Section 23 Keller?True User Fees Exempt

• Library: Tax Law 2009

In Keller v. Marion County Ambulance District, 820 S.W.2d 301 (Mo. banc 1991), the Supreme Court of Missouri carved out an exception to Hancock’s “tax, license or fees” language for true user fees. Id. at 305. The Keller Court specifically held that increases in charges for services provided by an ambulance district were not subject to Hancock’s voter approval requirement. Id. More generally, the Keller Court reversed the Roberts v. McNary, 636 S.W.2d 332 (Mo. banc 1982), holding that Hancock’s “tax, license or fees” language applies to all charges imposed by a political subdivision. The Keller Court interpreted Missouri Constitution article X, § 22(a)’s, voter approval requirement to include only taxes and other charges that are labeled a “license” or “fee” but are, in substance, a tax. Keller, 820 S.W.2d at 305.

The Keller Court set out in a footnote five factors it viewed as “critical” in determining whether a revenue increase by a local government is an increase in a “tax, license or fee” requiring voter approval under Hancock:

1) When is the fee paid?—Fees subject to the Hancock Amendment are likely due to be paid on a periodic basis while fees not subject to the Hancock Amendment are likely due to be paid only on or after provision of a good...