BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó




                     SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE
                            Senator Lois Wolk, Chair
          

          BILL NO:  AB 1412                     HEARING:  7/3/13
          AUTHOR:  Committee on Revenue & TaxationFISCAL:  Yes
          VERSION:  5/24/13                     TAX LEVY:  No
          CONSULTANT:  Miller                   

             SALES & USE TAXES: CLAIM FOR REFUND: CUSTOMER REFUNDS
          

          Authorizes a person to irrevocably assign to a customer the  
          right to receive a refund under the Sales and Use Tax


                           Background and Existing Law  

           Sales & Use Tax  .  State law imposes a sales tax on  
          retailers for the privilege of selling tangible personal  
          property, absent a specific exemption.  The tax is based  
          upon the retailer's gross receipts from sales in this  
          state.  The law provides that any amount collected or paid  
          in excess of what is due under the sales tax law must be  
          credited by the Board of Equalization (BOE) against any  
          other amounts due from the person from whom the excess  
          amount was collected or by whom it was paid, and the  
          balance refunded.  

          When a sales and use tax is imposed on a customer, but is  
          an amount that is either not taxable or is in excess of the  
          taxable amount, the amount paid must be returned to the  
          customer upon notification by the BOE or the customer. 

           Contingency fees.   Federal law allows the Secretary of the  
          Treasury to regulate practitioners with cases before the  
          Internal Revenue Service (IRS).  IRS Circular 230 generally  
          spells out requirements for these practitioners, and also  
          regulates the conduct of anyone providing tax advice or  
          preparing tax returns for compensation, including  
          attorneys, certified public accountants, and enrolled  
          agents.  In 2009, IRS revised Circular 230 to bar  
          individuals practicing before the IRS from charging clients  
          contingency fees, with specified exceptions, because of the  
          potential to exploit the audit selection process and  
          compromise a practitioner's duty of independent judgment.   
          Federal law also applies an erroneous claim for refund  
          penalty equal to 20% of the amount of the claim that lacks  




          AB 1412 -- 5/24/13 -- Page 2



          a reasonable basis for the refund.  California does not  
          conform to this penalty.  Additionally, the American  
          Institute of Certified Public Accountants Code of  
          Professional Conduct precludes accountants from charging  
          contingency fees for preparing an original or amended tax  
          return, with specified exceptions.


          State law restricts commissions charged by certified public  
          accountants in specified circumstances (SB 1289, Calderon,  
          1998).  However, sophisticated cottage industries of  
          non-accountant tax consultants have grown considerably in  
          recent years, offering to amend a taxpayer's previous state  
          income tax returns seeking refunds of previous taxes paid  
          by claiming tax credits not included on the taxpayer's  
          original return.  The taxpayer compensates the consultant  
          as a percentage of the refund, providing a significant  
          incentive to file aggressive claims with questionable  
          justification.  As many of these consultants are neither  
          accountants subject to state law or codes of ethics, nor  
          practitioners covered by Circular 230, they may charge  
          taxpayers contingency fees without any limitation.


                                   Proposed Law  

          AB 1412 authorizes a person to irrevocably assign a  
          customer the right to receive a refund under the sales and  
          use tax law.  For example, a retailer may make an  
          irrevocable election to assign a customer the right the  
          right to receive the refund if all of the following  
          conditions are met:

             1.   The amount is in excess of the actual tax owed,  
               pursuant to existing law.
             2.   The irrevocable election to assign to the customer  
               the amount refunded is provided by a statement signed  
               by the customer authorizing the named customer to  
               receive a refund.
             3.   The signed statement is submitted to the BOE in  
               conjunction with the person's claim for refund.
             4.   The amount to be refunded is $50,000 or greater.  


                               State Revenue Impact
           





          AB 1412 -- 5/24/13 -- Page 3



          According to the BOE, the impact is indeterminable.  To the  
          extent that additional claims involving excess sales tax  
          reimbursement would be filed, this could result in a state  
          and local revenue loss.  



                                     Comments  

          1.   Purpose of the bill  .  This bill is sponsored by the BOE  
          to allow, under limited circumstances, a direct  
          reimbursement to a customer who was overcharged sales tax  
          reimbursement

          2.   Contingency fees  .  This bill sets up a refund mechanism  
          for customers who are due large refund amounts, in excess  
          of $50,000.  Under existing law, these refunds are owed and  
          must be paid.  The purpose of this bill is to ensure direct  
          and expedited refunds to these customers.  Given the  
          ability to assign a single customer the right to collect  
          the tax, this bill may create a cottage industry whereby a  
          third-party receives the reimbursement on behalf of a  
          customer.  Earlier this year, the Committee approved SB 434  
          (Hill & Wolk) which prohibited contingency fees in  
          connection with enterprise zone tax credits.  AB 1412  
          allows a similar opportunity for contingency fee  
          agreements.  The Committee may wish to consider amending  
          the bill to provide that along with the documentation  
          required by this bill, the taxpayer shall submit a  
          statement that he or she charged or paid any contingency  
          fees in connection with the services allowed by AB 1412,  
          and contingency fees charged or paid in connection with  
          those services are contrary to public policy and the  
          application is null and void.


                                 Assembly Actions  

          Assembly Revenue & Taxation             8-0
          Assembly Appropriations                      18-0
          Assembly Floor                          78-0


                         Support and Opposition  (6/27/13)

           Support  :  Board of Equalization (sponsor).





          AB 1412 -- 5/24/13 -- Page 4




           Opposition  :  Unknown.