WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

H 3143

Pardons

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Todd Rutherford

Exempts fuel sold to cities/towns for municipal use from Massachusetts Chapter 64A fuel excise, reducing state revenue and altering municipal purchasing/retail tax accounting.

Referred to Committee on Judiciary
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · H 3143

Summary — H 3143 (2025): "Pardons" / Exempting municipalities from the gas tax

Note up front: the official bill text file submitted for H 3143 includes material from two unrelated measures (one from Massachusetts concerning municipal fuel tax exemption and separate South Carolina statutory language concerning limited pardons for firearm possession). The primary Massachusetts measure below is the one identified by sponsor Representative Bradley H. Jones, Jr.; the South Carolina language appears to be an unrelated insertion and is summarized separately at the end for clarity.

Primary purpose (Massachusetts)

To exempt sales of motor fuel to a city or town — when the fuel is consumed for municipal purposes — from the excise tax imposed under Chapter 64A of the Massachusetts General Laws.

Key provisions

  • Inserts a new Section 7B into Chapter 64A (as of the 2022 Official Edition).
  • Text of Section 7B: “The sale of fuel to a city or town which having consumed the same for any municipal purpose shall be exempt from the excise established by this chapter.”
  • No additional definitions, certification, reporting, or administrative procedures are included in the bill text (e.g., “municipal purpose” is not defined; mechanism for claiming the exemption is not specified).

Who would be affected

  • Municipal governments (cities and towns) — would no longer pay the Chapter 64A excise on fuel they purchase and consume for municipal purposes (e.g., municipal vehicles, public works equipment).
  • Fuel retailers and distributors — would need to handle exempt sales to municipalities differently for excise accounting and remittance.
  • Commonwealth/state finances — reduced excise tax receipts to the Commonwealth to the extent municipalities shift purchases to exempt status.
  • Executive agencies (e.g., Department of Revenue) — would likely need to provide guidance, reporting rules, or implementing regulations if the exemption is enacted.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Budgetary: The bill would lower municipal operating costs for fuel but cause a corresponding reduction in state excise tax revenue; the magnitude is unspecified and would require a fiscal estimate.
  • Administrative: The bill does not specify how municipalities or sellers must document that fuel was consumed “for any municipal purpose,” creating potential need for recordkeeping, verification processes, or enabling regulations.
  • Equity and market effects: Could incentivize municipalities to centralize fuel purchasing to capture the exemption; effect on private consumers and commercial buyers is none.
  • Legal drafting: The provision is brief and would likely require clarifying amendments (definitions, effective date, refund/credit mechanics).

Procedural status and timeline (as provided)

  • Prefiled: 2024-12-05
  • Introduced / read first time: 2025-01-14
  • Referred to Committee on Judiciary (and, per other docket entries, also to the Committee on Revenue) on 2025-01-14 and 2025-02-27 respectively.
  • Senate concurred: 2025-02-27 (as listed)
  • Hearing scheduled: 2025-10-17 (committee hearing entries list times and room A-2; one entry shows rescheduling and a virtual hearing update)

Related bill

  • HD 1323 (listed as replacing H 3143 in docket material)

Note on unrelated insertion (South Carolina language)

The bill text file also contains South Carolina statutory language (S.C. Code Section 24-21-925) establishing a process for a limited pardon allowing certain persons convicted of felonies (not “crimes of violence”) to possess firearms for hunting only, with a $200 application fee split between the Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services ($100) and the State Law Enforcement Division ($100). That South Carolina provision is not part of Massachusetts General Laws and appears to be an erroneous inclusion in the same document.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.