BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 209|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 209
Author: Lieu (D), et al.
Amended: 9/11/13
Vote: 21
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE : 6-1, 5/1/13
AYES: Knight, Beall, DeSaulnier, Emmerson, Hernandez, Liu
NOES: Wolk
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-0, 5/23/13
AYES: De Le�n, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: Walters, Gaines
SENATE FLOOR : 34-3, 5/30/13
AYES: Beall, Berryhill, Block, Calderon, Cannella, Corbett,
Correa, De Le�n, DeSaulnier, Emmerson, Evans, Fuller, Gaines,
Galgiani, Hernandez, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno,
Lieu, Liu, Monning, Nielsen, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Roth,
Steinberg, Torres, Walters, Wright, Yee
NOES: Anderson, Wolk, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Hancock, Knight, Vacancy
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : Not available
SUBJECT : Income taxes: exclusion: deferral: qualified
small business stock
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill partially reinstates the income exclusion
CONTINUED
SB 209
Page
2
and deferral provisions for gain from the sale or exchange of
qualified small business stock (QSBS), as defined, for taxable
years beginning on or after January 1, 2008, and before January
1, 2013.
Assembly Amendments remove the continuous appropriation for the
General Fund, and set a sunset date of January 1, 2016.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1.The United States Constitution and discriminatory taxes . The
U.S. Constitution grants the power to Congress to "regulate
Commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states" a
provision widely known as the Commerce Clause (Article I,
Section 8). If Congress fails to regulate interstate commerce
wholly or in part, the U.S. Supreme Court has asserted
consistently that the Constitution still precludes states from
doing so, known as the "dormant" or "negative" Commerce
Clause.
2.The QSBS exclusion . As originally enacted, the Internal
Revenue Code allowed taxpayers to defer the entire gain or
exclude from income 50% of the gain from the sale of QSBS in
specified circumstances, known as the "QSB exclusion." In
1993, California enacted its own QSB exclusion, seeking to
draw more investment into California-based firms. Taxpayers
could have claimed a deferral or income exclusion on the gain
on the sale of the stock, subject to a cap, if:
At issuance, the Corporation is a "C" Corporation with
less than 50 million in aggregate gross assets,
The taxpayer acquires stock at original issue, either in
exchange for money, other property, or as compensation for
services provided to the Corporation,
The taxpayer holds the stock for five years, and
At the date of issuance, the Corporation is a qualified
small business, and during the holding period, meets the
active business requirements,
CONTINUED
SB 209
Page
3
Among other requirements, to be a qualified small business, a
corporation must have 80% of its payroll located in California
at the time of issuance. To meet the active business
requirement during the holding period, a firm must continue to
have at least 80% of its payroll in California and 80% (by
value) of the assets of the corporation used in the active
conduct of a qualified trade or business in California for
substantially all of the holding period.
This bill:
1.Provides that, for taxable years beginning on or after January
1, 2008, and before January 1, 2013, a taxpayer may exclude
from gross income, under the Personal Income Tax (PIT) Law,
38% of any gain attributable to the sale or exchange of QSBS
held by the taxpayer for more than five years.
2.Limits the aggregate amount of eligible gain for the taxable
year, in the case of one or more dispositions of QSBS by a
taxpayer, to the greater of the following:
A. Ten million dollars, reduced by the aggregate amount of
eligible gain taken into account by the taxpayer for prior
taxable years and attributable to dispositions of QSBS, as
provided.
B. Ten times the aggregate adjusted basis of QSBS issued by
the corporation and disposed of by the taxpayer during the
taxable year.
1.Defines a QSBS as a stock in a "C" corporation that is
originally issued after August 10, 1993, if both of the
following requirements are met:
A. As of the date of issuance, the corporation is a
qualified small business.
B. The stock is acquired in exchange for money or property,
or as compensation for services provided to the
corporation, as specified.
1.Defines a "qualified small business" as a domestic "C"
corporation, provided all of the following apply:
CONTINUED
SB 209
Page
4
A. The aggregate gross assets of the corporation at all
times on or after July 1, 1993, and before the issuance did
not exceed $50 million;
B. The aggregate gross assets of the corporation
immediately after the issuance do not exceed $50 million;
C. At least 80% of the corporation's payroll, as measured
by total dollar value, is attributable to employment
located within California; and,
D. The corporation agrees to submit reports to the
Franchise Tax Board (FTB) and to shareholders as the FTB
may require to carry out the purposes of the QSBS statutes.
1.Specifies that a stock in a corporation shall not be treated
as a QSBS unless, among other requirements, during
substantially all of the taxpayer's holding period for the
stock, the corporation meets a new non-discriminatory active
business requirement, as provided.
2.Authorizes a taxpayer to elect to defer gain from the sale of
QSBS made after August 5, 1997, and before January 1, 2013,
provided that the taxpayer held the QSBS for more than six
months, the gain is not treated as ordinary income for
purposes of the PIT law, and the taxpayer acquires a
replacement QSBS within 60 days of the date of the sale.
3.Waives the imposition of penalties and accrual of interest
with respect to the additional taxes assessed as a result of
the court decision in Cutler v. FTB (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th
1247, for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1,
2008, and before January 1, 2013, and allows the affected
taxpayers to enter into a written installment payment
agreement with the FTB for the payment of those taxes over a
period not to exceed five years.
4.Allows taxpayers to file a claim for credit or refund,
resulting from this bill, for taxable years beginning on or
after January 1, 2008, and ending before January 1, 2009,
within 180 days of the effective date of this bill.
5.Makes legislative findings and declarations regarding the
CONTINUED
SB 209
Page
5
public purpose served by the bill.
6. States that the bill's provisions are not severable and, if
any provisions of this bill or its application are held
invalid, the invalidity shall apply to other provisions or
applications of this act, except for those provisions
relating to the waiver of penalties and interest.
Background
Cutler v. FTB. Frank Cutler sued the FTB when it disallowed a
1998 gain deferral for one stock that it determined did not meet
the requirement to be treated as QSBS. Cutler argued that the
FTB was wrong and the stock did meet the requirements, but even
if it didn't, the requirement discriminated against interstate
commerce in violation of the dormant commerce clause of the U.S.
Constitution. The Board of Equalization decided against Cutler,
but he paid the tax and filed suit against FTB in Superior Court
in 2009, represented by noted tax attorney Marty Dakessian.
The trial court sided with FTB because Cutler still could not
document that the corporation that issued the stock in question
met the active business requirement, and that Cutler did not
prove the law was discriminatory. However, the Second District
Court of Appeal reversed, ruling the QSB law was discriminatory
on its face, citing Fulton:
"A regime that taxes stock only to the degree that its issuing
corporation participates in interstate commerce favors
domestic corporations over their foreign competitors in
raising capital among North Carolina residents and tends, at
least, to discourage corporations from plying their trades in
interstate commerce."
The Appeals Court added that a discriminatory tax benefit is no
different than a discriminatory tax. Cutler v. FTB. 208
Cal.App.4th 1247 (2012). The Court cited two cases where the
California Supreme Court invalidated California tax statutes as
discriminatory: Ceridian Corp. v. FTB 85 Cal.App.4th 875
(2000), that invalidated Revenue and Taxation Code Section
24410, which provided for a dividend received deduction for
dividends paid by an 80% or more owned insurance corporation to
the extent that the insurance corporation was subject to the
California gross premiums tax, and Farmer Brothers v. FTB 108
CONTINUED
SB 209
Page
6
Cal.App.4th 976 (2003), that allowed for a dividend received
deduction to the extent that the dividend payor was subject to
California corporate income or franchise tax. Similar to those
cases, the Court in Cutler found the statutory scheme
discriminatory on its face, and remanded the case to the trial
court to calculate the refund, declining a refund request. The
Court also did not attempt to sever unconstitutional aspects of
the statute from the non-discriminatory ones. FTB did not
appeal.
On December 21, 2012, FTB issued notice 2012-03 stating that
because the Appeals Court held the statutory scheme of the QSB
exclusion discriminatory, the only possible remedy that FTB as
an administrative agency bound by California Constitution's
Article 3, Section 3.5 could issue that would treat all
taxpayers the same was to invalidate all QSB deferrals and
exclusions taxpayers claimed in each taxable year within the
statute of limitations, which is 2008, while allowing refund
claims for prior years. FTB updated its Web site to include new
FAQs in regards to the issue on February 28, 2013, directing
affected taxpayers to file amended returns without QSB deferrals
or exclusions back to 2008, and pay any tax due as a result.
FTB states that it started sending notices of proposed
assessment, which are essentially tax bills, on April 11th to
ensure collection before the statute of limitations expires for
the 2008 taxable year for taxpayers who did not voluntarily
waive the statute of limitations.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
AB:n:k 9/12/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: NONE RECEIVED
**** END ****
CONTINUED