Demo by Wysor for Nevada lobbyists. "Sample Client (vape retailer)" is a made-up client to show how a client alert looks.
November 5, 2026 · Official meeting page
The Technical Advisory Committee on Future State Revenues met to review and approve forecasts for selected non-major general fund revenues and tax credit programs for the Economic Forum's November 16th meeting. Staff reported minor changes, including downward revisions to the transportation connection excise, cigarette, and liquor taxes, a $3 million per year correction removing North Las Vegas repayments from FY 2028 and FY 2029, and a $10.6 million increase from the Grant Sawyer building sale. The committee unanimously approved both the non-major revenue forecast ($885,925,750 for FY 2027) and the tax credit forecast with no changes ($803,433,750 for FY 2027).
Sample Client (vape retailer) came up at:
Schmidt
Good afternoon. I'd like to call to meeting this meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee on Future State Revenues. Can we have staff call the roll?
Michael Nakamoto (Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Council Bureau)
Ms. Kaufman?
Kaufman
Here.
Michael Nakamoto (Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Council Bureau)
Ms. Greenamyer?
Greenamyer
Here.
Michael Nakamoto (Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Council Bureau)
Mr. Leiser? Here. Mr. Thorley?
Thorley
Here.
Michael Nakamoto (Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Council Bureau)
Mr. Wright?
Wright
Here.
Michael Nakamoto (Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Council Bureau)
Ms. Jacobin? Chair Schmidt?
Schmidt
I'm here. Uh, thank you very much. We'll move to agenda item number 2, which is the first opportunity for public comment. Uh, do we have any public comment here in Carson City? Do we have any public comment, uh, on the phone or through Zoom?
Committee staff
Here, the public line is open and working, and there are no callers at this time.
Schmidt
Okay, thank you very much. We'll close agenda item 2 and move to agenda item 3, which is approval of the October 6th, 2026 meeting minutes. Do we have any discussion or a motion for the minutes?
Kaufman
I, I would move to approve the October 6th, 2026 meeting minutes.
Schmidt
Okay, we have a motion.
Leiser
I'll second it.
Schmidt
And we have a second. So motion by Ms. Coffin, seconded by Ms. Greenmeyer. Any discussion? All in favor, please say aye.
Committee member
Aye.
Schmidt
Anyone opposed? I think I heard everyone. So motion passes. Minutes are approved for October 6th. We can go ahead and move to agenda item number 4. I think we had 2 2s on that agenda. So just be careful when looking at the numbers. But review and approval of revenue forecasts for selected general fund revenues, including tax, license and fees, fines, for presentation to the Economic Forum's November 16th meeting. Mr. Nakamoto, can you please walk us through this agenda item?
Nakamoto (Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Council Bureau) Sample Client (vape retailer)
Thank you, Mr. Chair. For the record, my name is Michael Nakamoto and I serve as Chief Principal Deputy Fiscal Analyst with the Fiscal Analysis Division of the Legislative Council Bureau. You all have 5 tables that have been prepared as the meeting materials for today's meeting. They are— anybody who happens to be watching this meeting online, these materials are available on the Governor's Finance Office website if you go to budget.nv.gov/meetings. And then click on the Other Budget Division Meetings link, it will take you to the meeting materials for this meeting. So I'm going to just walk through really quickly the 5 tables, not spending a lot of time on them, but I will focus on a couple of the tables as part of the presentation. So the first that you have is Table 1. It's the one with the green and orange coloring. This is, as last time, these are the year-to-date revenues for the unrestricted state general fund for FY26 and FY27 through the latest month. They are current through the end of October. Next, you have Table 3, which are the agency fiscal and budget forecasts for each of the non-major revenue sources and tax credits that are going to be discussed today. And so these are the ones that are for this particular meeting so they would take into account any revisions. If you want to see the revisions, you can look at the table that is marked Table 3, Difference Agency Fiscal Budget, and this will tell you how the forecast changed for each forecaster in each fiscal year between the October meeting and this meeting today. And then lastly, the 2 tables that I'm going to spend the most time on The first is Technical Advisory Committee General Fund Revenue Forecast, November 16th, 2026. This is the proposed consensus forecast that we will be presenting for your consideration and potential approval today. And then the last one is marked Difference Technical Advisory Committee, November 16th, 2026 versus October 14th, 2026. And this is the difference in the forecast how it changed between what we are proposing today and then what you approved at the previous meeting. So with that background, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, I'm going to walk through— and I'm not going to spend a lot of time on these. I'm just going to go through some of the highlights of it. If there are any questions that any of you have about any of the forecasts or any of the changes that I don't discuss, please feel free to ask them. But again, because the changes are fairly minor, I didn't want to bog down and spend a lot of time discussing relatively minor changes. With respect to the gaming taxes, you can see that there were a few changes, but the big one is for advanced license fees that increased by $375,000 in FY 2027. This was the Gaming Control Board's forecast. They basically have better information on new licensees between now and the last time, and so they anticipated anticipate additional revenue to come here. With respect to the transportation connection excise tax, this was revised downward, and it was primarily the Fiscal Analysis Division who had the downward revision. The second month of collections came in a lot weaker than expected, and so for our forecast to hold, it we didn't see the growth there. We also had a slight downward revision to our visitors forecast, which is not necessarily included in all of this, but it's what we use for developing a lot of our forecasts. And so with those changes, and I believe there was a downward revision by the Department of Taxation as well, that brought the forecast down by about $650,000 in FY27, just under $1 million in FY2028. 28, and about $935,000 in FY 2029. The cigarette tax, you can see that there are downward revisions, probably more drastic in, in the first year, but then there were downward revisions in FY 28 and FY 29 as well. And this was a combination of factors. The second month of revenues did not come in nearly as strong. And just a different outlook on how that tax is going to perform going forward. Again, there's nothing on page 2. So if you want to skip to page 3, I think there are a couple that are worth mentioning here. The other— or the— sorry, the liquor tax, GL3050. You can see that there were downward revisions. Okay. In all 3 fiscal years. If you actually went and looked at the Table 3 difference, you would see that that's primarily driven by both the Governor's Finance Office and the Department of Taxation reducing their forecasts. But the Fiscal Analysis Division, after getting some more information from the department and reevaluating the tax, we drastically increased ours. And it kind of netted out to this, where it was a fairly slight Decrease in the tax. Likewise, with the other tobacco tax, you can see that there are increases of in the mid-$500,000 range in all 3 fiscal years. This is, again, a reevaluation of the tax, I think, by both the Department of Taxation and the Governor's Finance Office. We slightly reduced ours, but then when you took the average Of the forecasts, it kind of worked out in that way. And we originally had, and we continue to have, the average of the agency forecast and the Fiscal Analysis Division forecast for that. So that's really it for taxes. The rest are— I don't know if there's anything worth mentioning. And then lastly on that page is tax credits, which we'll talk about in the next agenda item. Okay. So, Mr. Chair, I don't know if this is a good place to stop for any questions on taxes or if we can keep going.
Other tobacco tax forecasts rose by roughly $550,000 per year while cigarette taxes were revised downward, showing where state revenue expectations are shifting and where tax policy attention may follow.
Schmidt
Any questions? Okay, I think we can keep going.
Nakamoto (Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Council Bureau)
Okay. Thank you again, Mr. Chair. Michael Nakamoto with the Fiscal Analysis Division, for the record. Turning to page number 4 under licenses, the most drastic change that you can see there is for the first one, GL 3101 insurance. Insurance licenses. This had an upward revision, and it was primarily driven by the Fiscal Analysis Division increasing its forecast. We looked at this and we thought that it was growing a little stronger in the first few months than we had anticipated, so we added some revenue. But then when you average it out, it kind of reduced that increase since the previous forecast and this forecast were the average of the agency. Okay. The fiscal forecast and the budget forecast. The Secretary of State, you can see that there are fairly minor revisions for a few of them. This is primarily, again, fiscal, doing revisions to our forecast based on what we're seeing in terms of actual revenues through year to date. And then that's really it for licenses. Under fees and fines, You can see that probably the biggest ones to talk about are insurance fines, GL3242. This again was the Fiscal Analysis Division increasing its forecast based on year-to-date fine activity that's been received, and then that kind of worked its way through the forecast. And then with the short-term car lease, GL3066, you could see downward revisions That. We don't have any actual collection data for this tax yet because it is collected and remitted on a quarterly basis. The reduction, though, is driven by the Fiscal Analysis Division. We reduce— when we reduced our visitor forecast, it flows through this. And so given the revised visitor outlook, it brought this tax down very slightly. by in the neighborhood of $100,000 per fiscal year. So that's it for fees and fines. So then on the next page, this is where the bulk of the change in terms of dollar amounts are going to be. So under use of money and property, the first thing that I'll mention is GL 4408, the Governor's Technology Office repayments. When I presented this to you at the last meeting, I had mentioned that the numbers that we had in there were the best information that we had and that we were working with GTO to get the latest and greatest numbers. That occurred, so our office along with the Governor's Finance Office worked with GTO to get the latest and greatest numbers. So what you have in here is what was— what we believe are the current numbers. And so really all that changed is there are a couple of the repayments where you can see that amount went down in FY 2028 and FY 2029. Otherwise, there were not a lot of significant changes in terms of the GTO repayments. Where there is a significant change in the repayments though is under GL4102, the Windsor Park relocation repayment from the City of North This was an error by us that we didn't catch until after the meeting last time. When that legislation was approved in the 2023 session, it was based on a $12 million appropriation that was made to the Housing Division to be paid by the City of North Las Vegas using their consolidated tax or C-Tax revenue. And it was $3 million a year for 4 years. And because apparently I can't count, I can't count. That the first fiscal year was FY 2024, and so the last fiscal year is FY 2027. So it was our error to have it in there in 2028 and 2029, and as a result, we reduced the forecast by $3 million per fiscal year to account for that. Going down to other revenue, there are 2 that I'll mention here. One of them had a change and one of them Did not. The first is excess property sales, GL3222. This was also one where I made a misstatement, I guess is the best way to put it, at the last meeting, because we had a forecast in that was fairly substantial. It was about $28 million or $18 million. It was our assumption that that was the Grant Sawyer money. It turns out that it was not the Grant Sawyer money. It was a number of other properties that were being sold. Okay. Uh, by state lands. So we reached out to DCNR to get some clarification on that, and they actually provided us a revised number that takes into account adding about $10.6 million for the Grant Sawyer sale. So that is the, the net increase of the $10.6 million that you see there. That is the sale of Grant Sawyer. Uh, Everything else was the DMV building in Henderson, the old armory building here in Carson City, and a couple of other things down in Clark County. That made up the original forecast, but the increase that you see here is specific to the Grant Sawyer sale. And then lastly, GL-3255, unclaimed property. There are no changes to this forecast, and Neither the Treasurer's Office nor the Fiscal Analysis Division made any changes to our forecasts. And speak— I'm not going to speak for the Treasurer's Office, although I believe Ms. Anthony could. She's on the call on the Zoom if she wanted to, if there were any questions for the Treasurer's Office. Okay. Based on the information that we had when I was looking at the unclaimed property and what was coming in and going out, it was fairly low. But I was also looking at it before the Nevada Day weekend. In fact, I was looking at it on that Friday, and that is before the deadline for a lot of the abandoned property to be turned over each fiscal year, I believe. Right. That has to happen on October 31st. So when you're looking at it on October 30th and seeing a low number, you're like, oh, there's probably going to be some more money that comes in. And sure enough, I just went and pulled Dawn and the holder reports, the biggest category had about $57.8 million deposited just this week. So, and it was only at about $70 million before. So— Right now, we're kind of in range of where we were last fiscal year. The obligations are probably still a little lower. I didn't look at the obligations, but not having enough information to change the forecast, we didn't change the forecast. So that's why you see what you see there for the forecast. So when we get down to the bottom line, Mr. Chair, The total for FY 2027 of $885,925,750, that is a decrease of 1.2% compared to actual FY 2026 revenues or collections for all of these non-major revenues. And it represents an increase of $10,581,000 $900 from the forecast that was presented to you and approved at the last meeting of this body. Again, that, that $10.6 million, that's more or less the Grant Sawyer money put in. Otherwise, there were not a lot of changes. For FY 2028, the total of $850,796,814 is a decrease of 4% compared to the FY 2027 forecast and is a reduction of $3,881,462 from the previous forecast. Again, primarily Windsor Park, but then a few things here and there that brought it down just a little bit more. And then for FY 2029, the total of $859,194,574 is a 1% increase compared to that FY 2028 forecast. Thank you. And is a reduction in the total forecast of $3,293,662 from the previous forecast approved by this body, again, primarily driven by taking out the $3 million for Windsor Park that we put in by mistake. So that is all I had as kind of the brief overview of this. Again, there were not a lot of changes, but if there are any questions— Thank you. I can try my best to answer them. Thank you.
Schmidt
Do we have any questions? Okay, Mr. Leiser.
Leiser Sample Client (vape retailer)
Thank you, Michael. I don't know— sorry, Mr. Nakamoto. I don't know if this is for you or maybe Ms. Scott, but on the— and I'm sorry to go back, but on, I think it was maybe page 3, the other tobacco tax, we've got increases Just over $550,000 for each fiscal year. When we met last month, there was some discussion around a California law change that the department felt was impacting revenue collections on this, and I think that they were going to provide some follow-up information. Maybe if we could get some clarification on that law change. Either from you or Ms. Scott.
A committee member asked for clarification on the out-of-state law driving other tobacco tax growth, signaling lawmakers are scrutinizing this revenue source that directly affects the client's product line.
Nakamoto (Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Council Bureau) Sample Client (vape retailer)
Thank you, Mr. Leiser. Michael Nakamoto with the Fiscal Analysis Division, for the record. I can actually answer this one, and then Ms. Scott can follow up if I misstate the information that I am present or providing. So the, um, the Department of Taxation is believing that a lot of the increases in the other tobacco tax were specifically related to changes in laws from California. Basically, California rather recently passed laws that banned certain types of vape devices, flavored vape devices, and that sort of thing. And because that sort of thing doesn't necessarily eliminate the demand, there is a belief that there is cross-border effects. That is, people in California who no longer could purchase or no longer can purchase those devices come to Nevada and purchase them here because they are still legal here. So that is the information that at least that was relayed to me. Ms. Scott is on the Zoom if she wants to add anything or correct anything that I had to say.
The Department of Taxation attributes higher other tobacco tax collections to California flavored vape bans pushing buyers into Nevada, a trend that could draw legislative attention to vape products.
Scott (Department of Taxation)
Good afternoon, this is Erica Scott, economist with the Department of Taxation. What Mr. Nakamoto has mentioned is Uh, what we had discussed here at the agency with our excise team. Um, they had just noted that those, uh, flavored tobacco bans, um, and an increasing, um, uh, strictness with some of the legislation since, uh, 2022 and beyond, um, has affected business in California. And they're seeing increased transaction in Nevada based on that.
Schmidt
Thank you. Anyone else? Yes. Chair, can I ask another question?
Leiser
Yeah, please. Thank you. And Mr. Nakamoto, I'm sorry I didn't give you a heads up. So if you don't have this information, I understand, but I'm curious, for the FY27 consensus projection, the $85,925,750 number, do you know how that compares to the amount of these that was projected for these revenues in the May 2025 Economic Forum Technical Advisory Committee? and any adjustments for legislative action?
Nakamoto (Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Council Bureau)
Thank you, Mr. Leiser, for the question. Michael Nakamoto with the Fiscal Analysis Division, for the record. I can answer this question because I did actually do the math. So the legislatively adjusted May 1st, 2025 forecast for the non-major revenues for FY 2027 was $774 million $263,914. So the amount of $885,925,750 is $111,661,836 higher than what was approved by the Economic Forum after legislative adjustments from the May 1st, 2025 forecast for FY 2025. Thank you.
Leiser
And then similarly, if you have it, do we know for the consensus projections for FY28 and '29 combined how they compare to these revenue sources that were approved by the Forum and Technical Advisory Committee in May 2025, adjusted for legislative action? In other words, how much more revenue from these revenue sources are we looking at based on the projections from May to what we're considering today?
Nakamoto (Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Council Bureau)
Thank you, Mr. Leiser, for the question. Michael Nakamoto with the Fiscal Analysis Division, for the record. What I do have in front of me is the comparison of the '25-'27 biennium, so the current biennium, Which is the FY26 actual plus this revised FY2027 forecast, and then the '27-'29 biennium. So the FY28 and '29 actuals, that math I do have. So the '25-'27 biennium, so the FY26 actual, the FY27 forecast is $1,782,000,000. Okay. $460,410. The combined FY28 and '29 forecast is $1,709,991,388. So the difference between the 2 biennia is actually a decrease of $72,469,022. So doing the The other part of the question, it may not be where you were going. If you were to look at a comparison of what the forecast was for the '25-'27 biennium to this forecast for the '27-'29 biennium, so comparing May 1st of '25 to where we are now, I would take that $72.4 million decrease and then add back About $130.6 million, which is where FY26 ended above the forecast. So the total— when you go back to FY2026, the forecast for all of these revenues was $765,934,261. We finished $130,600,000. Okay. $600,399 above that. So when you do a comparison of forecast to forecast, this biennium is about $58 million higher. But when you're actually doing a comparison using the actual revenues, FY28 and '29 are expected to be about $72.5 million lower than the FY26 actual and the revised forecast for FY27.
Leiser
Thank you, Mr. Nakamoto. Appreciate all of the context in the response to the question. Thank you, Chair.
Schmidt
Any other questions? If we don't have any, then we can take a motion for agenda item 4 about the consensus forecast.
Kaufman
Mr. Chairman, I would make a motion to approve the revenue forecast for the minor revenues.
Leiser
Okay, I'll second that, sir.
Schmidt
Uh, so motion, Ms. Kaufman, second, Mr. Leiser. Uh, all— any discussion? All in favor say aye.
Kaufman
Aye.
Schmidt
Any opposed? Okay, motion passes. Uh, we can proceed to agenda item Number 5, review and approval of forecasts for various tax credit programs.
Nakamoto (Fiscal Analysis Division, Legislative Council Bureau)
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, Michael Nakamoto with the Fiscal Analysis Division, for the record. To just give a brief recap, the tax credit forecasts come from staff in working with a number of different agencies, so the Governor's Office of Economic Development, the Nevada Film Office within GOED, The Housing Division at the Department of Business and Industry, the Department of Taxation, the Las Vegas Stadium Authority for the Major League Baseball stadium credits, and so on. That was probably more information than you needed for me to say there are absolutely no changes to any of these forecasts for the simple reason that most of the— we don't have sufficient information on the revenues that The taxes can be used against. The first quarter of the gaming or the insurance premium tax and the modified business tax are not going to be reported until the end of November. We had another month of gaming, but again, it was not enough for us to revise any of these forecasts. So what you saw back in November or in October is what you see now. And so when you get down to the bottom line, The total of FY— for FY 2027 of $803,433,750 is 5% below the FY 2026 actual of $845,824,612. And so that change in the percentage from 1.2% -1.2% to -5% is largely due to the baseball stadium transferable tax credits that were not taken in FY 2026, but they are in the forecast for FY 2027. So that's driving that 3.8% gap. And then in FY 2028, the $764,274,867— I'm sorry. $782,638,574 is a 4.9% decrease compared to FY 2027 net of tax credits. And then in FY 2029, the $782,638,574 is a 2.4% increase compared to the 1% gross. And that's primarily due to the expiration or the Basically, we run out of affordable housing tax credits, so that goes from $9.2 million in FY 2028 to zero. So getting that money back into the state general fund increases that growth rate, uh, net of tax credits. So that's all I had on this agenda item, Mr. Chair. I am open for any questions. Thank you.
Schmidt
Any questions? Okay, don't see any, so we can take a motion on the tax
Kaufman
Mr. Chair, I would make a motion to approve the forecast for the various tax credits.
Leiser
Second.
Schmidt
Motion by Ms. Coffin, second by Mr. Leiser. All in favor say
Kaufman
aye.
Committee member
Aye.
Kaufman
Aye.
Leiser
Aye.
Schmidt
Aye. Any opposed? No. Okay, motion passes. Uh, we have the Taxes approved. We have the tax credit projections approved. That takes us to agenda item number 6, final opportunity for public comment. Anyone here? Anyone on Zoom?
Committee staff
Thank you, Chair. The public line is open and working, and there are no callers at this time for public comment.
Schmidt
All right, thank you very much. Thank you, members of the committee. Thank you to all the staff. Uh, with that, we are adjourned. Have a great day. Thank you.