HB 4148
Plain-language analysis
Generated analysis, not an official summary or legal advice. Confirm with linked Oregon documents.
The enrolled bill permanently shifts the statutory allocation of net local transient lodging tax revenue from a minimum of 70 percent for tourism promotion and facilities (with a maximum of 30 percent for city or county services) to a 50/50 split. It explicitly authorizes using up to 50 percent of that revenue for resiliency grants targeting small businesses in the restaurant and lodging sectors, clarifies that eligible municipal services include those delivered by special districts, and allows local governments with pre-2003 tax regimes to adopt the new ratios without voter approval. The measure mandates biennial expenditure reporting to the Legislative Revenue Office starting in 2027 and requires a statutory study on revenue allocation patterns due by September 2034. The material consequence is that local governments gain discretionary authority to redirect up to half of transient lodging tax funds toward direct municipal operations or economic recovery grants, while assuming new administrative tracking obligations.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
Local governments may face mounting municipal service costs or economic volatility that strain general funds, prompting a legislative hypothesis that reallocating existing transient lodging tax revenue could provide flexible, rate-neutral funding for direct services or small business recovery without triggering voter approval requirements.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Gain statutory authority to allocate up to 50 percent of net transient lodging tax revenue toward municipal services or small business resiliency grants instead of tourism promotion. Must implement new biennial data collection and reporting processes starting in 2027.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
Become statutorily eligible for resiliency grants funded by transient lodging taxes, contingent on local government appropriation decisions rather than automatic entitlement.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
May experience reduced funding shares if local governments maximize the new 50 percent cap for non-tourism uses, though they remain eligible for up to 50 percent of net revenue and must submit compliance data to local governments.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
Assume new administrative duties to collect biennial local government reports, aggregate statewide data, and conduct a statutory study on revenue allocation percentages due by September 2034.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
Local governments must track and report tax revenue splits separately for pre- and post-July 1, 2003 regimes, with detailed breakdowns of expenditures across tourism promotion, facilities, resiliency grants, and municipal services.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
No direct changes to tax rates or state revenue collections; official analyses confirm minimal fiscal impact on state and local government expenditures.
Basis: Official analysis · Sources: Fiscal Impact Statement A; Revenue Impact Statement A
Compliance relies on self-reporting and legislative aggregation rather than state-level audits, placing enforcement burden on local fiscal staff and destination management organizations.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
Access to resiliency grants and municipal service funding depends entirely on local appropriation decisions, creating potential budget reallocation volatility if tourism revenue fluctuates.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Revenue Impact Statement MRB
Coastal or resort municipalities facing economic downturns
A county uses the new authority to allocate exactly 50 percent of its transient lodging tax revenue to direct resiliency grants for struggling independent restaurants and lodging operators, preventing widespread business closures while maintaining baseline tourism marketing with the remaining 50 percent.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Enrolled
Municipalities with strained general funds
A city maximizes the allowable 50 percent cap for general municipal services (e.g., police, fire, infrastructure) and minimizes tourism promotion funding to the statutory minimum, causing a measurable decline in visitor numbers and long-term erosion of the local lodging tax base.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Enrolled
The text legally permits flexible allocation for municipal services but does not define strict eligibility thresholds or require state-level validation of service classifications, leaving room for misapplication if local accounting practices diverge from legislative intent.
Sources · Enrolled
The measure trades guaranteed minimum funding for tourism promotion and facilities for increased local fiscal flexibility to address municipal service needs or economic recovery, while introducing new administrative reporting burdens.
Provides rate-neutral funding flexibility for pressing local priorities without requiring voter approval.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Revenue Impact Statement A
Expands statutory eligibility to support small business recovery in tourism-adjacent sectors during economic shocks.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
May reduce consistent funding for destination marketing, potentially impacting long-term tourism demand and tax base stability.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Relies on local discretion rather than statutory mandates, creating uneven implementation and potential underfunding of tourism infrastructure.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Revenue Impact Statement MRB
The enrolled version adds explicit authorization for transient lodging tax revenue to fund resiliency grants for small businesses in the restaurant and lodging industries, which was removed in the minority report version. It also requires biennial reporting and a legislative study on these specific grants. Both versions retain the shift from a 70/30 to a 50/50 allocation split, clarify eligibility for special district services, grandfather pre-2003 tax regimes, and establish identical reporting timelines and repeal dates.
Added resiliency grants for small restaurant and lodging businesses as an allowable use of tourism/tourism-related facilities funding.
Expands statutory grant eligibility but requires new tracking and reporting mechanisms.
Sources · Enrolled
Added mandatory biennial reporting and legislative study requirements specifically covering resiliency grant allocations.
Increases administrative burden on local governments and the Legislative Revenue Office.
Sources · Enrolled
Minority report version eliminated resiliency grants and related reporting/study provisions.
Removed targeted economic recovery funding mechanism present in the enrolled text.
Sources · Minority Report to B-Engrossed
Tradeoff: The enrolled text restores targeted small business recovery funding at the cost of additional administrative reporting, whereas the minority report version prioritized streamlined allocation by removing grant-specific tracking.
high confidence. Analysis is grounded exclusively in the enrolled bill text and official Legislative Revenue Office/Legislative Fiscal Office analyses for this exact version. No legislative intent or external events are assumed.
Possible effects if adopted; not current bill text.
The amendment changes the mandatory allocation split for new or increased local transient lodging taxes from at least 70 percent for tourism promotion/facilities and no more than 30 percent for city/county services to a 50/50 split. It adds resiliency grants for small businesses in the restaurant and lodging industries as an allowable use under the tourism category, permits unexpended pre-enactment revenue to follow the new percentages, and shifts biennial reporting oversight from the Department of Revenue to the Legislative Revenue Office. The material consequence is that local governments gain significant discretion to redirect up to half of these funds toward general municipal services or small business support without changing tax rates, potentially altering local economic development priorities and tourism marketing capacity.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A; Staff Measure Summary A
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The amendment likely responds to legislative concerns about municipal fiscal flexibility during economic volatility, as indicated by staff discussions on the impact of tourism changes on local services and the need for spending adaptability. The addition of resiliency grants suggests a policy goal to provide targeted economic relief to hospitality-sector small businesses, inferred from committee focus on grant scope and industry resilience.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: IS_Impact HB 4148 A; Staff Measure Summary A
Gains discretion to allocate up to 50 percent of net transient lodging tax revenue to general city or county services instead of the prior 30 percent cap. Must implement new biennial reporting requirements to the Legislative Revenue Office starting in 2027, including detailed breakdowns of allocation percentages and reserve descriptions.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment; Revenue Impact Statement A
May experience reduced funding if local governments maximize the service allocation, potentially affecting marketing campaigns, staffing, and audience reach metrics previously supported by the prior 70 percent minimum.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Becomes eligible for resiliency grants funded through transient lodging tax revenues, creating a new potential revenue stream for economic stabilization that did not exist under current law.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Assumes new statutory responsibilities for collecting biennial local government reports, analyzing allocation data, and conducting a dedicated study on percentage requirements due by September 15, 2034.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A
Local governments must adjust budgeting and accounting processes to track the new 50/50 split and report detailed allocation percentages biennially. Tourism entities will need to adapt marketing strategies if funding shifts toward general services. No direct tax rate changes or state fiscal costs are imposed, but eligibility for resiliency grants depends entirely on local implementation and administrative rulemaking. Oversight relies on internal legislative reporting rather than public database publication, which may reduce transparency for residents and industry stakeholders.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment; Revenue Impact Statement A; Fiscal Impact Statement A
Tourism-dependent county during economic downturn
A county redirects 50 percent of lodging tax revenue to resiliency grants, successfully preventing widespread small business closures and preserving the local hospitality workforce. This stabilizes visitor confidence, maintains tourism infrastructure, and ultimately preserves long-term tax collections that would have otherwise collapsed.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
Municipality maximizing service allocation
A city allocates the full 50 percent allowance to general services, eliminating tourism marketing funding entirely. Visitor numbers decline sharply over three years, causing lodging tax revenues to drop below previous levels and leaving the municipality with a net fiscal loss despite short-term service gains.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
inference
Sources · Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
The measure trades guaranteed minimum investment in tourism promotion for expanded municipal fiscal flexibility, potentially strengthening local service delivery while risking long-term declines in visitor-driven revenue and industry resilience. Upsides include targeted economic relief for hospitality businesses and adaptable municipal budgeting; downsides include potential underfunding of destination marketing and inconsistent implementation across jurisdictions.
Provides municipalities with greater budgetary flexibility to address immediate service needs during fiscal stress.
Basis: Inferred · Source: IS_Impact HB 4148 A
Establishes a new funding pathway for resiliency grants, offering direct economic stabilization to small businesses in the restaurant and lodging sectors.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
Reduced mandatory investment in tourism promotion may lead to long-term declines in visitor numbers and subsequent tax revenue loss.
Basis: Inferred · Source: IS_Impact HB 4148 A
Shift from public database publication to internal legislative reporting may reduce transparency for residents, industry stakeholders, and destination management organizations.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
high confidence. Analysis is grounded in the provided proposed amendment text, official revenue and fiscal impact statements, and staff measure summaries. No enacted status or external speculation is applied.
The amendment would shift the statutory allocation of new or increased local transient lodging tax revenue from a minimum 70 percent for tourism promotion/facilities and maximum 30 percent for city/county services to a minimum 40 percent for tourism/facilities/resiliency grants and maximum 60 percent for city/county services. It would allow jurisdictions with pre-2003 tax regimes to apply these new percentages retroactively to unexpended revenue, mandate biennial financial reporting to the Legislative Revenue Office starting in 2027, and authorize a legislative study on revenue allocation by 2034.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The amendment likely responds to growing municipal budget pressures and economic volatility, seeking to balance tourism promotion with direct local service funding by expanding the allowable share for city/county services from 30 percent to 60 percent while introducing targeted business resiliency grants.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Gain statutory authority to allocate up to 60 percent of net revenue to municipal services instead of a maximum of 30 percent, and may apply this shift retroactively to unexpended funds.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Face potential reduction in baseline funding share as jurisdictions reallocate up to 20 additional percentage points to local services or resiliency grants.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
May become eligible for new resiliency grants if local governments choose to direct tourism-allocated revenue toward this purpose.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Assumes new administrative duties to compile biennial local government reports, publish aggregate summaries, and conduct a statutory study on revenue allocation percentages.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Local governments must adjust budgeting processes to track and report revenue splits under the new 40/60 threshold, with compliance beginning in 2027. The measure carries minimal direct fiscal impact on state or local expenditures but imposes administrative reporting costs on jurisdictions and the Legislative Revenue Office. Grandfathered jurisdictions can unlock previously restricted unexpended net revenue for current use. Enforcement relies on accurate self-reporting; misclassification of expenses could lead to audit discrepancies.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A; Revenue Impact Statement A
Fiscally constrained counties
A county reallocates the full 60 percent allowance to emergency and non-emergency municipal services, preventing critical service cuts without raising general property taxes.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Tourism-dependent jurisdictions
Multiple jurisdictions shift the maximum 60 percent to local services, causing a severe drop in destination marketing budgets that leads to measurable declines in visitor spending, hotel occupancy, and long-term hospitality sector employment.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
inference
Sources · Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
The measure trades a guaranteed minimum share of transient lodging tax revenue for tourism promotion in exchange for greater local government flexibility to fund municipal services and business resiliency.
Increased fiscal autonomy for local governments facing budget constraints
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Potential direct financial support for struggling hospitality businesses
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Enhanced transparency through standardized biennial reporting
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Reduced baseline funding for destination marketing and tourism infrastructure
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Risk of underinvestment in tourism promotion leading to economic contraction
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Administrative burden on jurisdictions and the Legislative Revenue Office for compliance and study execution
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
high confidence. The analysis is grounded exclusively in the supplied proposed amendment text and official legislative impact statements. No legislative intent or external events are assumed.
If adopted, the amendment would authorize local governments to allocate up to half of the revenue designated for tourism promotion or facilities under new or increased transient lodging taxes toward small business resiliency grants targeting restaurant and lodging employers with fewer than 100 employees within that jurisdiction, while maintaining a mandatory minimum allocation to traditional tourism promotion or facility funding.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The amendment likely aims to provide targeted economic stabilization for hospitality sector workers and owners during downturns by leveraging existing transient lodging tax revenue streams without creating new taxes or state appropriations.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Gain statutory discretion to design and fund small business resiliency programs using up to 50% of tourism-designated transient lodging tax revenue, subject to new biennial reporting requirements.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Become eligible for potential grant funding if their local government establishes a resiliency program, provided they operate within the taxing jurisdiction.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment
May experience reduced direct funding if local governments shift the maximum allowable tourism allocation toward resiliency grants rather than marketing or facility development.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Must track, verify, and publish biennial reports detailing how local governments allocate transient lodging tax revenue between traditional tourism promotion and the new resiliency grant category.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Local governments will need to draft or amend ordinances, establish grant application processes, and manage disbursements, creating administrative obligations. Eligibility is strictly capped at businesses with fewer than 100 employees operating within the taxing jurisdiction. No direct state expenditures are triggered, but local administrative costs for program design and oversight will be incurred. Access to funds will depend entirely on local government adoption and the size of their transient lodging tax base, creating potential geographic inequity across jurisdictions.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Rural or economically vulnerable jurisdictions
A county with a modest transient lodging tax establishes a well-administered resiliency program that successfully prevents the closure of dozens of locally owned restaurants and inns during an economic shock, preserving local employment, maintaining the tax base, and stabilizing community services.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment
High-tourism jurisdictions
A jurisdiction allocates the full 50% tourism-designated revenue to grants, drastically cutting destination marketing budgets. This leads to a measurable decline in visitor numbers over multiple years, shrinking the transient lodging tax base and ultimately reducing the total funding available for both tourism promotion and resiliency grants.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
The text legally permits targeted small-business grants but does not specify audit thresholds or eligibility verification mechanisms, creating room for duty creep or misclassification if local enforcement is lax.
Sources · Amendment -6 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
The measure trades potential short-term tourism promotion effectiveness for targeted small-business stabilization in the hospitality sector.
Direct financial support for vulnerable local employers reduces business closures during economic downturns and preserves jobs tied to transient lodging revenue.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment
Leverages existing tax revenue streams without requiring new appropriations or voter-approved tax increases.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Diverting up to 50% of tourism-designated revenue may underfund destination marketing, potentially reducing visitor numbers and long-term tax base growth.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Uneven adoption across jurisdictions could create geographic disparities in small-business support, with high-tourism areas having more grant funding than low-tourism areas.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
high confidence. The amendment text is explicit regarding eligibility criteria and funding allocation. Official revenue and fiscal impact statements confirm the permissive nature of the change and its minimal direct state cost. The analysis relies solely on provided statutory text and official legislative documents.
The amendment would lower the mandatory minimum allocation of new or increased local transient lodging tax revenues for tourism promotion from 70 percent to 50 percent, while raising the maximum allowable allocation for city and county services from 30 percent to 50 percent. It establishes a biennial reporting mandate to the Department of Revenue, creates a legislative study on revenue distribution and transparency, and applies these allocation changes retroactively to unexpended revenues collected before enactment.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The shift from a 70/30 to a 50/50 split suggests a policy response to local governments facing budget pressures for municipal services, seeking greater flexibility to redirect transient tax revenues toward non-tourism needs while maintaining a baseline commitment to tourism promotion.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
Gain flexibility to allocate up to 50 percent of new or increased tax revenue to municipal services instead of being capped at 30 percent. Must comply with new biennial reporting requirements and may adjust allocations for grandfathered taxes.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
Face a potential reduction in guaranteed funding shares for new or increased taxes. Required to submit performance metrics, campaign data, and compliance reports to local governments.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
Assume administrative burdens for collecting, publishing, and analyzing biennial tax allocation reports. LRO must conduct a statutory study on revenue distribution and transparency by 2034.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
Local governments must track and report revenue splits biennially starting in 2027, with detailed breakdowns of rates, allocations, reserves, and advisory board actions. DMOs must document marketing campaigns, audiences reached, and compliance with agreements.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
Official analysis indicates minimal direct fiscal impact on state or local expenditures, as the measure does not change tax rates and leaves allocation decisions to local discretion. Unexpended pre-enactment revenues become eligible for the new allocation percentages.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Compliance relies on self-reporting and legislative oversight rather than direct enforcement mechanisms. The Department of Revenue must maintain a publicly accessible database of reports.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
Local governments facing fiscal strain
A tourism-dependent city successfully redirects the newly permitted 50 percent allocation to fund critical infrastructure and emergency services, stabilizing municipal operations without raising general property taxes.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
Tourism promotion ecosystem
Multiple jurisdictions systematically allocate the maximum 50 percent allowed for municipal services while using administrative cost provisions or debt refinancing provisions to divert funds away from tourism promotion, causing a measurable decline in destination marketing and long-term visitor revenue.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
The text permits administrative cost allocations tied to debt financing. Without clear auditing standards or enforcement triggers, jurisdictions could classify general operational expenses as administrative costs, reducing actual tourism funding below statutory intent while remaining compliant on paper.
Sources · Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
The measure trades a guaranteed majority share of new transient tax revenue for tourism promotion in exchange for increased local fiscal flexibility to address municipal service needs. Upsides include enhanced budget autonomy for cities and counties and improved reporting transparency; downsides include potential underfunding of destination marketing, reduced competitive advantage for Oregon tourism, and reliance on voluntary compliance without direct enforcement mechanisms.
Enhanced budget autonomy for local governments to address non-tourism municipal service needs during economic downturns or infrastructure deficits.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
Improved transparency through mandatory biennial reporting and a publicly accessible database of revenue allocations.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
Potential underfunding of destination marketing and tourism-related facilities, which could reduce Oregon's competitive advantage in the hospitality sector.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
Reliance on voluntary compliance and legislative oversight rather than direct enforcement mechanisms, creating uncertainty for tourism stakeholders dependent on consistent funding.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -1 — proposed amendment
high confidence. The analysis is grounded in the explicit text of the proposed amendment and official legislative revenue and fiscal impact statements. No speculation is presented as fact, and all claims are bounded by the provided source material.
If adopted, this amendment would shift the mandatory allocation split for new or increased local transient lodging taxes from at least 40 percent to tourism and up to 60 percent to city/county services, to at least 50 percent for tourism and tourism-related facilities (including resiliency grants for small restaurant and lodging businesses) and no more than 50 percent for city/county services. It would transfer biennial reporting obligations from the Department of Revenue to the Legislative Revenue Office, mandate a legislative study on revenue usage by September 2034, and take effect January 1, 2027.
Basis: Official analysis · Sources: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment; Revenue Impact Statement A; Staff Measure Summary A
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The amendment appears designed to rebalance local transient lodging tax revenues toward tourism promotion and small business recovery, potentially addressing post-pandemic economic pressures on hospitality sectors, while increasing legislative oversight through direct reporting to the Legislative Revenue Office.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
Must adjust revenue allocation to meet the new 50 percent minimum for tourism/resiliency and 50 percent maximum for services, and submit biennial reports directly to the Legislative Revenue Office starting in 2027.
Basis: Official analysis · Sources: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
May receive increased funding if jurisdictions shift allocations toward tourism, but must comply with stricter reporting on performance metrics and compliance with grant agreements.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
Could become eligible for resiliency grants funded by transient lodging tax revenues, expanding potential financial support for recovery or operational stability.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
May face reduced funding availability from transient lodging taxes if jurisdictions reallocate revenue to meet the new tourism/resiliency minimums, potentially affecting emergency and non-emergency service budgets.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
Assumes new biennial reporting collection duties and a statutory mandate to conduct and report on a study of revenue usage percentages by September 2034.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
Behavior and obligations: Local governments must audit current allocation practices and adjust budgets to comply with the new split starting January 1, 2027. Unexpended net revenues collected before the effective date may be reallocated under the new percentages.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
Costs and eligibility: No direct state fiscal impact is projected; local administrative costs may rise slightly due to Legislative Revenue Office reporting requirements and grant administration for resiliency programs. Grant eligibility is strictly limited to small businesses in specified industries.
Basis: Official analysis · Sources: Fiscal Impact Statement A; Revenue Impact Statement A
Enforcement and access: Compliance relies on biennial reports submitted to the Legislative Revenue Office, which will aggregate data for legislative committees. Access to funds depends entirely on local government adoption of the new allocation percentages.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
Coastal hospitality sector and local economy
A coastal county facing severe post-storm economic contraction uses the new resiliency grant provision to distribute substantial transient lodging tax revenues directly to struggling small restaurants and lodges, stabilizing the local hospitality economy while maintaining tourism marketing through the 50 percent allocation.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
Municipal public safety departments
A jurisdiction heavily reliant on transient lodging taxes for emergency services is forced by the 50 percent cap to divert funds away from public safety, potentially delaying response times or requiring tax rate increases elsewhere to maintain service levels.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
The distinction relies on statutory language allowing broad service definitions while lacking explicit state-level verification protocols for expenditure categorization.
Sources · Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
The measure trades increased flexibility and targeted economic support for the hospitality sector against potential strain on local public service funding. Upsides include expanded financial tools for small business recovery and greater legislative visibility into tax usage; downsides include reduced discretionary revenue for municipal services and administrative burdens from new reporting mandates.
Expanded financial tools for small business recovery
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
Greater legislative visibility into tax usage
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
Reduced discretionary revenue for municipal services
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
Administrative burdens from new reporting mandates
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Amendment -7 — proposed amendment
high confidence. The amendment text, fiscal impact statements, and staff summaries provide clear, consistent descriptions of the statutory changes, reporting shifts, and operational timelines. No conflicting official versions were supplied.
The amendment shifts the mandatory allocation split of local transient lodging tax revenue from a minimum 70 percent for tourism-related uses to a minimum 40 percent, allowing up to 60 percent for city or county services. It adds resiliency grants for small restaurant and lodging businesses as an allowable tourism-related use, permits jurisdictions with pre-2003 grandfathered taxes to apply the new percentages retroactively to unexpended revenue, and establishes a biennial reporting and legislative study regime administered by the Legislative Revenue Office.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
Local governments may be seeking greater fiscal flexibility to direct transient lodging tax revenues toward municipal services rather than tourism promotion, reflecting shifting local budget priorities or economic conditions.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Gain discretion to allocate up to 60 percent of net revenue to municipal services (including emergency/non-emergency services and special district equivalents) instead of being capped at 30 percent. Must implement new biennial reporting and accounting procedures starting in 2027.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
May experience reduced funding shares if local governments maximize the service allocation cap. Must submit biennial performance and compliance reports to local governments for inclusion in statutory filings.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Gain eligibility for resiliency grants funded by the newly designated tourism-related revenue pool, providing a potential new funding stream for economic stabilization.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Assumes new administrative duties to collect, aggregate, and analyze biennial local government reports and conduct a statutory study on revenue allocation percentages by 2034.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Local governments must adjust budgeting and accounting processes to track revenue splits under the new percentages and file detailed biennial reports starting September 1, 2027. The shift is permissive rather than mandatory, meaning actual allocation depends on local legislative action. Compliance costs fall primarily on local finance offices and DMOs, while state fiscal impact remains minimal.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement MRB
Tourism-dependent county during economic downturn
A jurisdiction maximizes the 60 percent service cap to fund emergency response and infrastructure while simultaneously using the new resiliency grant provision to stabilize local hospitality businesses, preventing a broader regional economic contraction without raising general fund taxes.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Jurisdiction systematically prioritizing municipal services
A local government consistently allocates exactly 60 percent of transient lodging tax revenue to city/county services and minimizes tourism promotion spending to the 40 percent floor, causing a measurable decline in visitor demand and long-term erosion of the tax base that ultimately reduces total municipal revenue below pre-amendment levels.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
The text legally permits flexible allocation but relies on local self-reporting and LRO aggregation for oversight. Without explicit audit triggers or narrowly defined service categories, misclassification or scope expansion remains a plausible enforcement gap.
Sources · Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
The measure trades a guaranteed minimum share of transient lodging tax revenue for tourism promotion in favor of granting local governments greater discretion to fund municipal services and business resiliency.
Enhanced local fiscal flexibility allows municipalities to address pressing public safety, infrastructure, or budget shortfalls using existing visitor-generated revenue.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Standardized biennial reporting and a dedicated legislative study improve long-term transparency and data-driven policy adjustments for transient lodging tax allocation.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -11 — proposed amendment
Reduced mandatory tourism promotion funding may lead to decreased visitor demand, potentially eroding the long-term tax base and harming destination management organizations reliant on consistent marketing budgets.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Administrative compliance costs for local governments and the Legislative Revenue Office may outweigh the minimal direct fiscal impact noted in official analyses, particularly for smaller jurisdictions with limited finance staff.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement MRB
high confidence. The analysis is grounded exclusively in the supplied proposed amendment text and official committee revenue/fiscal impact statements. All claims are bounded by the explicit statutory language and permissive nature of the allocation shift.
If adopted, the amendment would explicitly permit local governments to allocate net transient lodging tax revenues designated for tourism promotion or facilities toward small business resiliency grants for restaurant and lodging operators with fewer than 100 employees within their jurisdiction. This would redirect a portion of visitor-generated tax revenue into direct economic stabilization for hospitality businesses, requiring local jurisdictions to establish eligibility criteria, application processes, and oversight mechanisms if they opt to use the provision.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The amendment likely aims to address economic vulnerability in the hospitality sector by allowing local governments to use visitor tax revenue for direct business stabilization rather than traditional marketing or infrastructure, reflecting a policy shift toward post-pandemic or inflationary recovery strategies.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment
Gain authority to allocate up to 50% of net transient lodging tax revenue toward small business resiliency grants, requiring new administrative capacity for grant management, compliance tracking, and biennial reporting.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Staff Measure Summary A; Staff Measure Summary A
Become eligible for direct financial assistance funded by local visitor taxes, contingent on local government adoption, program design, and competitive or needs-based application processes.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment
May face reduced funding pools if local governments redirect tourism-designated revenues toward resiliency grants instead of marketing campaigns or facility maintenance.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Revenue Impact Statement A
Local governments must draft grant guidelines, verify employee counts and industry classification, and track expenditures to ensure compliance with the 50% cap on tourism-designated funds. Businesses face application competition and potential administrative burdens to prove eligibility. Enforcement relies on local audit practices rather than state-level oversight, creating variability in program accessibility and fund distribution.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment; Revenue Impact Statement A
Coastal or resort jurisdiction
A county rapidly deploys a resiliency grant program that successfully prevents the closure of 40 independent lodging and dining establishments during a seasonal downturn, preserving an estimated $2M in local economic activity and retaining 300 jobs.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment
Tourism-dependent jurisdiction
A local government allocates nearly all tourism-designated funds to resiliency grants without adequate marketing or facility maintenance, causing a measurable decline in visitor numbers over two years and reducing long-term tax revenue by an estimated 15%.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Revenue Impact Statement A
The text legally permits local governments to designate transient lodging tax revenues for small business resiliency programs. A potential unlawful outcome could arise if jurisdictions misclassify non-hospitality businesses as eligible, or if grant awards are directed to politically connected operators without transparent bidding or needs-based criteria, exploiting the lack of state-level audit requirements for these specific expenditures.
Sources · Amendment -6 — proposed amendment; Revenue Impact Statement A
The measure trades traditional tourism marketing and facility funding for direct economic stabilization of hospitality businesses, expanding short-term business survival options while potentially weakening long-term destination competitiveness if visitor promotion is underfunded. Upsides include targeted financial relief for vulnerable small operators and localized economic retention; downsides include administrative complexity for local governments, risk of reduced tourism demand due to less marketing, and potential inequitable grant distribution without standardized oversight.
Direct financial relief for vulnerable small hospitality operators during economic downturns.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -6 — proposed amendment
Localized economic retention by keeping visitor tax revenue within the hospitality supply chain.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Administrative complexity and staffing costs for local governments to design, fund, and audit grant programs.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Risk of reduced tourism demand if marketing budgets are underfunded, potentially shrinking the tax base long-term.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Revenue Impact Statement A
high confidence. Analysis is grounded in the explicit amendment text, official revenue/fiscal impact statements, and staff summaries. Inferences are clearly labeled and bounded to the provided documents.
Decision brief generation failed. The existing briefs were preserved and this version can be retried.
45 records currently loaded
Records available in the current snapshot.
Earliest loaded signal
Introduced bill text posted
Posted Jan 28, 2026, 3:25 PM PST
Follow the official text for HB 4148 and every amendment branch. Connections come from each amendment's stated base. Horizontal position shows when each document was first posted, when available. Dotted links flag likely related proposals based on their text.
Click a card to isolate its connected lines; use View summary to jump to its details. Horizontal position shows first posting time in Pacific Time. Drag or use the arrow keys to pan. Pinch with two fingers on mobile, or zoom with the controls, +/− keys, or Control/Command + scroll; press 0 to reset. Dashed branches remained proposals. Dotted teal links are text-based early signals, not official amendment relationships.
Selected document summary
Targeted changes
What the document says to change
On page 1 of the printed bill, delete lines 5 through 22 and delete pages 2 and 3 and insert: “SECTION 1.
Inferred policy relationships
Likely revised proposal · Amendment -7
High confidence from shared inserted text: ORS 192.245, ORS 320.345, ORS 320.350, Effective date.
Likely revised proposal · Amendment -11
High confidence from shared inserted text: ORS 192.245, ORS 320.345, ORS 320.350, Effective date.
This is a text-based early signal, not an official statement that one amendment changes the other.
No deeper official pre-number history was found.
Chief sponsors: Representative Jules Walters, Senator Courtney Neron Misslin, Senator Suzanne Weber, Representative Cyrus Javadi
Regular sponsors: Representative Mark Gamba, Representative Dacia Grayber, Representative Ken Helm, Representative Sarah McDonald, Senator Wlnsvey Campos, Senator Lew Frederick, Senator James Manning Jr.
House carrier
Representative Cyrus Javadi
Third Reading Of House Bills · Version A
House carrier
Representative Jules Walters
Third Reading Of House Bills · Version A
Senate carrier
Senator Suzanne Weber
Consideration Of Committee and Minority Reports · Version A
Senate carrier
Senator Suzanne Weber
Third Reading and Final Consideration · Version A
Senate carrier
Senator Dick Anderson
Consideration Of Committee and Minority Reports · Version B
A carrier presents the measure or report but is not necessarily its sponsor or author.
Records already listed in Activity are not repeated here.
Official origin records are incomplete; missing facts are not inferred.
Yex Labs LLC should monitor this measure because the supplied artifact supports small-business incentives, grants, and tax policy and a credible operational, financial, or compliance effect.
78% confidence · deterministic fallback
45 events
Full timeline
45 entries shown.
Chapter 121, (2026 Laws): Effective date June 5, 2026.
Governor signed.
President signed.
Speaker signed.
Third reading. Carried by Weber. Passed.
Ayes, 23; Nays, 6--Gelser Blouin, Girod, Hayden, Linthicum, McLane, Robinson; Excused, 1--Drazan.
Minority Report withdrawn.
Second reading.
Minority Report to B-Engrossed bill text posted
Senate Minority Amendments to A-Engrossed bill text posted
Minority Recommendation: Do pass with different amendments. (Printed B-Eng. Minority)
Recommendation: Do pass the A-Eng bill.
Work Session held.
IS_Impact HB 4148 A
Revenue Impact Statement
Public Hearing held.
IS_Impact HB 4148 A
Revenue Impact Statement
Referred to Finance and Revenue.
First reading. Referred to President's desk.
Third reading. Carried by Javadi, Walters. Passed.
Ayes, 40; Nays, 12--Andersen, Breese-Iverson, Bunch, Diehl, Harbick, Helfrich, Lewis, Owens, Reschke, Skarlatos, Wallan, Yunker; Excused, 4--Boshart Davis, Hartman, Scharf, Valderrama; Excused for Business of the House, 4--Elmer, McIntire, Osborne, Smith G.
Second reading.
House Amendments to Introduced bill text posted
Recommendation: Do pass with amendments and be printed A-Engrossed.
Work Session held.
IS_Impact HB 4148 7
Revenue Impact Statement
Amendment -7 adopted
Amendment -11 proposed
Amendment -6 proposed
Amendment -1 proposed
Work Session held.
Amendment -7 proposed
Amendment -11 proposed
Amendment -6 proposed
Amendment -1 proposed
Public Hearing held.
Referred to Revenue.
First reading. Referred to Speaker's desk.
d to resiliency grants. BACKGROUND: A 1% Transient Lodge Tax was established by HB 2267 (2003) to help fund Oregon Tourism Commission programs. In 2016, the legislatur
MENDMENT: No amendment. BACKGROUND: A 1% Transient Lodge Tax was established by HB 2267 (2003) to help fund Oregon Tourism Commission programs. In 2016, the legislatur
han September 15, 2034. BACKGROUND: A 1% Transient Lodge Tax was established by HB 2267 (2003) to help fund Oregon Tourism Commission programs. In 2016, the legislatur
“Digest: The Act would let local transient lodging tax money be used for grants to small dining and lodging businesses. The Act would also let the tax money be used for services provided by a special district in lieu of a city or county. The Act would change the split of tax uses from at least 70 percent for tourism and no more than 30 percent for local services to at least 50 percent and no more than 50 percent. The Act would let local governments with grandfathered tax laws use the tax money in the new split ratios. The Act would make local governments file a tax revenue report every other year for LRO to combine and submit to the legislature. The Act would have LRO study the uses of the net revenue as allowed under the Act and turn its findings in to the legislature. (Flesch Readability Score: 61.6). [ Digest: The Act would let local transient lodging tax money be used for city or county services provided by a special district in lieu of the city or county. The Act would change the split of tax uses from at least 70 percent for tourism and no more than 30 percent for local services to at least 40 percent and no more than 60 percent. The Act would let local governments with grandfathered tax laws use the new provisions of the Act. The Act would make local governments file a tax revenue report every other year. (Flesch Readability Score: 60.7). ] Allows net local transient lodging tax revenue to be used for resiliency grants for small businesses in the restaurant and lodging industry. Allows city and county services for which net local transient lodging tax revenue may be used to be provided either directly by the city or county or indirectly by a special district. Changes the division of allowable uses of net local transient lodging tax revenue from at least 70 percent for tourism-related expenses and no more than 30 percent for city or county services, to at least [ 40 ] 50 percent and no more than [ 60 ] 50 percent, respectively. Allows units of local government with restricted grandfathered local transient lodging tax regimes to take advantage of the new provisions of the Act. Establishes biennial reporting by local governments of amounts and uses of local transient lodging tax revenue , the reported information to be aggregated by the Legislative Revenue Officer and submitted to the Legislative Assembly . Directs the Legislative Revenue Officer to conduct a study of the percentage requirements for allowable uses of local transient lodging tax revenue as amended by the Act and to submit the findings to the Legislative Assembly. Takes effect on the 91st day following adjournment sine die.”
Oregon updates this record in place. This page uses the latest text; an exact original snapshot is unavailable.
Confirm with the official record.
Supplemental, source-linked analysis from project researchers and community contributors. It is separate from Oregon's official record.