On September 28, 2024, California enacted Assembly Bill 2854, which imposes new disclosure requirements on local agencies (i.e., chartered or general law cities and counties) that have entered into local sales tax sharing agreements with retailers. Generally, pursuant to a local sales tax sharing agreement, a retailer will agree to establish a new sales or fulfillment center in a local jurisdiction and source its sales to that local jurisdiction. In exchange, the local jurisdiction will provide the retailer a rebate on the local sales tax revenue generated for the local jurisdiction.
Articles Posted in Local Tax
TEI’s 2024 Midyear Conference
SALT attorney Aruna Chittiappa will speak at TEI’s 2024 Midyear Conference on March 19.
60th Annual TEI New York Chapter Tax Symposium
Zachary Atkins will be speaking at the 60th Annual TEI New York Chapter Tax Symposium on December 6.
2023 COST Sales Tax Conference
Pillsbury SALT partner Robert P. Merten III will be presenting at the 2023 COST Sales Tax Conference taking place February 21-24, 2023.
California Governor Vetoes Sales Tax Bill Seeking to Require Large Online Retailers to File Informational Reports Detailing Sales by Destination
This week, Governor Newsom vetoed Senate Bill 792 (Glazer), which would have required large online retailers to include with their sales tax returns an additional schedule that reports gross receipts based on the “ship to” or destination location. The bill targeted online retailers with over $50 million in annual sales of tangible personal property. Qualifying online retailers that failed to report this information would have been subject to a penalty of $5,000.
California imposes a statewide sales tax on retailers for the privilege of selling tangible personal property at retail within the state, measured by the gross receipts from each sale. An additional sales tax of 1.25% (the Bradley-Burns Tax) is imposed on sales subject to the statewide sales tax, of which 1% is allocated to localities to use at their discretion and the remainder is distributed to county local transportation funds to support transportation programs. Continue Reading ›
Only Simple Majority Required (Again!): California Court of Appeal Holds SF’s Proposition G Citizen Initiative Did Not Require Supermajority Voter Approval; Reconsideration Request Pending
California’s Court of Appeal again held that a special tax measure placed on the local ballot as a citizen initiative required only a simple majority, not a supermajority, vote to pass.
Proposition G is a school parcel tax initiative that passed on San Francisco’s June 2018 ballot with 60.76% of the vote. The Proposition G school parcel tax is a special tax—in other words, the expenditure of its revenues is dedicated to a specific project or projects—and not a general tax, which revenues roll into the locality’s general fund. Here, the Proposition G school parcel tax funds are earmarked for educators’ salaries, staffing, professional development, technology, charter schools, and oversight of funding.
California Court of Appeal Says Tax for “Public Safety Services” and “Other Essential Services” Not a Special Tax
California’s Court of Appeal held a local sales tax ordinance (Measure K) was a general tax, not a special tax, and therefore its adoption did not require a two-thirds vote (supermajority) under California’s Constitution. A tax is “special” and therefore would require a two-thirds vote, when the expenditure of its revenues is dedicated to a specific project or projects. The plaintiffs argued that Measure K was a special tax because the funds were earmarked for the funding of the county’s public safety services and essential services. The Court of Appeal disagreed, concluding tax proceeds that are deposited in a separate account for unspecified “other essential services” could be used for any and all government services that qualify as an “essential service” and are therefore not dedicated to a specific project or purpose, indicative of a general tax. Thus, the court held Measure K was valid.
COST’s 2021 State Transaction Tax Webinar
Pillsbury SALT partner Jeffrey Vesely will present during COST’s State Transaction Tax Webinar on July 15. Continue Reading ›
San Francisco’s New Tax Provisions May Have Unintended Consequences
In a recent Tax Notes State article, Pillsbury lawyers Craig Becker, Breann Robowski, Richard Nielsen and Robert Merten examine San Francisco’s new tax provisions and unintended consequences they may have. Read more here.
Maryland Court of Appeals Rejects First Amendment Challenge to Local Tax on Outdoor Advertising Services
On February 15, 2021, the Maryland Court of Appeals issued a decision in Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. v. Director, Department of Finance of Baltimore City, Case No. 24-C-18-001778 (Md. 2021), upholding the constitutionality of a local ordinance that imposes an annual excise tax on businesses selling advertising space on off-site billboards. The tax in question applies only to businesses that own or control off-site billboards in the City of Baltimore i.e., billboards that are not located on the premises where the goods or services being advertised are offered for sale. Continue Reading ›