes and enter one of these GPLET deals, and that is they can enter into any number of agreements that allow them both to benefit financially and maybe not. So not just the developer benefits the city.
So in the example I gave you that the deal might include me as the developer paying for infrastructure that otherwise may not be owed by the developer, but would be a city obligation. Whether the utilities that would be going in the city would bring up to the boundary of the property, any number of improvements in city of Phoenix, it could include, if it’s going to have multifamily, which is a lot of our stuff that we’re seeing in Tempe and Phoenix, a lot of apartment buildings where I as a developer grant concessions to the city council that a certain percentage of the apartments are going to be saved for low-income housing.”
The implications for property taxes also could impact the Gilbert Unified School District considerably as McCarthy observed with properties that “normally would be paying a million dollars a year in property taxes to Gilbert Unified,” not doing so. State funds would be used to subsidize the difference. However, that isn’t so for school bond measures, which are voter approved as are school overrides. “In those instances, the tax rates are going to be higher than they otherwise would’ve been if that property would’ve been on the tax rolls. But even there, the schools really don’t lose money.”
“It’s the other taxpayers that are on the tax rolls that get screwed because the property isn’t paying taxes.”
Gilbert Mayor Brigette Peterson made particular mention during the April meeting that the council is “not trying to turn the town of Gilbert into a city because that’s always a bone of contention with our residents. But it is focused on making sure that this town doesn’t become a city that we’ve seen in the past go downhill. We’re trying to make sure that we’ve learned from other cities’ mistakes in the past and do what’s best for our community to move us into the future and forward.”
Peterson added, “The other thing that we heard at that last meeting that was so well attended was um they they felt like the decisions had already been made. We have not made any decisions, and tonight even we’re just offering more feedback. We’re not voting on anything at a study session, so this still has a lot of time to go through more of a process and to hear from the public too.”
A mailer sent to Gilbert residents in the proposed ‘Blighted area’ indicated that the next meeting is scheduled for June 18, 2024 at 6:30 PM.
The owners of the businesses that power the economy of southern Arizona are about to see some long overdue relief from a 2018 excise tax which was struck down by the State Supreme Court in 2022. Affected businesses will be able to file for a waiver or refund of the tax by April 9, 2026 to recover at least $87 million that was unlawfully collected by the county with another $4 million in interest to be paid out proportionally. Unfortunately, consumers who paid the tax as part of a transaction, will be unable to seek a refund.
The Pinal County transportation excise tax was invalidated by the Arizona Supreme Court in Vangilder v. Arizona Department of Revenue, in which the court found that the Pinal County Board of Supervisors violated state law by adopting a “two-tiered retail transaction privilege tax (TPT) on tangible personal property as part of a transportation excise tax.” While the court held that the basis of the tax was lawful, it invalidated the two-tiered system where the first $10,000 of any one item was taxed at one rate and any in excess was taxed at zero percent.
Arizona Supreme Court Justice Kathryn H. King, a former Deputy General Counsel in the Office of Governor Doug Ducey and appointed by Ducey wrote for the court:
“For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that Pinal County complied with state law in adopting the transportation excise tax. We further conclude, however, that state law does not permit Pinal County to adopt a two-tiered retail TPT structure as part of a transportation excise tax, whereby the first $10,000 of any single item is taxed at one rate and any amount in excess is taxed at a rate of zero percent. For that reason, Pinal County’s two-tiered retail TPT structure in Proposition 417 is unlawful and invalid.
Accordingly, we affirm the court of appeals’ opinion in part and vacate in part. We vacate paragraphs 2 and 23–30 of the court of appeals’ opinion. We affirm the superior court on other grounds. We deny Vangilder’s request for attorney fees.”
The filing opportunity was announced in a letter from the Arizona Auditor General on May 17 according to The Center Square. The letter detailed that approximately $87 million was collected through the excise tax which has earned $4 million in interest adding that the ‘applicable interests” would be paid out to those requesting a refund as well. However, the actual consumers who paid the 0.5% sales tax up to the first $10,000 have no such recourse because of the “transaction privilege tax” status of Arizona the outlet noted cited the Pinal County website.
PINAL COUNTY TRANSPORTATION EXCISE TAX REFUND/WAIVER
Request refund/waiver of Pinal County transportation excise tax invalidated by AZ Supreme Court. Businesses that reported & paid tax 4/2018 to 3/2022 eligible. Must be received on or before 4/9/2026.https://t.co/ybsSxNPBZfpic.twitter.com/zfe3GNrnoL
— Maricopa County Republican Committee | MCRC (@MaricopaGOP) April 24, 2024
The Auditor General wrote, “Between April 1, 2018, and February 28, 2024, the Pinal Regional Transportation Authority did not expend any of the 2018 Excise Tax revenues or accrued interest.”
The county website explained, “Specifically, taxpayers who will be able to request a refund or waiver of monies paid toward this invalidated tax are generally limited to those businesses that filed and paid tax to the Department for the April 2018 through March 2022 tax periods as part of their overall transaction privilege tax liability, for business activity that they conducted either in Pinal County or with Pinal County customers.”
