These are all of the taxes and fees bills proposed in the 2020 session. Each bill has its own bill number, please use your browser search feature to find the bill you are interested in. Return to the Colorado home page to pick a different bill category.

None of the text is the opinion of Engage. Each bill's description, arguments for, and arguments against are our best effort at describing what each bill does, arguments for, and arguments against the bill. The long description is hidden by design, you can click on it to expand it if you want to read more detail about the bill. If you believe we are missing something, please contact us with your suggestion. Some of these bills have the notation that they have been sent to the chamber's "kill" committee. This means that the leadership has decided to send the bill to the State committee even though it does not belong there based on its subject matter. This committee, in both chambers, is stacked with members from "safe" districts and the idea is to kill the bill without forcing any less safe members to take a hard vote. It is possible for a bill to survive the kill committee, but it is very rare.

Prime sponsors are given after each bill, with Senate sponsors in () and House sponsors in []. They are color-coded by party.

Some bills will have text highlighted in pink or highlighted in orange or highlighted in yellow. Pink highlights mean House amendments to the original bill; orange mean Senate amendments; yellow highlights mean conference committee amendments. The bill will say under the header if it has been amended.

Each bill has been given a "magnitude" category: Mega, Major, Medium, Minor, and Technical. This is a combination of the change the bill would create and the "controversy" level of the bill. Some minor bills that are extending current programs would be major changes if they were introducing something new, but the entire goal here is to allow you to better curate your time. Something uncontroversial likely to pass nearly unanimously that continues a past program may not be worth your time (and please remember, you can still read all of the minor bills!). Technical bills are here to round out the list. They are non-substantive changes.

House

Click on the House bill title to jump to its section:

MEGA

MAJOR

MEDIUM

MINOR

HB20-1022 Sales And Use Tax Simplification Task Force
HB20-1023 State Address Data For Sales And Use Tax Collection

TECHNICAL

Senate

Click on the Senate bill title to jump to its section:

MEGA

SB20-020 Reduce The State Income Tax Rate

MAJOR

MEDIUM

MINOR

TECHNICAL

HB20-1022 Sales And Use Tax Simplification Task Force (Williams (D), Tate (R)) [Kraft-Tharp (D), Van Winkle (R)]

From the Sales and Use Tax Simplification Task Force

Appropriation: None
Fiscal Impact: Negligible

Goal: Extend the sales and use tax simplification task force, refocus its mission on new tasks, and remove it from the sunset review process.

Description:

Extends the sales and use tax simplification task force for five more years. Adds more simplification and uniformity tasks for it to examine, as well as monitor the progress of recent legislation designed to make it easier to submit sales and use taxes while allowing for destination-based taxation, and removes the task force from sunset review.

Additional Information:

Specific areas the task force should consider are:

  • Making retail audits more uniform
  • Using a single form for state and local tax returns
  • Streamlining requirements for licenses
  • Making uniform the filing thresholds among various state entities
  • Simplifying use taxes
  • Simplifying how motor vehicle sales and use taxes are collected
  • Simplifying issuance of building permits and use taxes on building materials and equipment
  • Simplifying process to claim and administer various exemptions
  • Simplifying requirements for non-profits

Task force also shall get regular updates on progress of recently passed electronic sales and use tax system and encourage participation once it is online, as well as the purchase and development of a geographic information database to maintain jurisdictional boundaries and calculate appropriate tax rates. Also must:

  • Review how special district taxes add to overall complexity
  • Review how state standards and definitions match with local standards and definitions
  • Examine how the changes to the vendor fee are working
  • Explore eliminating requirement for taxpayers to use branch ID reporting
  • Explore an exemption for isolated or occasional sale of a business in an asset sale
  • Any other relevant topics


Auto-Repeal: July 2025

Arguments For:

The work here is still on-going, as we have come a long way with bills in the last few sessions but still have one of the most complicated sales and use tax setups in the country. Committees like this tend to be restricted to defined areas of study, so this bill opens up new ones for the committee to explore in order to further simplify our system here in Colorado. We also need to monitor how the large recent changes are doing. Legislative committees such as this one usually do not undergo sunset review. The legislature decides if it needs to keep going.

Arguments Against:

No committee should remove itself from the sunset review process. This committee only proposed two bills out of its allowable five this session and one of them was this one, so it is not so clear that it needs to continue.

How Should Your Representatives Vote on HB20-1022

HB20-1023 State Address Data For Sales And Use Tax Collection (Williams (D), Tate (R)) [Kraft-Tharp (D), Van Winkle (R)]

From the Sales and Use Tax Simplification Task Force

Appropriation: None
Fiscal Impact: Negligible

Goal: Give guidance to state regarding geographic information system database it is required to develop in association with bill from last session on destination-based sales taxation.

Description:

Requires minimum of 95% accuracy on a statistically valid sample of addresses from the database for the geographic information system state is to build for sales tax vendors to determine taxation jurisdictions and amounts. Holds vendors harmless from errors based on errors or omissions in system data. Requires state to create rules to administer bill. Auto-repeals 90 days after verification of a working and tested system goes online.

Additional Information: n/a

Auto-Repeal: 90 days after verified system is online

Arguments For:

The state needed just a little more guidance on this system specifications and the bill provides it. In general it is good practice to remove obsolete provisions from statute, thus the auto-removal.

Arguments Against:

The auto-renew also removes the section that holds vendors harmless in the event of errors in the database. That should stay.

How Should Your Representatives Vote on HB20-1023

SB20-020 Reduce The State Income Tax Rate (Sonnenberg (R)) [Pelton (R)]

Appropriation: None
Fiscal Impact: Loss of $100 million property tax exemption would have come from TABOR surplus in two years, plus potential additional losses in future years for same reason

Goal: Reduce the state income tax rate by 0.14%.

Description:

Reduces the state individual and corporate income tax rates from 4.63% to 4.49% and the alternative minimum tax by the same 0.14%.

Additional Information: n/a

Auto-Repeal: None

Arguments For:

The state is flush with cash, so much so that we are projecting three straight years of TABOR tax refunds and the refund in 2019 was so large it triggered an automatic temporary reduction of the tax rate down to 4.5%. Right now the state is projected to return $1.1 billion to state taxpayers in the next three years. This is a sign that our taxes are too high and that we should allow taxpayers to keep more of their own money, where they can put it to use bolstering our state economy rather than having the state sit on it for a year only to give some of it back.

Arguments Against:

Another recession is coming. It is inevitable and the only question is when and how hard will it hit. Balancing our state revenues around their peak is a recipe for disaster when we reach a valley. We cannot simply raise taxes back up in that circumstance, it would require voter approval on a general election ballot. We still haven’t fully recovered from the last recession, as we still owe our schools hundreds of millions of dollars. The state needs to use as much money as it can to get back to even from our last recession and put away some reserves to prepare for the next one. Colorado’s economy is booming with our current tax structure. Our unemployment is among the lowest in the country. The state is one of the fastest-growing in the country. We don’t need lower taxes. In addition, this bill causes the state to have to find tens of millions of dollars for property tax exemption refunds that would have been covered by TABOR refunds.


Three straight years of TABOR refunds along with hundreds of millions of dollars owed to our schools and billions in transportation needs shortfalls shows that we have a TABOR problem, not a tax problem. Lowering our taxes permanently will only make these funding issues worse. The solution continues to be, despite the results of the last election, to fix TABOR.


A tax cut done in this matter is highly regressive. Those earning under $100,000 would see less than $100 of tax relief, while those earning over $1,000,000 would get over $1,000. This is unacceptable.

How Should Your Representatives Vote on SB20-020