In One Technologies LLC v. Franchise Tax Board, an out-of-state California corporate taxpayer filed suit in California trial court challenging the state’s mandatory single sales factor apportionment formula on the basis its passage in 2012 via voter initiative Proposition 39 unconstitutionally violated the “single subject rule.”
Articles Posted in California
CDTFA Proposes Amendments to Regulation 1706 (Drop Shipments) to Clarify that Marketplace Sales Are Generally Not Drop Shipment Transactions
The California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (Department) has given notice that it proposes to amend California Code of Regulations, title 18, section (Regulation) 1706, Drop Shipments. Regulation 1706, subdivision (c) provides that a drop shipper making a drop shipment must report and pay tax measured by the retail selling price of the property paid by the California consumer to the true retailer, unless the sale and use of the property are otherwise exempt. The proposed amendments clarify that marketplace sales are generally not drop shipment transactions and provide more guidance about how a person can overcome the presumption they are a drop shipper. Continue Reading ›
California’s Long-Awaited Market-Based Sourcing Regulation Amendments: Why Participate in the Formal Regulatory Process?
Five years and six interested parties meetings later, California is finally ready to proceed with the formal rulemaking process to adopt substantial amendments to its market-based sourcing rules. At the Franchise Tax Board’s September 9, 2021 meeting, FTB staff requested permission and received approval from its three-member Board to commence the formal regulatory process under California’s Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to amend California Code of Regulations, Title 18, section 25136-2 (Regulation 25136-2). Continue Reading ›
California Lawyers Association’s Taxation Webinar
Pillsbury SALT attorney Jeff Phang will present during CLA’s taxation webinar on September 13. Jeff is partnering with Annie Rothschild (Eversheds Sutherland) to present on the topic, “Recent Developments in California Income Tax Apportionment and Sourcing Law.”
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.
California Lawyers Association’s 2021 Annual Income Tax Seminar
Pillsbury SALT attorneys Robert Merten and Lexi Louderback will present during CLA’s Annual Income Tax Seminar on July 15.
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.
Hidden Within The Transparency and Fairness Act of 2017 Was The Little Noticed Exemption from OAL Review of the CDTFA’s Proposed Regulations
Much to the recent surprise of many in the tax community, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (“CDTFA”) is able to adopt or amend regulations without the normal review process by the Office of Administrative Law (“OAL”) under the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”). Continue Reading ›
COST Central West Regional State Tax Webinar
Pillsbury SALT attorneys Carley Roberts, Annie Huang and Robert Merten III will present at the COST Central West Regional State Tax Webinar on March 24.