BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    




            SENATE REVENUE & TAXATION COMMITTEE

            Senator Gilbert Cedillo, Chair

                                                  SB 557 - Kuehl

                                                Amended: May 6, 2003

                                                                       

            Hearing: May 7, 2003                       Fiscal: Yes

            SUBJECT:  Imposes a timber products user forest restoration  
                      excise tax (one cent a board foot) on every  
                      consumer at the time timber products are  
                      purchased for consumption in this state. Through  
                      this tax, provides funding for the administration  
                      and review of timber harvest plans, environmental  
                      restoration, re-training for timber workers, and  
                      watershed protection.

            EXISTING LAW 

            Imposes a timber yield tax on the following:

             Every timber owner who harvests his or her timber or  
              causes it to be harvested, and 

             Every timber owner of felled or downed timber who  
              acquires title to such felled or downed timber in this  
              state from an exempt person or agency, as described, and 

             Every person who, without authorization, intentionally or  
              unintentionally harvests or causes to be harvested timber  
              owned by another.


            The timber yield tax rate is currently set at 2.9%. The  
            amount of tax is calculated according to the volume of  
            timber harvested, the established value for the species  
            harvested, and the tax rate.

            The timber yield tax is collected by the Board and  
            deposited in the State Treasury to the credit of the Timber  








                                                            SB 557-Kuehl

                                                                   Page 
            Tax Fund.  After administrative costs are deducted,  
            remaining revenues are returned to local agencies, as  
            specified.

            THIS BILL 

             Excise Tax

             Imposes an excise tax on the consumer at the time of the  
            purchase of a timber product for consumption in this state.  
             The tax would be one cent per board foot for solid wood  
            products, one cent per square foot for veneer-based and  
            sheeting materials, and one cent per linear foot for poles  
            and pilings.  

             Administration 

             Requires a timber product supplier to collect the tax from  
            a consumer at the time it sells a timber product to the  
            consumer.  The tax is required to be added to and stated  
            separately in the billing to the consumer.  A consumer in  
            this state would be liable for the tax until it has been  
            paid to the state, except that payment to a timber product  
            supplier that is registered with the BOE is sufficient to  
            relieve the user from further liability.  

            Authorizes a timber product supplier to retain 3% of the  
            fee as reimbursement for any costs associated with the  
            collection of the tax.  The remainder of the tax would be  
            remitted by the timber product supplier to the BOE, which  
            is due and payable on or before the 25th day of the  
            calendar month following the monthly period for which the  
            fee is due.  A taxpayer would also be required to make out  
            a return for the preceding monthly period on or before the  
            25th day of the month following each monthly period.

            Allows for a 3% administrative cap for the BOE to collect  
            the tax.

            Requires the BOE to transmit the payment to the Timber  
            Products User Forest Restoration Fund, which this bill  
            would establish in the State Treasury.  

             Allocation of Funds








                                                            SB 557-Kuehl

                                                                   Page 

             Money in the fund would be spent solely for the following  
            purposes:

                   To pay for refunds of the tax, where necessary.
                   To assume in its entirety the existing General Fund  
                 appropriations as they existed on December 31, 2002,  
                 for the administration and review of all operations of  
                 all departments, boards, and commissions that review  
                 timber harvesting, as specified.

                   To provide increases above the former General Fund  
                 appropriations for the maintenance of existing  
                 operations of the reviewing agencies, and to provide  
                 increases that result in programmatic improvements to  
                 the operations of the reviewing agencies, or for any  
                 other appropriate increases.

                   To provide necessary additional support to the  
                 reviewing agencies, in order to comply with changes in  
                 statutory law passed by the Legislature and approved  
                 by the Governor or to comply with regulations that are  
                 adopted by any of the reviewing agencies.


            After all of the above expenditures have been appropriated,  
            any moneys remaining in the fund would be used to create  
            within the Department of Forest and Fire Protection  
            (Department), a cost share program with a minimum  
            contribution of matching funds of 20% from any project that  
            is funded.  Projects specified in the bill include, but are  
            not limited to, alleviation of erosion and sedimentation  
            problems caused by road building activities on public and  
            private timberlands, undertaking the restoration of wild  
            salmon and steelhead streams, and developing enhanced  
            protections for forested watersheds. 

            The director of the Department could waive the requirement  
            of cost-share funds for projects of extraordinary  
            importance that are consistent with the purposes of the  
            Z'berg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act of 1973 (Forest Practice  
            Act).  Any remaining moneys would also be allowed to be  
            used for projects that fund public education activities,  
            including, but not limited to, grants for natural resource  








                                                            SB 557-Kuehl

                                                                   Page 
            education, natural resource research, watershed studies,  
            botanical studies, and wildlife surveys.  

            The fund would also reimburse the costs to the Department  
            and the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection to  
            create a broad-based stakeholder group that would do all of  
            the following:

             Explore the suitable reuse and conversion of closed mills  
              and other timber industry facilities in California to  
              productive uses.

             Recommend the most efficient way to develop new milling  
              and processing capacity in California that is certifiable  
              by the Forest Stewardship Council.

             Make recommendations that will develop and maintain more  
              "value-added" timber processing and manufacturing  
              facilities in California to benefit the economic status  
              of rural communities and workers.

            The bill would become effective January 1, 2004.

             Definitions:

             "Board foot" means the cubic volume of sawn lumber equal to  
            144 cubic inches.

            "Board foot equivalent" means the calculated board foot  
            volume of wood fiber within various non-sawn wood products

            "Engineered wood products" means certain wood-based  
            products including, but not limited to, veneer-based  
            sheeting material, plywood, laminated veneer lumber (LVL),  
            parallel-laminated veneer (PLV), laminated beams, I-joists,  
            edge-glued material and composite material such as  
            cellulosic fiberboard, hardboard, particleboard,  
            waferboard, flakeboard, oriented strandboard (OSB), or any  
            other panel product where wood fiber is a component part.

            "Non-uniform solid wood products" mean certain wood  
            products, including but not limited to, shakes, shingles,  
            split rails, bolts, pickets, and slabs.









                                                            SB 557-Kuehl

                                                                   Page 
            "Timber product" means any product sold in California in  
            which wood or wood fiber is a principal part including but  
            not limited to sawn lumber or boards, engineered wood  
            products, and non-uniform solid wood products.

            "Timber product retailer" means a person who sells timber  
            products to consumers.


            FISCAL EFFECT: 

            According to the BOE, this proposal would generate  
            approximately $66 million annually for the Timber Products  
            User Forest Restoration Fund.


            COMMENTS:


            A.   Purpose of the bill

            In its Findings and Declarations the bill states: 

            (a) Forested lands in California provide significant  
            environmental benefits, including serving as the source of  
            more than half the state's supply of drinking water,  
            habitat for numerous wildlife and plant species, some of  
            which are rare, threatened, or endangered, the source of  
            raw materials for the timber products industry, and a  
            source of jobs for those who are employed in that industry.  


            (b) Regulation of timber harvesting practices, including  
            timber harvesting plans, non-industrial timber management  
            plans, exemptions, and emergency notices has become  
            increasingly complex and expensive, even given the fact  
            that some reviewing agencies review less than 20% of the  
            proposed timber harvesting plans presented to them. 

            (c) The current budget crisis presents an opportunity to  
            reevaluate financing of the timber harvesting plan review  
            process that currently draws approximately $21 million  
            annually from the General Fund. 









                                                            SB 557-Kuehl

                                                                   Page 
            (d) It is appropriate to support the timber harvesting plan  
            review process through user [taxes]. 

            B.   Amendments

            The author has taken amendments to this measure to address  
            the concerns regarding the lack of definitions for the  
            imposition of this tax.  Specifically, the author has  
            defined: solid wood products, veneer based and sheeting  
            materials, and poles and pilings.  The author has also  
            provided for the computation of non-standard sizes of  
            timber products.  

            C.   Retail Difficulty


            Timber product suppliers already must collect and remit  
            sales and use tax on the retail sale of timber products in  
            California. Timber product suppliers most likely sell other  
            tangible personal property subject to sales and use tax.  
            Opponents note that adding an additional tax that would be  
            due on the sale of timber products would require retailers  
            to keep track of timber product sales separately from other  
            sales of tangible personal property.  
            Additionally, smaller timber product suppliers may find  
            collecting the fee burdensome.  Larger suppliers would have  
            the ability to program the amount of the tax for each  
            product into its computer system.  Therefore, the tax would  
            be automatically added to the purchase price once the  
            product code or UPC is entered at the register.  Cashiers  
            at smaller supply stores, which are typically not  
            computerized, would have to determine the product category  
            and the board feet, square feet or linear feet (depending  
            on the product) for each timber product sold.  As such, the  
            tax would be collected based on cashier judgment, which  
            would likely lead to reporting errors.

            D.   Precedent-The Tax and the Administrative Cap


            Imposing varying fees on specific commodities complicates  
            tax administration and could set a precedent for  
            establishing multiple fees on other classes of tangible  
            personal property. This results in increasing  








                                                            SB 557-Kuehl

                                                                   Page 
            administrative costs to the BOE, a further complicated tax  
            system and an increased record-keeping burden on taxpayers.
            In addition, authorizing timber product suppliers to retain  
            a percentage of the tax as reimbursement for any costs  
            associated with the collection of the fee could set a  
            precedent for other taxes and fees.  

            Of the 29 taxes and fees currently administered by the BOE,  
            reimbursement is only allowed under the California Tire Fee  
            Law and the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Tax Law.  The  
            California Tire Fee Law authorizes a retail seller to  
            retain 3% of the fee as reimbursement of collection costs.   
            The Cigarette and Tobacco Products Tax Law provides that  
            cigarette tax stamps are to be sold to licensed  
            distributors at a specified discount, which is intended to  
            help defray the cost (leasing of equipment/labor cost) to  
            the distributor for affixing the stamps.



            E.   Sales Tax and Excise Tax

            The sales tax is a tax on gross receipts; the excise tax is  
            a per unit tax.  A sales tax is generally easier to  
            administer as it does not require a per unit measurement,  
            but instead a calculation of the gross receipts.  Although  
            this bill would be substantially easier to administer as a  
            sales tax, it would preclude California from participating  
            in the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement, if the  
            state chooses to conform with all the provisions of the  
            Agreement.  Specifically, the Agreement states that no  
            single product can have a different tax rate than another  
            of which the provisions of this bill would not conform.

            F.   LAO Proposal

            The LAO has advocated that timber harvest review costs be  
            entirely covered by timber operators. As that agency stated  
            in its 2003-04 Budget Analysis: "There is a direct link  
            between the THP review and enforcement and those who  
            directly benefit from it through their harvesting of  
            timber. In other words, without the state review and  
            approval of the THP, businesses would not be able to  
            harvest timber. Doing so would be consistent with the  








                                                            SB 557-Kuehl

                                                                   Page 
            Legislature's actions in requiring the costs of most other  
            environmental regulatory programs, such as those protecting  
            air and water quality, to be fully or partially reimbursed  
            through industry fees and assessments." 


            The LAO reviewed a number of potential ways that fees could  
            be structured to recover state agency costs related to  
            THPs, which include the following:

                   Per Acre Fee. Timber operators would pay a fee  
                 based on the number of acres proposed to be harvested  
                 in the submitted THP, without regard to the value of  
                 the proposed harvest. Under this option, fees could be  
                 structured with a sliding scale so that above a  
                 certain minimum number of acres, the cost per acre  
                 could be reduced. The fees would be payable to CDFFP  
                 upon submission of a THP. 


                   A Flat Fee Per THP. Timber operators would pay a  
                 flat fee for each THP submitted to CDFFP, without  
                 regard to the value of the proposed harvest. The fees  
                 would be payable to CDFFP upon submission of a THP. 


                   A Fee for Service Basis. A fee would be assessed  
                 based on the costs of state agencies related to  
                 reviewing a particular THP. Under this option, THPs  
                 requiring more state agency review time would be  
                 assessed a higher fee. A fee would be collected at the  
                 conclusion of the review process. 


                   A Timber Yield Fee. Timber operators would pay a  
                 fee based on the value of timber that is harvested.  
                 Such a fee could be collected using the existing  
                 timber tax collection system in which timber owners  
                 are required to report the value of timber harvested  
                 to the Board each quarter for payment of timber yield  
                 taxes, based on the value of the harvested timber. 

            Of the various potential fee mechanisms, the LAO's  
            preferred fee structure would be a timber yield fee. This  








                                                            SB 557-Kuehl

                                                                   Page 
            is because unlike the first three options, the timber yield  
            fee would be directly proportional to the monetary gain  
            from the harvest. The LAO is concerned with the flat  
            fee/tax because all timber operators would pay the same  
            regardless of the value harvested. Similarly, there is a  
            concern that under a per acre fee, timber operators  
            submitting the same size THP, but which represent different  
            harvest values, would pay the same fee. It was also found  
            that a timber yield fee is preferable because unlike the  
            other options, a yield fee would use an existing process to  
            collect the fee, thereby saving the administrative costs to  
            set up a totally new collection process.

            G.   A Timber Yield Fee Wouldn't Work

            Proponents of the measure note that a timber yield fee  
            would:

            Disproportionately affect smaller landowners

            Does not create funds for financial incentives for  
            landowners such as conservation easements;

            Does not pay for mitigation projects such as watershed  
            restoration, or fixing roads.

            H.   Should Producers Take Responsibility for the Impact of  
                 the Product

            Proponents of this measure advocate for market-based  
            policies requiring that producers take responsibility for  
            the impacts of their products, including offsetting the  
            cost of environmental regulation and enforcement.  The  
            proponents state that "while the timber industry logs  
            privately held lands, the environmental impacts of timer  
            harvesting can go far beyond the borders of their property,  
            impacting watersheds, habitat, endangered and threatened  
            species, water quality, and in some cases, coastal  
            resources."

            I.   Competitive Disadvantage

            Opponents of this measure claim that if this bill passes  
            "users of timber products will not only buy from  








                                                            SB 557-Kuehl

                                                                   Page 
            out-of-state sources to avoid the tax, which creates a  
            competitive disadvantage for California's business and  
            economy, but also places timber products, which are a  
            renewable resource, at a competitive disadvantage compared  
            to building materials that compete with wood in the  
            marketplace.  This could create an economic catastrophe for  
            lumber retailers and forest landowners who may be forced to  
            convert their lands to other non-forest uses."  The  
            building industries and retailers of timber products also  
            state that they have been "huge contributors in helping  
            California's economy generate revenue and jobs since our  
            state's budget crisis;" they claim that this bill would  
            create a disadvantage for affordable housing and  
            California's housing market.


            Support and Opposition

                 Support:       Californians Against Waste

                 Defenders of Wildlife 
                 Forest Landowners of California 
                 Harwood Products 
                 Planning and Conservation League
                 Oppose    American Forest and Paper Association

                           California Building Industry Association
                           California Business Properties Association
                           California Chamber of Commerce
                           California Manufacturing and Technology  
            Association
                           California Retailers Association
                           California Taxpayers Association (CalTax)
                           Lumber Association of California and Nevada
                           Western Wood Preservers Institute
                           Reliable Wholesale Lumber, Inc.
                           Payless Building Supply
                           Mead Clark Lumber Company, Inc.
                           Meeks
                           Weyerhaeuser


            ------------------------------









                                                            SB 557-Kuehl

                                                                   Page 
            Consultant: Gayle Miller
            05/06/:3 09:25