BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    AB 2392


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  May 25, 2016


                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS


                               Lorena Gonzalez, Chair


          AB  
          2392 (Nazarian) - As Amended May 16, 2016


           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Policy       | Revenue and Taxation          |Vote:| 9 - 0       |
          |Committee:   |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


          Urgency:  No  State Mandated Local Program:  NoReimbursable:  No


          SUMMARY:


          This bill allows a tax credit, for taxable years beginning on or  
          after January 1, 2017, and before January 1, 2022, equal to 30%  
          of a qualified taxpayer's costs incurred for seismic retrofit  
          construction. Specifically, this bill:  


          1)Establishes that the total amount of credit that may be  
            allocated for any given year is $12 million, and the credit  
            will be allocated on a first-come-first-served basis.


          2)Allows one-fifth of the credit for amount for the taxable year  








                                                                    AB 2392


                                                                    Page  2





            in which the credit is allocated, and one-fifth of the credit  
            amount for each of the subsequent four taxable years. 


          3)Allows any excess credit to be carried over to the following  
            taxable years until the credit has been exhausted. 


          4)Defines "qualified taxpayer," "qualified costs," "qualified  
            building," and "seismic retrofit construction" for the  
            purposes of this bill.


          5)Establishes the goals, purposes, and objectives of the credit  
            and the performance indicators and data collection  
            requirements for determining whether the credits meet these  
            goals, purposes, and objectives.





          FISCAL EFFECT:


          1)Estimated GF revenue decreases of $800,000, $2.7 million, and  
            $4.7 million in 2016-17, 2017-18, and 2018-19, respectively. 


          2)Additional ongoing annual GF costs in the hundreds of  
            thousands of dollars for the Franchise Tax Board (FTB) to  
            administer the changes to forms and systems.


          COMMENTS:


          1)Purpose.  According to the author, this measure will improve  
            California's preparedness for earthquakes, saving taxpayers  








                                                                    AB 2392


                                                                    Page  3





            money that would otherwise be required for disaster relief.   
            According to the USGS, California has a 99.7% chance of having  
            a magnitude 6.7 or larger earthquake during the next 30 years.  

            Proponents of the bill argue the cost of retrofitting  
            buildings can be very expensive, and this bill will encourage  
            owners of older properties to upgrade safety features,  
            protecting both owners and tenants from future earthquakes. 


          2)Opposition.  The California Tax Reform Association (CTRA)  
            notes that property owners are already strongly incentivized  
            to retrofit their buildings in order to preserve the value of  
            their investment.  CTRA argues that since an earthquake would  
            likely cause a total loss to property owner, there is no need  
            for an additional tax credit.  Such credit would only reward  
            activity that would otherwise have been undertaken. 
          3)Who Benefits? If current retrofit construction trends  
            continue, AB 2392's annual cap of $12 million will be reached  
            in calendar year 2017, the first year of implementation  
            (though credits are provided to taxpayers in one-fifth  
            segments over a five year period). This raises the question of  
            whether this new proposed tax expenditure would result in any  
            new retrofit construction or simply reward behavior that would  
            have happened anyway. While retrofit construction is costly,  
            there's little guarantee that this credit will help speed up  
            the pace of seismic retrofitting in California. 


          4)Similar legislation vetoed. This bill is substantially similar  
            to AB 428 (Nazarian) of 2015, which was vetoed by the Governor  
            along with a number of other tax expenditure bills, with the  
            following veto message:


               "Each of these bills creates a new tax credit or expands an  
               existing tax credit.










                                                                    AB 2392


                                                                    Page  4








               Despite strong revenue performance over the past few years,  
               the state's budget has remained precariously balanced due  
               to unexpected costs and the provision of new services. Now,  
               without the extension of the managed care organization tax  
               that I called for in special session, next year's budget  
               faces the prospect of over $1 billion in cuts.





               Given these financial uncertainties, I cannot support  
               providing additional tax credits that will make balancing  
               the state's budget even more difficult. Tax credits, like  
               new spending on programs, need to be considered  
               comprehensively as part of the budget deliberations."


            Analysis Prepared by:Luke Reidenbach / APPR. / (916) 319-2081