Missouri
Lawsuit aims to block Missouri income tax amendment from ballot
A lawsuit filed Wednesday, May 13 seeks to knock a proposed constitutional amendment off Missouri’s 2026 ballot that would give lawmakers new power to expand sales taxes to eliminate the income tax, arguing legislators bundled too many subjects into one proposal and wrote misleading ballot language.
The lawsuit, filed in Cole County Circuit Court by attorney Chuck Hatfield on behalf of a Missouri resident, challenges a proposed ballot question that would ask voters to amend the Missouri Constitution to begin phasing out the state individual income tax.
The measure, approved by the legislature last month, is expected to appear on the November ballot unless Gov. Mike Kehoe moves it to another election. Kehoe has made eliminating the income tax one of his top priorities, arguing it would make Missouri more competitive with states that do not tax individual income.
But the lawsuit argues the proposal is constitutionally defective and should be blocked from any ballot. In the alternative, it asks the court to rewrite the summary statement voters would see.
The lawsuits central legal argument is that the proposal violates constitutional limits on ballot measures by including more than one subject and effectively amending multiple articles of the Missouri Constitution.
“This is precisely the logrolling harm the multi-article rule was designed to prevent,” the lawsuit argues, contending voters who support eliminating the income tax could be forced to also accept provisions they oppose, such as expanding the sales tax or changing how road funds and local taxes are handled.
The lawsuit also argues the proposal would improperly expand the constitutional role of the state auditor by requiring the office to calculate reduced tax rates triggered by the amendment. The petition contends that duty is not related to auditing the receipt or expenditure of public funds, which the Missouri Constitution says is the limit of the auditor’s authority.
Instead, the lawsuit argues, the amendment would give the auditor a new rate-setting or revenue-modeling role, including authority to calculate changes affecting tax rates set elsewhere in the constitution.
A spokesperson for Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, who was among the named respondents in the lawsuit, did not respond to a request for comment.
If passed, the proposal would direct lawmakers to set a revenue baseline and triggers for phased-in reductions in the top tax rate. It also allows five years for the legislature to write a new sales tax law, which must be directly tied to cuts in the top income tax rate in a manner supporters hope will not increase or decrease revenue.
Currently Missouri has an income tax with a top rate of 4.7% for taxable incomes greater than about $9,200 a year. The sales tax is 3% for general revenue, but earmarked state taxes and local options stack on top of that, creating a rate that is 7% to 8% in most locations and can be as much as 12% in some special districts.
The sales tax applies to physical goods and excludes services. The Missouri Constitution prohibits lawmakers from applying the sales tax to real estate transfers and any goods or services not currently taxed, but those provisions would not apply to any sales tax plan passed as a result of the constitutional amendment.
Missouri gets about 65% of its state revenue from income tax, about 22% from sales tax and the rest from other sources including a corporate income tax. To replace the revenue from the income tax without expanding coverage of the sales tax would increase the tax rate by as much as 8.5%.
State law exempts residential utility costs, prescription drugs and groceries from all or a portion of the current sales tax. There are also dozens of other sales tax exemptions, mainly tied to business operations as an economic development tool.
The lawsuit also challenges the ballot summary approved by lawmakers.
The summary asks voters whether the Missouri Constitution should be amended to “phase-out the individual income tax based on revenue growth,” “reduce personal property and other local taxes when local revenues increase,” “modify the sales and use tax to eliminate income tax and reduce local taxes” and “protect local funding for public schools and other purposes.”
The lawsuit argues that language is unfair and insufficient because it does not tell voters that the amendment would allow lawmakers to tax services now protected from sales taxes, would temporarily exempt certain tax increases from constitutional limits on new annual revenue and would permanently bar lawmakers from reimposing an individual income tax once it is eliminated.
The lawsuit takes particular aim at the word “modify,” arguing it fails to convey the breadth of the sales-tax authority voters would be granting lawmakers.
“A voter reading ‘modify the sales and use tax’ would not be apprised that the resolution authorizes the state to begin taxing services such as haircuts, legal fees, home repairs, medical services, accounting, and any other service currently exempt from sales tax,” the lawsuit states.
It also argues the phrase “protect local funding for public schools and other purposes” is argumentative because the word “protect” encourages support for the measure rather than neutrally describing what it does.
“If the people are allowed to have a fair vote, they’ll vote this amendment down,” Hatfield said in an interview May 13. “But the ballot summary the legislature wants to show them is just not fair or accurate.”
The governor called on lawmakers in January to place an income-tax phaseout on the ballot, saying voter approval would allow lawmakers to act next session.
Supporters of the amendment have argued that eliminating the income tax would help Missouri attract residents, jobs and investment. During debate over the proposal, Republicans framed it as a long-term economic growth strategy and a way to let Missourians keep more of what they earn.
Opponents have argued the plan would shift the tax burden toward sales taxes, raising costs for people who spend a larger share of their income on taxable goods and services. They have also warned that the ballot language does not make clear that voters would be authorizing a broader sales tax in order to replace revenue from the income tax.
The lawsuit asks the court to permanently block Hoskins from placing the measure on any ballot. If the court declines to do that, it asks for a new summary statement that “fairly and accurately conveys the central purpose and probable effects” of the amendment.
This story was first published at missouriindependent.com.
JACKSON COUNTY, Mo. (KFVS) – Four years after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and Missouri became the first state to ban abortion, Planned Parenthood is once again offering abortions.
Medication abortions are returning, too, after a Jackson County Circuit Court ruling. However, the state’s legal battle continues with court cases and a new ballot measure.
The past four years
Four years ago, Missouri politicians used a 2019 trigger law to ban abortion within 20 minutes of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned the limited federal abortion protections of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Abortion was put on the ballot in 2024 by an initiative petition that collected more than 380,000 signatures. Missouri became the first state to end an abortion ban by a vote of the people in 2024 and established the Right to Reproductive Freedom in the state constitution.
Another vote this year
This year will mark the second time Missourians vote on abortion. In November, Missourians will once again vote on abortion on the new Amendment Three. A “yes” vote is to ban abortions.
The new ballot measure has limited exceptions for rape, incest and medical emergencies, only if performed before the 12-week gestational period. It’s set to be on the statewide ballot for the November 2026 midterm election.
Bonnie Lee with 40 Days for Life said she hopes Missourians vote in favor of new restrictions in November.
“Missouri is waking up, and we will make a difference in November,” Lee said.
Missourians will see this question on their ballot:
“Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:
Repeal the 2024 voter-approved Amendment providing reproductive healthcare rights, including abortion through fetal viability;
Allow abortions for rape and incest (under twelve-weeks’ gestation), emergencies, and fetal anomalies;
Allow legislation regulating abortion;
Ensure parental consent for minors’ abortions;
Prohibit gender transition procedures for minors?”
A “yes” vote would essentially repeal the Amendment Three passed in November 2024. But this language may not be final. If lawyers appeal again, it can go to the Missouri Supreme Court.”
“I think voters are now seeing they didn’t know what they were voting on [in 2024]. There was a lot of misinformation, a lot of hidden information, a lot of legalese,” Lee said.
Maggie Olivia with Abortion Action Missouri said she wants the opposite outcome at the ballot box.
“I feel all the more invigorated having seen the consequences of abortion bans to do whatever it takes to stop this new abortion ban,” Olivia said.
Olivia called the new Amendment Three an overreach by Missouri politicians.
“There are some politicians in Jefferson City who don’t like the decision we just made in 2024, so they think they can muddy the waters, change the rules,” Olivia said.
Ongoing lawsuit
This month, a Jackson County Circuit Court judge issued a permanent injunction striking down several state abortion restrictions.
Planned Parenthood said the decision also clears the way for medication abortion to be available in Missouri for the first time since 2018 and allows Planned Parenthood to resume providing it.
“For too long, politicians forced patients to leave the state for an evidence-based and trusted form of abortion care. Now that care is coming home,” said Emily Wales, president and CEO of Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains.
Attorney General Catherine Hanaway criticized the ruling and said she plans to appeal to the Missouri Supreme Court.
“This radical decision gives abortion providers a free pass to police themselves,” Hanaway said in a statement. “My office will expeditiously appeal this dangerous decision to the Missouri Supreme Court.”
Copyright 2026 KFVS. All rights reserved.
Watch before buying a home ice cream machine
A practical guide to choosing an ice cream maker you’ll actually use.
Think you know the best ice cream shop in Missouri? Ask ten people, and you’ll likely get ten different answers.
Cheapism, a website focused on budget living, is weighing in on the debate with its recently released list of the best ice cream shops in every state. Here’s what it selected as Missouri’s best ice cream spot:
What’s the best ice cream shop in Missouri, according to Cheapism?
The media outlet selected the winners by scouring through Reddit threads, Yelp reviews, Google ratings and local favorites to find the best ice cream shop in every state.
Factoring all of that in, the honor of Missouri’s best ice cream shop goes to Clementine’s Ice Cream in St. Louis.
Clementine’s is a locally owned artisanal ice cream shop founded in 2015, known for its “naughty” (alcohol-infused) and “nice” (nonalcoholic) offerings, as well as non-dairy options.
The company has expanded from its beginnings as a single shop to multiple locations, boasting 11 shops across the Midwest, with three more on the way.
What’s Clementine’s best ice cream flavor?
Clementine’s also landed on Food & Wine’s list of essential ice cream flavors for all 50 states with its gooey butter cake ice cream.
The magazine praised the “super creamy” texture of the cream cheese ice cream and appreciated the large chunks of Clementine’s homemade gooey butter cake mixed throughout.
What is gooey butter cake?
For those not in the know, gooey butter cake is one of the Show Me State’s best-kept secrets, with its origins tracing back to St. Louis in the 1930s.
The cake allegedly came about when a baker accidentally reversed the butter-to-flour ratio while making a batch of coffee cake, resulting in a gooey, custard-like filling. Given it was the Great Depression, the bakery decided to sell the resulting cake rather than waste it, making it a hit with locals in the process.
It became so popular, in fact, that other bakeries in the city soon began making their own versions, and an iconic Missouri treat was born.
How to find a Clementine’s near you
Clementine’s has more than a dozen locations, mostly centered around St. Louis. It also has locations in Kansas City and Bentonville, Arkansas.
A Clementine’s is scheduled to open in Columbia this summer.
Check out this map to find the nearest Clementine’s location near you:
You can also get Clementine’s shipped directly to your front door via Goldbelly.
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (KFVS) – As more data centers are announced across Missouri, one state lawmaker wants to get rid of non-disclosure agreements.
Republican State Rep. Tricia Byrnes from St. Charles County organized a public hearing for Sept. 16 at the Missouri Capitol for lawmakers to discuss data center regulations. Any legislation that comes out of the hearing will have to wait until January to be introduced in the General Assembly. Byrnes said she hopes local communities take action before January.
The effort comes after Amazon and Google announced multibillion-dollar data center projects in Montgomery County, which Byrnes represents.
Montgomery County farmer Harry Cope said residents have concerns about how the projects have been handled.
“The transparency that’s gone on with all of this stuff in our county has been about like looking through muddy water,” Cope said.
Byrnes said Missourians are looking for state leaders to respond.
“Missourians should never take a bad deal. And right now, folks are waiting for Jefferson City to stand up and pay attention,” Byrnes said.
Byrnes is not proposing a complete statewide stop to data center projects. She said she wants to get rid of nondisclosure agreements for data center projects and create specific noise standards and water permits. She said she wants the process to happen in public.
Gov. Mike Kehoe, a Republican, has said he supports more data centers in Missouri, saying they are better for the economy.
“It’s about opportunity, good-paying jobs, investment in our community, better efficiency. And it’s about making sure Missouri remains on the forefront of next-generation technology,” Kehoe said.
Byrnes did not directly comment on whether Kehoe will support her legislation. She addressed a comment the governor made last week, when he implied foreign adversaries such as China are spreading misinformation about data centers.
“We have extremely intelligent people all across Missouri, and what I’m hearing now is this spin that they’re hearing stuff from China. I can tell you, no one from China asked me to have you here today,” Byrnes said.
Missouri House Democratic Leader Ashley Aune said there is an opportunity for lawmakers to craft legislation based on what Missourians want.
“I don’t have a proposal top of mind about what regulation would, should, can look like across the state. But what I will say is that we have a real opportunity to work with our voters,” Aune said.
Copyright 2026 KFVS. All rights reserved.
-
North Dakota1 minute agoFargo woman convicted in North Dakota fraud case now faces charges in Minnesota: A deeper dive
-
Ohio8 minutes agoProperty transfers in Marion County, sales range from $40K to $415K
-
Oklahoma11 minutes agoWhat are the Oklahoma City Thunder getting in Kentucky star Otega Oweh?
-
Oregon16 minutes agoOregon Announces $49 Million Payout to Inmates for Handling of Pandemic
-
Pennsylvania23 minutes agoPa. sees growth in over-65 residents, but overall population stagnates
-
Rhode Island26 minutes agoGETTING SUPPORT AT THE FORT – Jamestown Press
-
South-Carolina31 minutes ago250 years later, Revolutionary War artifacts still tell South Carolina's story
-
South Dakota38 minutes agoUS Rep. Dusty Johnson looks ahead after primary defeat
