Did Missouri approve the ballot wording for another county tobacco cigarette tax petition with dedicated uses?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2025. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Missouri law, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey approved the legal content and form of the proposed summary statement for Deirdre Hirner's initiative petition 2026-007. The statement described a constitutional amendment to let county voters set and control county taxes on tobacco cigarettes, whether submitted by the county governing body or by initiative petition, and to dedicate the proceeds solely to education, health and mental health, crime prevention, job creation, veterans' services, or other local use specifically approved by voters.
The wording of this petition matches petition 2026-006 almost word for word; it was one of a series Deirdre Hirner filed the same day to test slightly different phrasings of the same idea. The attorney general reviewed the statement under § 116.334, RSMo for legal content and form, and approved it without endorsing the petition.
What this means for you
County officials and voters
The reviewed statement described county voter control over a local tax on tobacco cigarettes, with the money confined to the listed purposes. Because the tobacco-tax petitions were nearly identical, a proponent could later choose which approved version to circulate for signatures.
Tobacco retailers
Had the measure passed, counties could set their own taxes on tobacco cigarettes. The opinion approves only the summary voters would read; it sets no rate.
Missouri voters and researchers
Opinion 10-2025 records approval of the summary statement for petition 2026-007. The attorney general expressly did not endorse it.
Common questions
Q: How does petition 2026-007 differ from 2026-006?
A: The summary statements are effectively identical. Filing multiple near-duplicate petitions lets a proponent lock in approved wording and pick one to circulate.
Q: What could counties do under the described amendment?
A: County voters could set and control a tax on tobacco cigarettes, with proceeds limited to the listed local uses.
Q: Did the attorney general endorse the tax?
A: No. The opinion approved the summary statement's legal content and form and disclaimed any endorsement.
Background and statutory framework
The Missouri Secretary of State requested review on December 30, 2024. Under § 116.334, RSMo, the attorney general reviews a proposed summary statement for legal content and form before circulation. The attorney general approved the statement on January 9, 2025.
The proposal was identified as Deirdre Hirner's petition 2026-007.
Citations and references
Statute: § 116.334, RSMo.
Source
- Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
- Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/10-2025.pdf
Original opinion text
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
ANDREW BAILEY
January 9, 2025
OPINION LETTER NO. 10-2025
The Honorable John R. Ashcroft
Missouri Secretary of State
James C. Kirkpatrick State Information Center
600 West Main Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Dear Secretary Ashcroft:
This opinion letter responds to your request dated December 30, 2024, for our review under § 116.334, RSMo of a proposed summary statement prepared for the petition submitted by Deirdre Hirner, 2026-007. The proposed summary statement is as follows:
Do you want to amend the Missouri Constitution to:
• allow county voters to set and control county taxes on tobacco cigarettes, whether submitted to county voters by the county governing body or by initiative petition; and
• use the county tobacco tax proceeds solely for education, health and mental health, crime prevention, job creation, veterans' services, or other local use specifically approved by voters?
Pursuant to § 116.334, RSMo, we approve the legal content and form of the proposed statement. Because our review of the statement is mandated by statute, no action that we take with respect to such review should be construed as an endorsement of the petition, nor as the expression of any view regarding the objectives of its proponents.
Very truly yours,
ANDREW BAILEY
Attorney General
OP-2025-010
Supreme Court Building
207 W. High Street
P.O. Box 899
Jefferson City, MO 65102
Phone: (573) 751-3321
Fax: (573) 751-0774
www.ago.mo.gov
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 2025 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Missouri statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.