WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2119

Tourism - As introduced, changes, from 90 days after the end of a fiscal year to 60 days after the end of a fiscal year, the deadline for each city levying a tax upon the privilege of occupancy under general law to file a report with the department of tourist development detailing the amount spent by the municipality and how those expenditures have been designated and used for tourism and tourism development. - Amends TCA Title 5; Title 6; Title 7 and Title 67.

114th Regular Session (2025-2026) Introduced by John Crawford

Cuts municipal occupancy tax reporting deadline from 90 to 60 days after fiscal year-end, accelerating state oversight of local tourism spending.

Placed on cal. Calendar & Rules Committee for 4/14/2026
#tourism
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2119

Legislative bill overview

HB 2119 accelerates the reporting deadline for Tennessee cities that collect occupancy taxes (hotel taxes) from 90 days after fiscal year-end to 60 days. Cities must report to the Department of Tourist Development how much they spent on tourism and tourism development initiatives. This administrative change affects financial reporting timelines across multiple sections of Tennessee code.

Why is this important

Faster reporting deadlines enable state oversight of local tourism spending to occur more quickly and improve budget tracking for the state tourism development system. However, this creates tighter administrative burdens on municipal finance departments that must compile and submit detailed expenditure reports within a compressed 30-day window instead of the current 90-day period.

Potential points of contention

  • Administrative burden on small municipalities: Smaller cities with limited finance staff may struggle to gather, audit, and report detailed tourism expenditure data within 60 days versus the current 90-day period
  • Data accuracy concerns: Compressed timelines could increase reporting errors if municipalities rush to meet the deadline, potentially creating compliance and audit issues
  • Lack of stated justification: The bill provides no explanation for why the 30-day reduction is necessary, raising questions about whether this solves a real problem or merely adds regulatory burden

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

Sign in to ask a question.