Missouri · individual fact

Missouri budget, debt, and interest

Missouri state-government finances, comparable debt and interest figures, and the enacted budget.

The national companion measures federal finances. Here the unit is Missouri state government. Federal debt is not allocated to Missouri; a state budget is not the federal budget.

State debt outstanding$6.99BFY2024 · #37 of 50 · highest first
Interest expenditure$300.21MFY2024 · #27 of 50 · highest first
Total state tax collections$17.79BFY2024 · #24 of 50 · highest first

Missouri over time

Explore Missouri readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Missouri officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Missouri effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Missouri change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

No comparable time series is retained for this topic. The chart shows events and reviewed actions; current state comparisons appear below.

Missouri government actions Missouri · source units

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

Events and reviewed actionsNo saved observations in this range.Sep 1, 2005May 31, 2026
✦ Major events & context · 50National context · Hurricane Katrina emergency appropriations · 2005-09-08Katrina relief fundingNational context · Medicare prescription drug benefit begins · 2006-01-01Medicare Part D beginsNational context · Iraq and Afghanistan war funding assessment · 2007-07-31War funding assessmentNational context · Economic Stimulus Act tax rebates · 2008-02-132008 tax rebatesNational context · Treasury support for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac · 2008-09-07Fannie / Freddie supportNational context · Great Financial Crisis and Great Recession · 2008-09-15Great Financial CrisisNational context · Emergency stabilization law creates TARP · 2008-10-03TARP stabilizationNational context · Federal Reserve cuts rates close to zero · 2008-12-16Fed near-zero ratesNational context · American Recovery and Reinvestment Act · 2009-02-17Recovery ActNational context · Affordable Care Act changes health financing · 2010-03-23Health-care financing lawNational context · Tax extensions and payroll-tax relief · 2010-12-172010 tax / benefit dealNational context · Budget Control Act and debt-limit agreement · 2011-08-022011 budget agreementNational context · S&P lowers the U.S. sovereign credit rating · 2011-08-05S&P rating downgradeNational context · Fiscal-cliff tax agreement · 2013-01-02Fiscal-cliff agreementNational context · Automatic federal spending cuts begin · 2013-03-01Federal spending cutsNational context · Shutdown ends and debt limit is suspended · 2013-10-172013 funding / debt dealNational context · Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 · 2013-12-262013 budget caps dealNational context · Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 · 2015-11-022015 budget / debt dealNational context · Fed begins lifting rates after the crisis · 2015-12-16Fed rate normalizationNational context · 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act · 2017-12-222017 tax lawNational context · Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 · 2018-02-092018 budget / debt dealNational context · 2018–19 partial government shutdown · 2018-12-222018–19 funding lapseNational context · Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 · 2019-08-022019 budget / debt dealNational context · COVID-19 pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Emergency rate cuts and Treasury purchases · 2020-03-15Fed pandemic responseNational context · CARES Act pandemic relief · 2020-03-27CARES Act reliefNational context · Further pandemic relief and annual funding · 2020-12-27December pandemic reliefNational context · American Rescue Plan · 2021-03-11American Rescue PlanNational context · Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act · 2021-11-15Infrastructure fundingNational context · Congress raises the debt limit after two impasses · 2021-12-162021 debt-limit increaseNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2022 rate increases · 2022-03-16Fed rate increasesNational context · Semiconductor funding and investment credits · 2022-08-09CHIPS fundingNational context · PACT Act expands veterans’ benefits · 2022-08-10Veterans’ benefits expansionNational context · Inflation Reduction Act changes taxes and spending · 2022-08-16Energy / health / tax lawNational context · Student-loan cancellation cost recorded · 2022-09-30Loan-cost accountingNational context · Inflation and rates raise interest costs above forecasts · 2023-01-09Inflation / interest costsNational context · Fed reports suspension of Treasury payments · 2023-01-13Fed payments suspendedNational context · Disaster tax deadlines move into the next fiscal year · 2023-02-24Disaster tax deferralsNational context · Fiscal Responsibility Act · 2023-06-032023 debt-limit agreementNational context · Fitch lowers the U.S. sovereign credit rating · 2023-08-01Fitch rating downgradeNational context · Student-loan cost reversal lowers recorded outlays · 2023-08-31Loan-cost reversalNational context · National security supplemental funding · 2024-04-24Security supplementalNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2024 rate cuts · 2024-09-182024 Fed rate cutsNational context · Social Security Fairness Act becomes law · 2025-01-05Social Security benefitsNational context · Treasury begins extraordinary measures · 2025-01-21Debt-limit measuresNational context · Broad U.S. tariff announcement · 2025-04-02Tariffs / customs receiptsNational context · Moody’s lowers the U.S. sovereign credit rating · 2025-05-16Moody’s rating downgradeNational context · 2025 tax and spending reconciliation law · 2025-07-042025 tax / spending lawNational context · 2025 federal government shutdown · 2025-10-012025 funding lapseNational context · Supreme Court rejects IEEPA tariff authority · 2026-02-20Tariff authority ruling● Missouri Legislature · 2623422● U.S. Congress · Missouri delegation · 1◆ Governor · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.■ Missouri agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2005-09-012026-05-31

27 of 27 reviewed Missouri actions match · 19 date markers shown. 50 major events shown separately.

How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Missouri · state comparison

State debt and interest

Compare state-government balances and interest expenditure from the same Census fiscal-year survey.

Missouri · FY2024$6.99B
Missouri rank#37among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$1.1TSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

State debt outstanding

Long-term debt outstanding plus short-term debt outstanding at fiscal year end.

State governments only, Census level 2; amounts converted from thousands to dollars. Fiscal-year ending dates differ among states. Excludes local-government debt. Dollar ranks describe scale, not credit quality.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Missouri stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Missouri has a dark outline.

Lower value · $728.59MHigher value · $166.39BStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Missouri · $6.99BFY2024 · Rank #37 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Missouri with every state · 50 ranked
State debt outstanding · FY2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California$166.39B—
#2New York$120.59B—
#3Texas$70.05B—
#4Massachusetts$65.87B—
#5New Jersey$57.23B—
#6Pennsylvania$48.67B—
#7Illinois$43.38B—
#8Virginia$33.73B—
#9Connecticut$33.27B—
#10Ohio$32.29B—
#11Washington$30.62B—
#12Maryland$25.9B—
#13Michigan$25.02B—
#14Colorado$23.57B—
#15Wisconsin$22.79B—
#16Florida$20.14B—
#17Minnesota$17.03B—
#18Oregon$16.91B—
#19Louisiana$16.09B—
#20South Carolina$15.36B—
#21West Virginia$15.08B—
#22Georgia$14.05B—
#23North Carolina$13.13B—
#24Hawaii$11.72B—
#25Rhode Island$11.41B—
#26Alabama$10.99B—
#27Oklahoma$10.15B—
#28Kentucky$10.08B—
#29Tennessee$9.03B—
#30Indiana$8.52B—
#31Iowa$8.06B—
#32Arkansas$8.05B—
#33Mississippi$7.72B—
#34New Hampshire$7.58B—
#35Kansas$7.16B—
#36New Mexico$7.12B—
#37Missouri · your comparison$6.99B—
#38Arizona$6.88B—
#39Alaska$5.72B—
#40Utah$5.55B—
#41Maine$5.3B—
#42North Dakota$4.89B—
#43South Dakota$4.67B—
#44Delaware$3.69B—
#45Nebraska$3.39B—
#46Nevada$2.89B—
#47Montana$2.76B—
#48Vermont$2.67B—
#49Wyoming$1.26B—
#50Idaho$728.59M—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Missouri · state comparison

Where state revenue comes from

All measures use Census state-government records for FY2024. Categories describe collections; they do not rank statutory tax rates.

Missouri · FY2024$5.26B
Missouri rank#25among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$465.4BSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

General sales-tax collections

Census category T09.

State governments only, Census level 2; amounts converted from thousands to dollars. Fiscal-year ending dates differ among states.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Missouri stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Missouri has a dark outline.

Lower value · $0Higher value · $54.35BStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Missouri · $5.26BFY2024 · Rank #25 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Missouri with every state · 50 ranked
General sales-tax collections · FY2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas$54.35B—
#2California$53.33B—
#3Florida$40.09B—
#4Washington$22.81B—
#5New York$19.99B—
#6Ohio$16.33B—
#7Illinois$16.05B—
#8Pennsylvania$15.6B—
#9New Jersey$14.31B—
#10Tennessee$14.08B—
#11Arizona$13.16B—
#12Michigan$12.7B—
#13North Carolina$12.16B—
#14Indiana$10.96B—
#15Massachusetts$9.4B—
#16Georgia$9.01B—
#17Minnesota$8.49B—
#18Nevada$8.4B—
#19Wisconsin$7.59B—
#20Virginia$7.4B—
#21Maryland$6.85B—
#22South Carolina$6.44B—
#23Connecticut$6.23B—
#24Kentucky$5.8B—
#25Missouri · your comparison$5.26B—
#26Mississippi$5.07B—
#27Arkansas$5.07B—
#28Louisiana$4.87B—
#29Hawaii$4.79B—
#30Colorado$4.67B—
#31Iowa$4.64B—
#32Utah$4.63B—
#33Alabama$4.59B—
#34Kansas$4.33B—
#35New Mexico$4.33B—
#36Oklahoma$3.81B—
#37Idaho$3.09B—
#38Nebraska$2.97B—
#39Maine$2.35B—
#40West Virginia$1.82B—
#41South Dakota$1.68B—
#42Rhode Island$1.63B—
#43Oregon$1.34B—
#44North Dakota$1.32B—
#45Wyoming$1.01B—
#46Vermont$597.33M—
#47Alaska$0—
#47Delaware$0—
#47Montana$0—
#47New Hampshire$0—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Missouri · state comparison

Where state operating spending goes

Census categories allow consistent comparisons. These selected categories are not a breakdown of the current Missouri appropriations act.

Missouri · FY2024$15.65B
Missouri rank#24among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$1.02TSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Public welfare current operations

Current operations for public welfare institutions and other public welfare, excluding capital and transfers.

State governments only, Census level 2; amounts converted from thousands to dollars. Fiscal-year ending dates differ among states.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Missouri stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Missouri has a dark outline.

Lower value · $1.09BHigher value · $156.71BStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Missouri · $15.65BFY2024 · Rank #24 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Missouri with every state · 50 ranked
Public welfare current operations · FY2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California$156.71B—
#2New York$97.35B—
#3Texas$57.32B—
#4Illinois$41.13B—
#5Florida$40.11B—
#6Ohio$39.77B—
#7Pennsylvania$39.34B—
#8Massachusetts$34.12B—
#9North Carolina$30.64B—
#10New Jersey$28.06B—
#11Arizona$26.02B—
#12Michigan$24.37B—
#13Virginia$23.68B—
#14Minnesota$23.37B—
#15Indiana$22.93B—
#16Maryland$21.61B—
#17Kentucky$20.54B—
#18Oregon$20.47B—
#19Washington$19.6B—
#20Georgia$18.99B—
#21Louisiana$18.69B—
#22Tennessee$16.42B—
#23Wisconsin$16.26B—
#24Missouri · your comparison$15.65B—
#25Oklahoma$14.57B—
#26Colorado$13.6B—
#27South Carolina$12.84B—
#28New Mexico$10.72B—
#29Iowa$10.26B—
#30Alabama$9.73B—
#31Arkansas$8.67B—
#32Mississippi$8.08B—
#33Utah$6.91B—
#34Kansas$6.84B—
#35Nevada$6.62B—
#36West Virginia$6.24B—
#37Maine$5.7B—
#38Nebraska$4.97B—
#39Connecticut$4.88B—
#40Rhode Island$4.54B—
#41Hawaii$4.14B—
#42Delaware$3.97B—
#43Idaho$3.73B—
#44Alaska$3.27B—
#45Montana$2.89B—
#46New Hampshire$2.72B—
#47Vermont$2.69B—
#48North Dakota$2.09B—
#49South Dakota$1.95B—
#50Wyoming$1.09B—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Missouri · state comparison

State operating costs and the enacted budget

The enacted plan, spending categories and audited activity use different periods and accounting scopes; they are kept separate.

Missouri · FY2024$34.43B
Missouri rank#22among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$2.04TSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Current operation expenditure

Sum of Census current-operation expenditure categories, excluding capital outlay, interest, and assistance/subsidy expenditure.

State governments only, Census level 2; amounts converted from thousands to dollars. Fiscal-year ending dates differ among states. This FY2024 comparison differs in scope and period from Missouri’s FY2027 appropriations and Fiscal year ended June 30, 2025 — qualified opinion audit shown below.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Missouri stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Missouri has a dark outline.

Lower value · $4.01BHigher value · $287.03BStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Missouri · $34.43BFY2024 · Rank #22 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Missouri with every state · 50 ranked
Current operation expenditure · FY2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California$287.03B—
#2New York$161.37B—
#3Texas$136.18B—
#4Florida$86.61B—
#5Pennsylvania$77.15B—
#6Illinois$75.67B—
#7Ohio$66.77B—
#8New Jersey$64.53B—
#9Massachusetts$61.38B—
#10North Carolina$59.01B—
#11Michigan$57.27B—
#12Virginia$53.45B—
#13Washington$49.82B—
#14Georgia$45.19B—
#15Maryland$45.06B—
#16Oregon$41.41B—
#17Arizona$38.71B—
#18Minnesota$38.1B—
#19Indiana$37.4B—
#20Kentucky$36.94B—
#21Wisconsin$34.5B—
#22Missouri · your comparison$34.43B—
#23South Carolina$32.85B—
#24Colorado$32.73B—
#25Louisiana$31.67B—
#26Tennessee$31.12B—
#27Alabama$26.99B—
#28Oklahoma$24.28B—
#29Utah$22.7B—
#30New Mexico$21.94B—
#31Connecticut$21.22B—
#32Iowa$19.89B—
#33Kansas$18.39B—
#34Hawaii$16.62B—
#35Mississippi$16.46B—
#36Arkansas$16.28B—
#37West Virginia$13.19B—
#38Nevada$12.43B—
#39Nebraska$10.41B—
#40Maine$10.12B—
#41Delaware$9.24B—
#42Rhode Island$8.93B—
#43Alaska$8.4B—
#44Idaho$8.21B—
#45New Hampshire$7.12B—
#46Montana$6.44B—
#47Vermont$6.28B—
#48North Dakota$5.63B—
#49South Dakota$4.55B—
#50Wyoming$4.01B—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Where State tax revenue comes from

FY2025 ACFR actual — qualified opinion

Shares of the $17.080 billion in taxes reported as general revenue for Missouri's primary government. The State Auditor issued qualified opinions on governmental activities and the General Fund because auditors were not allowed access to income-tax returns and related source documents; the other listed tax lines remain the amounts reported in the ACFR.

Individual and pass-through income tax
$9.0B · 52.8%
Sales and use taxes
$4.9B · 28.6%
Other taxes
$1.2B · 7.2%
Fuel tax
$1.0B · 6.1%
Corporate income tax
$907.0M · 5.3%

FY2027 signed spending plan

FY2027 after-veto appropriations

Every after-veto department total in the Office of Administration's FY2027 table is assigned exactly once to one of these service groups. Operating, ARPA, and capital-improvement bills are included and reconcile to the exact $50.684 billion grand total.

Health and human services
$24.8B · 48.9%
Education
$9.8B · 19.4%
General government
$4.3B · 8.6%
Transportation
$4.0B · 7.8%
Public safety and corrections
$3.2B · 6.3%
Natural resources and agriculture
$1.8B · 3.6%
ARPA programs
$1.2B · 2.3%
Capital improvements
$848.1M · 1.7%
Economy, insurance, and labor
$750.4M · 1.5%

Audited government-wide results

Fiscal year ended June 30, 2025 — qualified opinion
Revenue
$42.6B
Expenses
$40.7B

Government-wide activity for Missouri's primary government as reported in the FY2025 ACFR. Revenue combines program revenue and general revenue before internal transfers. The State Auditor qualified the opinion on governmental activities because auditors were not allowed access to income-tax returns and related source documents; the business-type-activities opinion was unmodified.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about budgets, government spending, deficits and public debt from FactVote’s Missouri candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

22 statements from 11 candidates

2026 Missouri State Auditor — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 4 statements

Scott Fitzpatrick

4 statements

Republican · State Auditor · MO

Budgets, spending & debt

When I arrived in Jefferson City, I immediately went to work fighting for taxpayers on the Budget Committee. I felt the best way to hold government and bureaucrats accountable to taxpayers was to control their funding. So I worked harder than everyone else, and learned more than everyone else about …

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Entering Public Service

Candidate campaign source

When I arrived in Jefferson City, I immediately went to work fighting for taxpayers on the Budget Committee. I felt the best way to hold government and bureaucrats accountable to taxpayers was to control their funding. So I worked harder than everyone else, and learned more than everyone else about the state budget and ultimately became the youngest Chairman of the Budget committee in Missouri history.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Scott Fitzpatrick — candidate-owned primary source ↗
View 3 more statements from Scott Fitzpatrick
Budgets, spending & debt

When I became Budget Chairman I inherited a massive budget deficit, but I went to work, cut wasteful spending, and balanced the budget. The bureaucrats and lobbyists didn’t believe it was possible to accomplish all these things at the same time. But I knew the truth – if we are willing to make diffi…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Entering Public Service

Candidate campaign source

When I became Budget Chairman I inherited a massive budget deficit, but I went to work, cut wasteful spending, and balanced the budget. The bureaucrats and lobbyists didn’t believe it was possible to accomplish all these things at the same time. But I knew the truth – if we are willing to make difficult decisions and put the interests of Missourians above those of special interests, anything is possible. At the end of my time as Budget Chairman, even after making a record investment in K-12 education and passing a tax cut that put money back in Missourians’ pockets, our budget surplus was over $650 million.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Scott Fitzpatrick — candidate-owned primary source ↗
Budgets, spending & debt

As House Budget Chairman, I defeated a plan hatched by Democratic Governor Jay Nixon to give illegal immigrants in-state tuition at Missouri higher education institutions by cracking down on their funding. After Democrats lost that battle, they attempted to change state regulation to allow those sam…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Blocking Taxpayer Funding for Illegal Immigrants

Candidate campaign source

As House Budget Chairman, I defeated a plan hatched by Democratic Governor Jay Nixon to give illegal immigrants in-state tuition at Missouri higher education institutions by cracking down on their funding. After Democrats lost that battle, they attempted to change state regulation to allow those same illegal immigrants to receive scholarships funded by Missouri taxpayers. Once again, I fought back against this attempted abuse of taxpayer money, and I won by passing a bill overriding those regulatory changes and leading to the override of Governor Nixon’s veto of the legislation. As Auditor, I will ensure your tax dollars are not spent providing benefits to illegal immigrants.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Scott Fitzpatrick — candidate-owned primary source ↗
Budgets, spending & debt

As Auditor, I’ll expand upon the work I’ve done throughout my public service. Where waste, fraud, and abuse occur, I will find it and root it out. I have a record of doing that as Budget Chairman and as Treasurer. As Auditor, I will have the tools necessary to continue that work on an even greater s…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Fighting Waste and Fraud

Candidate campaign source

As Auditor, I’ll expand upon the work I’ve done throughout my public service. Where waste, fraud, and abuse occur, I will find it and root it out. I have a record of doing that as Budget Chairman and as Treasurer. As Auditor, I will have the tools necessary to continue that work on an even greater scale, allowing me to have an even larger impact on government at the state and local level. That is why it is imperative we elect a proven, conservative champion with a record of fighting for taxpayers and that is why I’m running to be your next State Auditor.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Scott Fitzpatrick — candidate-owned primary source ↗

2026 Missouri U.S. House — District 1 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Wesley Bell

1 statement

Democratic · U.S. House District 1 · MO

Budgets, spending & debt

No family should have to worry about whether they can afford to eat. The cost of feeding a family has skyrocketed, and Washington has to be part of the solution — not make it worse by cutting food assistance programs. Wesley has fought against Republican budget cuts to food assistance and pushed for…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Economy, jobs, taxes, and affordability

Candidate campaign source

No family should have to worry about whether they can afford to eat. The cost of feeding a family has skyrocketed, and Washington has to be part of the solution — not make it worse by cutting food assistance programs. Wesley has fought against Republican budget cuts to food assistance and pushed for policies that crack down on price gouging and put money back in the pockets of working families.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Wesley Bell — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

2026 Missouri U.S. House — District 2 — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 2 statements

Ann Wagner

1 statement

Republican · U.S. House District 2 · MO

Budgets, spending & debt

Reduce and control federal spending while improving the efficiency of taxpayer-dollar use.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Federal Spending

Candidate campaign source

Reduce and control federal spending while improving the efficiency of taxpayer-dollar use.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026

Ann Wagner — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

Fred Wellman

1 statement

Democratic · U.S. House District 2 · MO

Budgets, spending & debt

I will relentlessly focus on protecting Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care from privatization, while expanding mental health and suicide prevention resources, and safeguarding mandatory funding for earned benefits against budget cuts. I oppose the current Taking Care of America’s Vetera…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Veterans and Military

Candidate campaign source

I will relentlessly focus on protecting Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care from privatization, while expanding mental health and suicide prevention resources, and safeguarding mandatory funding for earned benefits against budget cuts. I oppose the current Taking Care of America’s Veterans Act (TCAVA) as written, with Section 108 taking away benefits from future veterans. The idea that the only people being required to adhere to ‘Pay-Go’ rules are veterans while the Department of Defense gets a blank check to wage wars is unacceptable.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Fred Wellman — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 3
How statements are selected

This section matches specific budgets, government spending, deficits and public debt terms in retained, attributed source text from published Missouri candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Missouri incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Missouri legislators and Missouri’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Missouri’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

27 matching sponsorships or proposals · 18 Missouri incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Rep. Ann Kelley

Missouri House of Representatives, District 127 · R–MO

3 proposals
View proposals from Rep. Ann Kelley
Missouri Legislature · HB 2531

Modifies provisions relating to elections

May 13, 2022 · Did not pass

Rep. Ann Kelley · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 2531 -- ELECTIONS SPONSOR: Kelley (127) This bill changes election laws. In its main provisions, the bill: (1) Requires election authorities to enter voter history in their computerized registration system and forward such information to the Missouri Voter Registration System by the time required for election certification (Section 115.157, RSMo); (2) Beginning January 1, 2023, the bill requires the use of a paper ballot and repeals electronic voting system language with certain exceptions for voting equipment used for the disabled. Requires local election authorities to be members of the Center for Internet Security and allows the Secretary of State (SOS) to review cyber security for…

This measure did not pass before the 2022 session ended. Final recorded action on 2022-05-13: Referred: Elections and Elected Officials(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses registration, access to voting, or the handling of cast ballots. Registered-voter turnout uses registered voters as its denominator, so registration and voting rules can concern different components of the displayed rate. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Registered-voter turnout. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 2531 -- ELECTIONS SPONSOR: Kelley (127) This bill changes election laws. In its main provisions, the bill: (1) Requires election authorities to enter voter history in their computerized registration system and forward such information to the Missouri Voter Registration System by the time required for election certification (Section 115.157, RSMo); (2) Beginning January 1, 2023, the bill requires the use of a paper ballot and repeals electronic voting system language with certain exceptions for voting equipment used for the disabled. Requires local election authorities to be members of the Center for Internet Security and allows the Secretary of State (SOS) to review cyber security for local election authorities and vendors as specified in the bill. Testing of vendor products such as programs and machines is allowed and subject to appropriation (Sections 115.225, 115.237, and 115.417); (3) Requires the use of antifraud countermeasures in ballots printed after January 1, 2023 and specifies certain antifraud measures that will be used (Section 115.247); (4) Allows the use of mail-in ballots by administrative or executive order only and repeals a currently expired exception to absentee ballot processing rules and an exception allowing mail-in voting which were implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic (Section 115.302); (5) Requires use of photographic identification for purposes of voting in-person absentee ballots at an election authority site that is a designated polling place (Sections 115.257 and 115.427); (6) Authorizes the use of provisional ballots in cases where a voter appears without identification which may be verified and counted by use of either photographic identification or signature matching and repeals an affidavit requirement that was declared unconstitutional in Priorities U.S.A., et. al. v. State of Missouri (Mo. If federal money is not subject to legislative appropriation, then it stands automatically refused by Missouri (Section 115.1550); (9) Requires all federal laws relating to election security procedures, voter identification, and voter fraud to be subject to review by the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules prior to implementation via the standard rulemaking process (Section 115.1552); and (10) Requires all agencies of the state or its political subdivisions to provide notice to the Governor, the President Pro Tem and Minority Leader of the Senate, and the Speaker and Minority Leader of the House of Representatives of any communications received from the federal government relating to elections or the implementation of federal election laws (Section 115.1554).
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HB 1976

Modifies provisions relating to elections

Jan 27, 2022 · Did not pass

Rep. Ann Kelley · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 1976 -- ELECTIONS SPONSOR: Kelley (127) This bill changes election laws. In its main provisions, the bill: (1) Requires a centralized voter registration database that allows daily archiving of data. Local election authorities will keep separate electronic databases and regularly update their lists for conformity and comparison with the centralized database (Section 28.970, RSMo); (2) Requires automatic tabulating equipment to be air-gapped and unable to be connected to the internet or receive outside communications (Section 115.013); (3) Allows poll watchers and challengers to record and livestream the vote tabulation process so long as such activities do not impede the vote count.…

This measure did not pass before the 2022 session ended. Final recorded action on 2022-01-27: Referred: Elections and Elected Officials(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses registration, access to voting, or the handling of cast ballots. Registered-voter turnout uses registered voters as its denominator, so registration and voting rules can concern different components of the displayed rate. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Registered-voter turnout. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 1976 -- ELECTIONS SPONSOR: Kelley (127) This bill changes election laws. In its main provisions, the bill: (1) Requires a centralized voter registration database that allows daily archiving of data. Local election authorities will keep separate electronic databases and regularly update their lists for conformity and comparison with the centralized database (Section 28.970, RSMo); (2) Requires automatic tabulating equipment to be air-gapped and unable to be connected to the internet or receive outside communications (Section 115.013); (3) Allows poll watchers and challengers to record and livestream the vote tabulation process so long as such activities do not impede the vote count. Election authorities will record the vote tabulation process for statewide and federal elections and make such recordings available as public records under Chapter 610 (Section 115.108); (4) Authorizes election authorities to remove names from the voter registration list at any time when it is discovered that an individual is not entitled to vote under the laws of this state and prohibits the inclusion of inactive and unverified voter registrations in the list used for an upcoming election (Section 115.178); (5) Beginning January 1, 2023, the bill requires the use of a paper ballot and repeals electronic voting system language with certain exceptions for voting equipment used for the disabled. Requires local election authorities to be members of the Center for Internet Security and allows the Secretary of State (SOS) to review cyber security for local election authorities and vendors as specified in the bill. Testing of vendor products such as programs and machines is allowed and subject to appropriation (Sections 115.225, 115.237, and 115.417); (6) Allows the use of mail-in ballots by administrative or executive order only and repeals a currently expired exception to absentee ballot processing rules and an exception allowing mail-in voting which were implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic (Section 115.302); (7) Requires use of photographic identification for purposes of voting in-person absentee ballots at an election authority site that is a designated polling place (Sections 115.257 and 115.427); (8) Authorizes the use of provisional ballots in cases where a voter appears without identification which may be verified and counted by use of either photographic identification or signature matching and repeals an affidavit requirement that was declared unconstitutional in Priorities U.S.A., et. al. v. State of Missouri (Mo. (9) Requires the retention of ballots in all elections for one year from the date of certification in a secure location. Intentional destruction or tampering with such ballots will be a class one election offense (Section 115.449); and (10) Requires ballot matching regarding all ballots cast, unused ballots, spoiled ballots, and provisional ballots to ensure that the numbers sent to election authorities match the returns. Discrepancies must be immediately reported to the SOS. The election authority shall also provide number totals for absentee ballots and regular ballots cast and such totals will be public records under chapter 610 (Section 115.450).
Review official supporting evidence ↗
Missouri Legislature · HB 1483

Modifies provisions relating to elections

Jan 27, 2022 · Did not pass

Rep. Ann Kelley · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

This committee will implement random election audits as specified. The integrity committee shall also conduct comprehensive risk assessments of election authorities to protect against cyber security threats to the election process. An "Election Integrity Fund" is created to fund audits and risk assessments (Section 21.1020); (4) Authorizes the Secretary of State (SOS) to audit voter registration lists and require election authorities to remove improper names. Audit procedures are specified in the bill and noncompliance could result in a withhold of funds (Section 28.960, RSMo); (5) Grants the SOS exclusive and broad authority over all types of election equipment. The SOS office will be a…

This measure did not pass before the 2022 session ended. Final recorded action on 2022-01-27: Referred: Elections and Elected Officials(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses registration, access to voting, or the handling of cast ballots. Registered-voter turnout uses registered voters as its denominator, so registration and voting rules can concern different components of the displayed rate. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Registered-voter turnout. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

This committee will implement random election audits as specified. The integrity committee shall also conduct comprehensive risk assessments of election authorities to protect against cyber security threats to the election process. An "Election Integrity Fund" is created to fund audits and risk assessments (Section 21.1020); (4) Authorizes the Secretary of State (SOS) to audit voter registration lists and require election authorities to remove improper names. Audit procedures are specified in the bill and noncompliance could result in a withhold of funds (Section 28.960, RSMo); (5) Grants the SOS exclusive and broad authority over all types of election equipment. The SOS office will be a member of the Center for Internet Security. (7) Prohibits the state of Missouri or its political subdivisions from receiving or expending private money to prepare, administer, or conduct an election or register voters (Section 115.022); (8) Allows appointment of election judges who reside outside the requisite election authorities jurisdiction without the need for written consent from the election authority in whose jurisdiction the potential judge resides. Increases the number of election judges and specifies the procedures for selecting election judges from lists submitted by political party committees (Section 115.081; 115.085); (9) Allows election challengers to be present when election judges arrive at polling places and to remain until all ballots are returned and counted (Section 115.105); (10) Increases the number of watchers allowed from one to four for each political party. Candidates for watcher need not reside or be a registered voter within the jurisdiction they serve (Section 115.107); (11) Authorizes the Department of Revenue to use electronic applications when sending materials to election authorities under the existing voter registration program in place at the Division of Motor Vehicles and Drivers Licensing, within the Department of Revenue. Electronic applications shall be sent no later than three business days after completion of a form. The electronic applications shall be secure and in a format compatible with the existing Voter Registration System under Section 115.158. The SOS and Director of Revenue shall guarantee the security and transmission of electronic data. Images of signatures may be used for the purpose of voter registration (Sections 115.151, 115.160, 115.960); (12) Authorizes an election authority to remove names from voter registration lists at any time where it is determined that an individual is not allowed to vote under the laws of Missouri (Section 115.178); (13) Beginning January 1, 2023, the bill requires the use of a paper ballot and repeals electronic voting system language with certain exceptions for voting equipment used for the disabled. Requires local election authorities to be members of the Center for Internet Security and allows the SOS to review cyber security for local election authorities and vendors as specified in the bill. Testing of vendor products such as programs and machines is allowed and subject to appropriation (Sections 115.225, 115.237, 115.417); (14) Requires use of photographic identification for purposes of voting in-person absentee ballots at an election authority site that is a designated polling place (Sections 115.237, 115.257, 115.427); (15) Repeals a currently expired exception to absentee ballot processing rules and an exception allowing mail-in voting which were implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic (115.277, 115.302); (16) Prohibits the distribution of unsolicited applications for absentee ballots by any person including election authorities. The violation of this rule will be a class four election offense (Sections 115.279, 115.637); (17) Prohibits the use of mail-in ballots subsequent to the effective date of the bill except by explicit reference and repeal of this section of the bill (Section 115.302); (18) Authorizes the use of provisional ballots in cases where a voter appears without identification which may be verified and counted by use of either photographic identification or signature matching and repeals an affidavit requirement that was declared unconstitutional in Priorities U.S.A., et. al. v. State of Missouri (Mo. (19) Requires the retention of ballots in all elections for one year from the date of certification in a secure location. Intentional destruction or tampering with such ballots will be a class one election offense (Section 115.449); and (20) Requires ballot matching regarding all ballots cast, unused ballots, spoiled ballots, and provisional ballots to ensure that the numbers sent to election authorities match the returns. Discrepancies must be immediately reported to the SOS (Section 115.450).
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Anthony Ealy

Missouri House of Representatives, District 36 · D–MO

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Anthony Ealy
Missouri Legislature · HB 3340

Prohibits state agencies from spending state funds on civil immigration detention

May 15, 2026 · Did not pass

Rep. Anthony Ealy · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 3340 -- USE OF STATE FUNDS FOR CIVIL IMMIGRATION DETENTION SPONSOR: Ealy This bill requires a specific appropriation line item before any state agency can expend funds appropriated by the State to: (1) Lease, build, or retrofit facilities for civil immigration detention; or (2) Contract to provide ongoing facility operations such as food, medical, or security functions for civil immigration detainees. The bill does not limit or otherwise interfere with information- sharing requirements under State or Federal law.

This measure did not pass before the 2026 session ended. Final recorded action on 2026-05-15: Referred: Emerging Issues(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses immigration or residents with a specified immigration status. The foreign-born population includes naturalized citizens and both lawfully and unlawfully present noncitizens, so an enforcement measure addresses only a subset. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 3340 -- USE OF STATE FUNDS FOR CIVIL IMMIGRATION DETENTION SPONSOR: Ealy This bill requires a specific appropriation line item before any state agency can expend funds appropriated by the State to: (1) Lease, build, or retrofit facilities for civil immigration detention; or (2) Contract to provide ongoing facility operations such as food, medical, or security functions for civil immigration detainees. The bill does not limit or otherwise interfere with information- sharing requirements under State or Federal law.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Barry Hovis

Missouri House of Representatives, District 146 · R–MO

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Barry Hovis
Missouri Legislature · HB 1183

Modifies provisions regarding adult high schools

Apr 5, 2023 · Did not pass

Rep. Barry Hovis · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 1183 -- ADULT HIGH SCHOOLS SPONSOR: Hovis Currently, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education is required to authorize the operation of four adult high schools across the state. This bill transfers such authority to the Department of Social Services and requires each nonprofit organization to submit an annual report to the Department. In addition, the Department shall authorize a fifth adult high school to be located in a county with more than 700,000 but fewer than 800,000 inhabitants, or a contiguous county. When this bill goes into effect, this will apply to Jackson County or an adjacent county. The Department shall administer funding to the adult high schools, subject to…

This measure did not pass before the 2023 session ended. Final recorded action on 2023-04-05: Referred: General Laws(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses high-school completion, equivalency, or adult education relevant to the diploma-or-higher share of adults age 25 and older. Current student programs affect only a potential future component of that adult population. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 1183 -- ADULT HIGH SCHOOLS SPONSOR: Hovis Currently, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education is required to authorize the operation of four adult high schools across the state. This bill transfers such authority to the Department of Social Services and requires each nonprofit organization to submit an annual report to the Department. In addition, the Department shall authorize a fifth adult high school to be located in a county with more than 700,000 but fewer than 800,000 inhabitants, or a contiguous county. When this bill goes into effect, this will apply to Jackson County or an adjacent county. The Department shall administer funding to the adult high schools, subject to appropriations. For the existing adult high schools, the Department shall maintain authorization for the nonprofit organizations to operate the high school, provided that no more than one organization may be authorized to operate an adult high school in each of the current four locations. An organization may establish satellite campuses for any adult high school it is authorized to operate. By January 1, 2024, the Department shall select a Missouri-based nonprofit organization to operate the new adult high school, provided the organization meets current law requirements and demonstrates the ability to commit at least $500,000, rather than $2 million, for the necessary infrastructure to establish the school. The bill also provides that such organization must limit the administrative fee to no more than 10%.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Bill Allen

Missouri House of Representatives, District 17 · R–MO

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Bill Allen
Missouri Legislature · HB 1327

Requires election authorities to make available at least one electronic voting machine per polling location for blind or visually impaired voters at an election in order to comply with federal law

Apr 5, 2023 · Did not pass

Rep. Bill Allen · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 1327 -- VISUALLY IMPAIRED VOTERS SPONSOR: Allen This bill requires an election authority with 300,000 or more residents in its jurisdiction to make available at least one voting machine per polling location for use by voters who are blind or visually impaired in all state and local elections. An election authority with fewer than 300,000 residents in its jurisdiction shall make available at least one voting machine for use by voters who are blind or visually impaired in all state and local elections. Any additional costs for the maintenance and use of voting machines shall be paid by the state, subject to appropriation. No voter will be required to prove the existence of blindness or…

This measure did not pass before the 2023 session ended. Final recorded action on 2023-04-05: Referred: Elections and Elected Officials(H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses registration, access to voting, or the handling of cast ballots. Registered-voter turnout uses registered voters as its denominator, so registration and voting rules can concern different components of the displayed rate. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Registered-voter turnout. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HB 1327 -- VISUALLY IMPAIRED VOTERS SPONSOR: Allen This bill requires an election authority with 300,000 or more residents in its jurisdiction to make available at least one voting machine per polling location for use by voters who are blind or visually impaired in all state and local elections. An election authority with fewer than 300,000 residents in its jurisdiction shall make available at least one voting machine for use by voters who are blind or visually impaired in all state and local elections. Any additional costs for the maintenance and use of voting machines shall be paid by the state, subject to appropriation. No voter will be required to prove the existence of blindness or visual impairment in order to utilize a voting machine. Nothing in this section shall be construed to require a voter who is blind or visually impaired to use a voting machine. Upon signing an affidavit, voters who are blind or visually impaired may continue to vote by absentee ballot or any other legal method of voting. This bill is the same as HB 1075 (2023).
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Bishop Davidson

Missouri House of Representatives, District 130 · R–MO

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Bishop Davidson
Missouri Legislature · HB 447

Modifies provisions relating to duties of the department of elementary and secondary education

Jul 6, 2023 · Enacted

Rep. Bishop Davidson · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The SBE shall adopt and implement the performance standards relating to health and family education beginning with the 2024-25 school year. ADULT HIGH SCHOOLS (Sections 160.2705, 160.2720, and 160.2725) Currently, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) is required to authorize the operation of four adult high schools across the state. This bill transfers such authority to the Department of Social Services (DSS) and requires each nonprofit organization that operates an adult high school to submit an annual report to DSS. In addition, DSS shall authorize a fifth adult high school to be located in a county with more than 700,000 but fewer than 800,000 inhabitants, or a…

Approved by the Governor on 2023-07-06. The recorded final action was 2023-07-06: Approved by Governor (G). This is the legislative disposition; subsequent court rulings may affect enforcement.

Why this record is included

The record addresses high-school completion, equivalency, or adult education relevant to the diploma-or-higher share of adults age 25 and older. Current student programs affect only a potential future component of that adult population. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

The SBE shall adopt and implement the performance standards relating to health and family education beginning with the 2024-25 school year. ADULT HIGH SCHOOLS (Sections 160.2705, 160.2720, and 160.2725) Currently, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) is required to authorize the operation of four adult high schools across the state. This bill transfers such authority to the Department of Social Services (DSS) and requires each nonprofit organization that operates an adult high school to submit an annual report to DSS. In addition, DSS shall authorize a fifth adult high school to be located in a county with more than 700,000 but fewer than 800,000 inhabitants, or a contiguous county. When the bill goes into effect, this will apply to Jackson County or an adjacent county. DSS shall administer funding to the adult high schools subject to appropriations. For the existing adult high schools, DSS shall maintain authorization for the nonprofit organizations to operate the high school, provided that no more than one organization may be authorized to operate an adult high school in each of the current four locations. An organization may establish satellite campuses for any adult high school it is authorized to operate. By January 1, 2024, the DSS shall select a Missouri-based nonprofit organization to operate the new adult high school, provided the organization meets current requirements and demonstrates the ability to commit at least $500,000 for the necessary infrastructure to establish the school. GRANT AWARDS AUTHORITY (Sections 161.243 and 205.565) DESE shall provide grants directly to private entities, as defined, for the provision of early childhood education services, subject to appropriations.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Don Mayhew

Missouri House of Representatives, District 124 · R–MO

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Don Mayhew
Missouri Legislature · HB 2072

Modifies provisions relating to the motor fuel tax exemption

Apr 22, 2024 · Did not pass

Rep. Don Mayhew · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HCS HB 2072 -- MOTOR FUEL TAX EXEMPTION SPONSOR: Mayhew COMMITTEE ACTION: Voted "Do Pass with HCS" by the Standing Committee on Transportation Accountability by a vote of 10 to 3. Voted "Do "Pass" by Rules-Regulatory Oversight by a vote of 6 to 2. The following is a summary of the House Committee Substitute for HB 2072. This bill creates the "Motor Fuel Tax Fund of 2021", into which the refundable revenue up to $550 million, adjusted annually for inflation, collected under subdivision (1) of subsection 3 of Section 142.803, RSMo, will be deposited. Any money in the Fund not refunded to a motor fuel purchaser within the required time will remain in the Fund and be subject to appropriation by…

This measure did not pass before the 2024 session ended. Final recorded action on 2024-04-22: Reported Do Pass (H).

Why this record is included

The record addresses a Missouri gasoline-cost or supply component. The displayed price is EIA’s 15-state Midwest regional proxy, not a Missouri statewide average; this record does not set pump prices across that region. This relationship does not establish an effect on the displayed statistic; actions after its measurement period cannot explain the earlier value.

Retained Missouri evidence context: Midwest regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

HCS HB 2072 -- MOTOR FUEL TAX EXEMPTION SPONSOR: Mayhew COMMITTEE ACTION: Voted "Do Pass with HCS" by the Standing Committee on Transportation Accountability by a vote of 10 to 3. Voted "Do "Pass" by Rules-Regulatory Oversight by a vote of 6 to 2. The following is a summary of the House Committee Substitute for HB 2072. This bill creates the "Motor Fuel Tax Fund of 2021", into which the refundable revenue up to $550 million, adjusted annually for inflation, collected under subdivision (1) of subsection 3 of Section 142.803, RSMo, will be deposited. Any money in the Fund not refunded to a motor fuel purchaser within the required time will remain in the Fund and be subject to appropriation by the General Assembly for road and bridge projects for state-owned infrastructure. (Section 142.803, RSMo). Beginning October 1, 2024, this bill authorizes a taxpayer to donate the motor fuel tax refund to a tax-exempt nonprofit entity by providing the entity with all required documentation and a signed statement indicating that the nonprofit is entitled to the taxpayer's refund. The nonprofit entity must submit the documentation and statement, along with proof of its tax-exempt status, to the Director of Revenue. The taxpayer is then entitled to subtract from the taxpayer's Missouri adjusted gross income the amount of the refund donated to the nonprofit (Sections 142.815 and 142.824). Currently, motor fuel is exempt from fuel tax, and an exemption and refund may be claimed by a taxpayer if the tax has been paid and no refund has been previously issued. These exemptions and refunds are currently issued on a fiscal year basis. If the amount of refunds claimed in a tax year exceeds the tax collected for the tax year, refunds shall be allowed based on the order in which they are claimed (Section 142.822). Currently, the motor fuel tax rebate under Section 142.822 is eligible only for vehicles with a gross weight of 26,000 pounds or less. This bill extends the eligibility to motor fuel delivered into a motor vehicle with a gross weight over 26,000 pounds if the motor vehicle is owned by a corporation licensed in Missouri with its primary headquarters in this state, or owned by a sole proprietor whose home office is located in Missouri; provided that the corporation or sole proprietor submits documentation that any exemption and refund claimed is based solely on fuel delivered into a motor vehicle while it was operating in Missouri. If the vehicle was operated in multiple states, the submitted documentation must separate the fuel delivered while operating in Missouri and the other states (Section 142.822). Currently, exemptions and refunds issued for any additional tax on motor fuel are based on a fiscal year. Beginning in fiscal year 2025, they will be based on the tax year.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Missouri officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Missouri statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.