Close

SeeSALT Blog

Updated:

California Revenue & Taxation Code Section 19308: Filing a Claim for Refund Beyond the Normal Time Periods in Section 19306

Under Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code Section 19306(a), a claim for refund typically must be filed within four years from the date the return was filed, four years from the last day prescribed for filing the return (determined without regard to any extension of time for filing the return) or…

Updated:

California Revenue & Taxation Code Section 19164: Defending Against the Accuracy-Related and Fraud Penalties

The accuracy-related and fraud penalties under Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code Section 19164 are generally determined in accordance with federal law. The federal counterparts to Section 19164 are I.R.C. Sections 6662-6665. Defending against the accuracy-related and fraud penalties can be difficult and requires a solid understanding of the applicable exceptions…

Updated:

California Revenue & Taxation Code Section 24425: Disallowance of Interest Expense Deductions

Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code Section 24425 operates to prevent taxpayers from deducting expenses incurred to generate nontaxable income. Analysis Expense attribution has become an important issue in California in light of the Ceridian, Farmer Brothers, and Abbot Laboratories decisions in which the dividends received deduction treatment under Cal. Rev.…

Updated:

Subpart F Issues Under a California Water’s-Edge Election

The California water’s-edge election has proved immensely popular with both foreign and domestic parent corporations potentially engaged in a worldwide unitary business. Many elections are made to reduce or minimize California franchise tax, while others are made to simplify or reduce the compliance burdens under California’s worldwide combined reporting method.…

Updated:

California 2004 State and Local Tax: Important Developments

Franchise Income Tax: Apportionment and Allocation of Business and Nonbusiness Income In General Motors Corp. v. Franchise Tax Board, the first of the six “gross receipts” cases in court in California to be decided in the Court of Appeal, the Second Appellate District addressed the issue of what the term…

Updated:

An Overview of California’s 2004 Tax Amnesty Legislation

Introduction As a result of discussions between Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and the California Legislature as part of the funding of the fiscal 2005 Budget Act, language to implement a tax amnesty program was included in Senate Bill (SB) 1100, which was written by the Senate Budget and Fiscal Committee. Amnesty…

Updated:

California Enacts New FTB and BOE Penalties Affecting Pending Audits, Protests, Appeals and Settlements

California corporate and individual taxpayers with pending audits, protests, appeals or settlement proceedings with the California Franchise Tax Board (FTB), or with comparable proceedings pending with he California State Board of Equalization (BOE) should pay particular attention to new penalties recently enacted by the Legislature and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger as…

Updated:

California Residency: Intent Not Enough to Change a Taxpayer’s Residence

For the first time in over 20 years, the California Court of Appeal has issued a published decision interpreting the California residency provisions of Revenue and Taxation Code section 17014. In Homer E. Nobel et al. v. Franchise Tax Board, the court addressed whether the taxpayers were residents of California…

Updated:

California 2003 State and Local Tax: Important Developments

Income and Franchise Taxation: Apportionment/Allocation and Business/NonBusiness Income In Appeal of Polaroid Corp., the State Board of Equalization (SBE) held that proceeds received by the taxpayer from apatent infringement lawsuit were business income and must be included in the (numerator and the denominator of the) sales factor. The SBE also…

Updated:

California 2002 State and Local Tax: Important Developments

Legislation: Income and Franchise Taxation 2002 Cal Stat. ch. 488 is the major tax bill for the 2002 Legislative Session that responds to California’s $23.6 billion budget gap: (1) it conforms California law to federal law relative to the bad debt reserve of large banks (California had permitted charge-offs to…