BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó






                                                                     AB 199


                                                                     Page A


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING


          AB  
          199 (Eggman)


          As Amended  August 25, 2015


          2/3 vote.  Urgency


           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |Committee       |Votes|Ayes                  |Noes                |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Natural         |9-0  |Williams, Dahle,      |                    |
          |Resources       |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |Cristina Garcia,      |                    |
          |                |     |Hadley, Harper, Mark  |                    |
          |                |     |Stone, McCarty,       |                    |
          |                |     |Rendon, Wood          |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Revenue &       |9-0  |Ting, Brough,         |                    |
          |Taxation        |     |Dababneh, Gipson,     |                    |
          |                |     |Roger Hernández,      |                    |
          |                |     |Mullin, Patterson,    |                    |
          |                |     |Quirk, Wagner         |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Appropriations  |17-0 |Gomez, Bigelow,       |                    |
          |                |     |Bloom, Bonta,         |                    |
          |                |     |Calderon, Chang,      |                    |
          |                |     |Daly, Eggman,         |                    |











                                                                     AB 199


                                                                     Page B


          |                |     |Gallagher,            |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |Eduardo Garcia,       |                    |
          |                |     |Holden, Jones, Quirk, |                    |
          |                |     |Rendon, Wagner,       |                    |
          |                |     |Weber, Wood           |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
          |                |     |                      |                    |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------ 


          SUMMARY:  Expands the sales and use tax (SUT) exclusion under  
          the California Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation  
          Financing Authority (CAEATFA) by revising the definition of a  
          "project" to include tangible personal property (TPP) that  
          primarily processes or uses "recycled feedstock."  Specifically,  
          this bill:  


          1)Modifies the definition of "project" to include TPP if at  
            least 50% of its use is either to process recycled feedstock  
            that is intended to be reused in the production of another  
            product or utilizes recycled feedstock in the production of  
            another product or soil amendment.


          2)Provides that a "project" does not include TPP that processes  
            or utilizes recycled feedstock in a manner that would  
            constitute disposal as defined pursuant to Public Resources  
            Code (PRC) Section 40192.


          3)Moves the definition of "project," which includes TPP that is  
            used in California for the design, manufacture, production, or  
            assembly of advanced manufacturing, advanced transportation  
            technologies, or alternative source products, components, or  
            systems from PRC Section 26003 to PRC Section 26011.8, in both  
            the active and dormant sections.











                                                                     AB 199


                                                                     Page C




          4)Defines "recycled feedstock" as material that would otherwise  
            be destined for disposal, having completed its intended end  
            use and product lifecycle.


          5)Provides that "soil amendments" may include "compost," as  
            defined under the Food and Agriculture Code (FAC) Section  
            14525, "gypsum" or "phosphatic sulfate gypsum," as defined  
            under FAC Section 14537, or a substance distributed for the  
            purpose of promoting plant growth or improving the quality of  
            crops by conditioning soils through physical means.


          6)Provides that this is an urgency statute necessary for the  
            immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety.


          EXISTING LAW:  


          1)Creates CAEATFA for the purpose of promoting the development  
            and utilization of alternative energy sources and the  
            development and commercialization of advanced transportation  
            technologies. 
          2)Authorizes CAEATFA to provide financial assistance to certain  
            facilities that use alternative energy sources and  
            technologies, develop advanced manufacturing, or are needed to  
            develop and commercialize advanced transportation technologies  
            that conserve energy, reduce air pollution, and promote  
            economic development and jobs. 


          3)Allows CAEATFA to provide eligible projects financial  
            assistance in the form of a SUT exclusion on property used for  
            the "design, manufacture, production, or assembly" of either  
            advanced manufacturing, advanced transportation technologies,  
            or alternative energy source products, components or system,  











                                                                     AB 199


                                                                     Page D


            as defined.


          4)Requires a project to demonstrate that the benefits to the  
            state from the project equals or exceeds the projected benefit  
            to the participating party from the SUT exclusion.


          5)Requires CAEATFA to provide 20-day notice to the Legislature  
            once the value of SUT exemptions approved by CAEATFA exceeds  
            $100 million.  The notification must be provided prior to  
            granting additional approvals.  


          6)Sunsets the CAEATFA's expanded authority to promote the use of  
            advanced manufacturing on July 1, 2016.


          7)Imposes a sales tax on a retailer's gross receipts from the  
            retail sale of TPP in this state, unless the sale is  
            specifically exempt from taxation by statute.  It is presumed  
            that gross receipts from a particular sale of TPP are subject  
            to tax, unless the seller can establish either that the sale  
            was not a retail transaction or that the sale is subject to an  
            exemption.


          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, although there may be the potential redirection of  
          CAEATFA funds resulting from the eligibility expansion, the  
          total impact of all CAEATFA-approved sales and use tax  
          exclusions (STEs) to the General Fund is limited to $100 million  
          annually.  Further, according to CAEATFA, all projects that are  
          approved for the STE have demonstrated that any costs to the  
          state will be offset by the increased economic activity created  
          by the project. 


           COMMENTS:  











                                                                     AB 199


                                                                     Page E




          1)Author's Statement:  The author has provided the following  
            statement in support of this bill:


               California exports 20 million tons of recyclables  
               annually, worth nearly $8 billion.  With AB 199, the  
               state would help incentivize the recycling sector to  
               invest more in manufacturing.  Keeping more of these  
               valuable materials in-state would allow Californians to  
               share in both the environmental and economic benefits of  
               their recycling.


          2)CAEATFA Background:  The California Alternative Energy Source  
            Financing Authority was established in 1980 with an  
            authorization of $200 million in revenue bonds to finance  
            projects utilizing alternative or renewable energy sources,  
            such as wind, solar, cogeneration and geothermal.  In 1994,  
            the authority was renamed "CAEATFA" and its charge was  
            expanded to include the financing of "advanced transportation"  
            technologies.  During the energy crisis of 2001, CAEATFA's  
            authority was expanded again to provide financial assistance  
            to public power entities, independent generators, and others  
            for new and renewable energy sources, and to develop clean  
            distributed generation.  The CAEATFA board consists of five  
            members:  the Treasurer, Controller, Director of Finance,  
            Chairperson of the Energy Commission, and President of the  
            Public Utilities Commission.


            CAEATFA may provide financial assistance to approved projects  
            via the issuance of bonds, loans, loan guarantees and credit  
            enhancements.  CAEATFA may authorize up to $1 billion in  
            revenue or prepayment bonds to fund projects.  Over the last  
            few years, CAEATFA has provided financial assistance through  
            various programs, including qualified energy conservation  
            bonds for projects that promote the use of alternative energy  











                                                                     AB 199


                                                                     Page F


            and energy efficiency in state, local and tribal government  
            facilities, as well as clean renewable energy bonds for  
            renewable energy projects.  In addition, with the passage of  
            SB 71 (Padilla), Chapter 10, Statutes of 2010, CAEATFA is  
            allowed to grant a SUT exemption to provide financial  
            assistance for the purchase of equipment that is used for the  
            design, manufacture, production, or assembly of "advanced  
            transportation technologies" or "alternative source" products,  
            components, or systems (SB 71 Program).  Alternative source  
            products include cogeneration technology, energy conservation,  
            solar, biomass, wind, geothermal, specified hydro-electric, or  
            any other energy efficient technologies that reduce the use of  
            fossil and nuclear fuels.  Alternative sources also include  
            advanced electric distributive generation technology and  
            energy storage technology.  The SB 71 Program will sunset on  
            January 1, 2021.  In 2012, SB 1128 (Padilla), Chapter 677,  
            Statutes of 2012, again expanded the SUT exclusion program to  
            include advanced manufacturing projects.  


          3)Benefits Analysis:  As noted above, CAEATFA may provide a SUT  
            exclusion for the purpose of promoting the creation of  
            California-based manufacturing, California-based jobs,  
            advanced manufacturing, the reduction of greenhouse gases, or  
            the reduction in air and water pollution or energy  
            consumption.  Before a SUT exclusion can be awarded, CAEATFA  
            is required to determine the eligibility of individual  
            projects based on a number of factors relating to a reduction  
            in greenhouse gases and the creation of manufacturing jobs.   
            An important factor that CAEATFA is required to consider is  
            the extent to which the anticipated benefit to the state from  
            the project equals or exceeds the loss of sales and use tax.


          4)What Does this Bill Do?  This bill expands the types of  
            projects that may qualify for the SUT exclusion to include TPP  
            that is either:  a) primarily used to process recycled  
            feedstock intended to be reused in the production of another  
            product, or b) primarily utilizes recycled feedstock in the  











                                                                     AB 199


                                                                     Page G


            production of another product or soil amendment.  "Recycled  
            feedstock" is defined as materials that would otherwise be  
            destined for disposal, having completed its intended end use  
            and product lifecycle.  


            According to CalRecycle, between 6% (for multi-stream) and 81%  
            (for mixed waste) of the incoming material at a Materials  
            Recovery Facility (MRF) is usually sent to landfills for final  
            disposal.<1>  MRFs receive recyclables and sorts the materials  
            by type or grade to meet the commodity specifications.  The  
            inability of the MRF to recycle a larger portion of the  
            materials is due, in part, to a lack of equipment capable of  
            sorting the various plastics, paper, metals, and glass.  The  
            expansion of qualifying projects is meant to incentives the  
            purchase of machinery that is better able to sort recyclable  
            material, thereby reducing the amount of recyclable material  
            that ends up in landfills.    


            The second provision of this bill provides a SUT exclusion for  
            --------------------------


          <1>


           "Multi-stream" refers to incoming recyclables that have usually  
                          been collected separately from each other; for  
                          example, a curbside program that separates paper  
                          from glass or plastic prior to pick-up is  
                          considered "multi-stream".  "Single-stream"  
                          refers to all incoming recyclables that have  
                          been collected in one stream, such as in a  
                          residential blue bin program.  Recyclables  
                          collected in a single-stream manner often have a  
                          higher level of contamination than materials  
                          received through a multi-stream process.  (State  
                          of Recycling in California, CalRecycle, March  
                          2015.)












                                                                     AB 199


                                                                     Page H


            TPP that primarily utilizes recycled feedstock in the  
            production of another product or soil amendment.  According to  
            CalRecycle, there are approximately 160 MRFs throughout the  
            state, which sort recyclable material.  Once recoverable  
            materials are collected and sorted or processed, they are  
            delivered to recycling or manufacturing markets in California,  
            domestically and internationally.  However, according to  
            CalRecycle, there is a minimal manufacturing infrastructure in  
            California for recycled glass, paper, plastic, and tires.  If  
            all of the reported material from processing facilities for  
            glass, paper, and plastics went to manufacturing facilities in  
            California, the supply would exceed the manufacturing capacity  
            by more than 300%.  Therefore, the inclusion of TPP that  
            primarily utilizes recycled feedstock is meant to increase the  
            manufacturing capacity of recycled material.  Finally, within  
            the second provision, this bill also provides a SUT exclusion  
            for TPP that primarily uses recycled feedstock to create soil  
            amendment.    


          5)Partial Sales and Use Tax Exemption:  The rationale for  
            providing a SUT exemption on business inputs is to reduce the  
            imposition of a tax on a tax, otherwise known as "pyramiding".  
             The SUT is paid when a business is considered to be the final  
            consumer of tangible item.  The tax paid on TPP is then  
            incorporated into the cost of a consumer product, leading to  
            double taxation.  As noted by Joseph Henchman, "Ideally, a  
            sales tax should be levied on all goods and services sold at  
            retail, and to prevent distortions and hidden taxes, it should  
            be levied only once on each good or service sold at retail."   
            (Joseph Henchman, States Should Avoid Sales Taxes on Nonprofit  
            Hospital Purchases, Tax Foundation, April 2008.)  Ideally,  
            taxes should only be levied once because pyramiding may cause  
            consumers to favor goods and services that are provided by a  
            single company instead of those that require multiple  
            production steps.  (Id.)  


            The passage of AB 93 (Budget Committee), Chapter 69, Statutes  











                                                                     AB 199


                                                                     Page I


            of 2013, and SB 90 (Galgiani), Chapter 70, Statutes of 2013,  
            created California's first effort to grant a partial SUT  
            exemption for taxpayers performing manufacturing or research  
            and development in the state.  There are a few differences  
            between CAEATFA's SUT exclusion and the state's partial SUT  
            exemption.  The partial exemption rate is currently 4.1875%.   
            The partial exemption provides that sales of the qualifying  
            property sold to a qualified person be taxed at a rate of  
            3.3125% (7.50% current statewide tax rate - 4.1875% partial  
            exemption) plus any applicable district taxes.  Under CAEATFA,  
            an approved project does not pay any SUT tax, including local  
            and district taxes.  Additionally, the state's SUT exemption  
            is much broader and more readily available.  So long as a  
            business meets all requirements, a qualifying manufacturer can  
            receive a partial SUT exemption.  CAEATFA, however, is a more  
            robust process, requiring the applicant to meet a set of  
            criteria before the exclusion can apply.  Furthermore, the  
            programs appear to accomplish different goals.  Both programs  
            reduce the economic distortions related to taxing business  
            inputs, but CAEATFA appears to also be concerned with  
            encouraging projects that provide a greater return on  
            investment for the state.  As noted above, the anticipated  
            project benefits, measured by the fiscal and environmental  
            benefit to the state, must exceed the cost of forgone SUT.  No  
            such analysis is needed for the partial SUT exemption. 




          Analysis Prepared by:  Carlos Anguiano / REV. & TAX. / (916)  
                          319-2098                                FN:  
                          0001557


















                                                                     AB 199


                                                                     Page J