Request By:
Senator Woodrow Stamper, Chairman
Senate Appropriations & Revenue Committee
Capitol Building
Frankfort, Kentucky 40601
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; Joseph R. Johnson, Assistant Attorney General
This letter is in response to your request for an Attorney General's Opinion, dated January 9, 1979, concerning the question of whether a so-called "revenue reducing bill" may be introduced in the Kentucky Senate. Section 47 of the Kentucky Constitution states as follows:
All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the house of representatives, but the senate may propose amendments thereto: Provided, No new matter shall be introduced under color of amendment, which does not relate to raising revenue.
Black's Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition, defines the term "raising revenue" as follows:
To levy a tax as a means of collecting revenue; to bring together; collect, or levy revenue. The phrase does not imply an increase of revenue. (Emphasis added).
The above definition is consistent with the interpretation of this phrase by the Kentucky Courts. In Dalton v. State Property Commission, Ky. 304 S.W.2d 342 (1957), it was held that the term "raise revenue" means to levy a tax as a means of collecting revenue.
Therefore, the term "raise revenue" does not imply an increase in the amount of revenue to be collected by the state. It does not imply an increase in the tax rate. By the same token, even though a tax rate may be decreased by the General Assembly, any such tax bill will still be considered a revenue producing measure. Therefore, the question becomes not whether more or less revenue will be produced by the legislation, but whether the legislation is, in fact, in the strictest sense of the word, a revenue measure. See Livingston County v. Dunn, Ky. 51 S.W. 450 (1932).
Any bill which can appropriately be considered a revenue measure must be introduced in the House of Representatives, irrespective of whether such bill increases or reduces the tax rate.