Establishes a framework for distributing a portion of the state's meals and rooms tax revenue to municipalities based on relative fiscal capacity.
relative to the formula of distribution of revenue from the meals and rooms tax.
I oppose HB 1474 because it doesn’t add new revenue — it just reshuffles existing Meals & Rooms funds and creates winners and losers among municipalities. Towns rely on this revenue for stable budgeting, and changing the formula adds uncertainty without fixing the underlying problem of state underfunding. This feels like moving money around instead of providing real property tax relief.
Please VOTE NO.
I oppose this bill.
Testimony Against NH HB1474: Concerns Over Revenue Distribution Formula The proposed HB 1474 seeks to alter the formula governing the distribution of revenue generated from the meals and rooms tax, a change that could profoundly impact local budgets and communities reliant on tourism. By shifting revenue sources based on this new formula, smaller municipalities may find themselves at a disadvantage, leading to budget shortfalls that could undermine essential services and infrastructure. Such disparities threaten the economic stability of these communities, which already struggle to compete with larger urban areas for both visitors and funding. Additionally, the lack of equity safeguards for smaller municipalities raises concerns about fairness in the distribution of tax revenue. Communities that depend heavily on tourism are already vulnerable to fluctuations in visitor spending, and redefining the revenue-sharing structure without thoughtful considerations could exacerbate these vulnerabilities. It is imperative that any changes to the meals and rooms tax revenue distribution ensure equitable treatment for all towns and cities, so that local governments can continue to support essential services, enhance tourism experiences, and foster community growth. Advocating for robust equity measures is vital in maintaining a balanced and fair taxation system that empowers, rather than undermines, local communities.
January 14, 2026 House Ways and Means Committee New Hampshire State House Concord, NH Re: Opposition to HB 1474 – Meals and Rooms Tax Distribution Change Dear Chairperson Janigian, Vice Chair Ulery, and Honorable Members of the Committee, On behalf of the Town of Durham, I am writing to express our opposition to HB 1474, which proposes changing the existing distribution formula for Meals and Rooms (M&R) tax revenue. Based on our review and the New Hampshire Municipal Association’s preliminary calculations, this change would result in a 54 percent reduction in M&R revenue for Durham. Durham is home to the University of New Hampshire, a major hub of educational, cultural, and economic activity for our state. Although roughly half of UNH students live in tax-exempt on-campus housing, they are fully engaged members of the broader Durham community and are included in our census population. These residents use local infrastructure, generate traffic, shop and dine locally, and require ongoing municipal services. Our police, fire, and emergency medical departments routinely provide assistance both on and off campus, adding substantial costs that are borne by local taxpayers. Under the proposed formula, removing student residents from Durham's population count would dramatically understate the true service demands placed on our community. The result would unfairly penalize Durham and other host communities such as Plymouth and Hanover that support large institutional populations. It is worth noting that these same individuals contribute directly to state revenues through local spending that generates Meals and Rooms taxes. Excluding them from the population calculation overlooks both their economic contribution and the municipal expenses they help create. The bill also raises practical concerns. Determining who qualifies as a resident under the proposed language would be extremely difficult to implement on an annual basis, and no clear methodology has been described. More importantly, we have not yet seen any official estimates from the State Treasurer or Department of Revenue Administration showing the likely impacts of these changes on each community. Moving forward without this essential information could create lasting inequities across the state. For these reasons, the Town of Durham respectfully urges the Committee to reject HB 1474. The existing formula, while not perfect, provides a fair and transparent basis for distributing state aid. Altering it in this way would undermine college communities that already shoulder an outsized share of service responsibility for tax-exempt institutions. Thank you for your time and consideration, and for your continued support of New Hampshire’s municipalities. All my best, Todd Todd I. Selig, Administrator Town of Durham, NH 8 Newmarket Rd., Durham, NH 03824 USA Office: 603.868.5571 | Mobile: 603.817.0720 www.ci.durham.nh.us | tselig@ci.durham.nh.us --
This bill would in effect reward communities that do not have businesses providing rooms and meals (and associated valuation. Instead give more money (% of take) to communities where revenue is generated to cover municipal expenses therefor.
I oppose this bill for various reasons. First, STR are already clearly defined under NH Law and subject to Rooms and Meals Tax. Expanding the definition of hotels to include STR creates confusion and is unnecessary. Many home owners in NH have to rent out their space on an interim or short term basis to cover increasing taxes and costs. Adding additional taxes or requirements that apply to actual hotels is not only costly but interferes with a landowners use of their property. I, like many others in the White Mountain region, have only been able to keep out families property (which we have owned since 1970) by welcoming families for short stays and then continuing to use the property ourselves. Additionally, the proposed legislation will be another step towards eroding the rights and liberties of New Hampshire landowners, the consequences of which have played out in Massachusetts. State interference with an individuals lawful use of their property, be it direct or indirect (via additional unnecessary requirements and taxes), is a step towards stripping said landowners of their rights and liberties. New Hampshire is not Vermont, Massachusetts, or Rhode Island. The proposed legislation will be another step towards stripping New Hampshire owners of their freedoms, choices, and privileges as property owners and members of the community.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.