| Starting a business license program |
|
|
|
| Written by enrique |
| Saturday, 06 June 2009 11:15 |
|
The “nuance” is this: 1. The “license” is regulatory (not revenue raising) in nature. Thus, any costs associated with its administration (such as time spent by planners to review applications for zoning compliance or Finance staff in issuing or renewing the license) is a fee, and not subject to the voter approval requirements of Prop 218. 2. The “tax” is just that – a tax, and only exists to raise revenues. There is no expectation of a link between costs and revenues. Any increase (even in just in categories but revenue neutral overall) would be subject to voter approval: majority if general purpose and two-thirds if earmarked. To keep these concepts distinctly different, we have two separate ordinances: one for business tax – which sets tax amounts; and another for businesses licenses, which authorizes fees to be set by resolution. For clarity, they are in separate sections of our municipal code: the tax in “Revenue and Finance” (Chapter 3); and the license in “Licenses, Permits and Regulations (Chapter 5). Thus, when we renew business licenses and taxes, businesses pay for two distinctly different things: a business license (fixed fee of $34 – slated to go to $42 in July); and a business tax, which is .0005 of gross receipts (or $50 per $100,000 of gross receipts), with a minimum tax of $25. Until 2005, we only had a business tax ordinance. Among other things, in order to recover the regulatory costs we were in fact incurring, we adopted a business license ordinance. To help understand this dual concept, I’ve attached three things:
- Bill
Bill Statler Director of Finance & Information Technology City of San Luis Obispo |
| Last Updated on Saturday, 06 June 2009 11:17 |


