BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    




            SENATE REVENUE & TAXATION COMMITTEE

            Senator Lois Wolk, Chair

                                                      SB 884- Ashburn

                                                 Amended: June 16, 2010

                                                                       

            Hearing: July 1, 2010       Urgency          Fiscal: Yes




            SUMMARY: Makes Several Changes to the Use Tax Registration  
                       Program including Return Due Date Extension and  
                       Delaying Penalties. 

            

                 EXISTING LAW imposes a use tax on the storage, use, or  
            other consumption in California of tangible personal  
            property purchased from any retailer.  The use tax is  
            imposed on the purchaser, and unless that purchaser pays  
            the use tax to a retailer registered to collect the  
            California use tax, the purchaser is liable for the tax,  
            unless the use of that property is specifically exempted or  
            excluded from tax.  The use tax is the same rate as the  
            sales tax.  Generally, a use tax liability occurs when a  
            California consumer or business purchases tangible items  
            for their own use from an out-of-state retailer that is not  
            registered with the Board of Equalization (BOE) to collect  
            the California use tax.

                 EXISTING LAW requires "qualified purchasers" to  
            register with the BOE and report and pay by April 15, the  
            use tax owed for purchases made during the preceding  
            calendar year (AB X4 18, Committee on Budget, 2009). That  
            bill defines "qualified purchaser" as a person not required  
            to hold a seller's permit, not already otherwise registered  
            or required to register with the BOE, and that receives at  
            least $100,000 in gross receipts from business operations  
            per calendar year.

                 THIS BILL would make several changes related to the  






                                                        SB 884 - Ashburn

                                                                  Page 4
            

            use tax registration program enacted by last year's ABX4  
            18.  Specifically, this bill would: 

                   Eliminate the April 15 due date for qualified  
                 purchasers and give the BOE the authority to establish  
                 calendar year or fiscal year reporting bases for these  
                 qualified purchasers - as the Board currently has for  
                 most sales and use tax taxpayers.  Accordingly, the  
                 returns and due dates of the use tax would either be  
                 on January 31 following the calendar year for those  
                 taxpayers the Board designates to be on a calendar  
                 year reporting basis, or July 31 for those taxpayers  
                 the Board designates to be on a fiscal year (July 1 to  
                 June 30) basis. 
                   Authorize the Board to grant a reasonable extension  
                 of time for filing 2009 returns pursuant to this  
                 program up to six months, as specified.

                   Waive all penalties for reporting periods 2007,  
                 2008 and 2009 provided that the qualified purchaser  
                 pays all use tax liability for those periods by March  
                 15, 2011, and require the BOE to make refunds of any  
                 penalties paid by qualified purchasers for the 2007,  
                 2008 and 2009 reporting periods, as specified. 




            FISCAL EFFECT: 

                 According to the BOE, to the extent some taxpayers  
            delay remitting their use tax until March 15, 2011, some  
            shifting of revenues from fiscal year 2009-10 to 2010-11  
            could occur.  There could also be some foregone penalty  
            revenue attributable to those taxpayers who voluntarily  
            remitted the penalty and did not request relief. BOE states  
            that the amount of revenue shifting is indeterminable at  
            this time.  However, the amount of foregone penalty revenue  
            would amount to $ 991,144, as BOE would have refunded this  
            penalty revenue "as promptly as feasible" under SB 884. 


            COMMENTS:







                                                        SB 884 - Ashburn

                                                                  Page 4
            

            A.   Purpose of the Bill

                 The author provides the following statement: 

                 Assembly Bill X4 18, which passed last year, required  
                residents who receive   $100,000 in gross receipts in  
                business operations, who are not registered with the  
                board as retailers, to register and file a use tax  
                return by April 15. This new filing requirement has  
                created some confusion among tax payers. The  
                requirement to register for use tax was signed by the  
                Governor in July of 2009 which gave the Board of  
                Equalization less than 6 months to notify taxpayers of  
                the mandate. As a result not all applicable taxpayers  
                were informed or have had adequate time to prepare for  
                this year's first time filing. Moreover, the April  
                deadline is different from the fiscal year calendar by  
                which many taxpayers file with the FTB. Consequently,  
                taxpayers may be unfairly penalized for this year's  
                missed deadline.



                 [SB 884] will extend the April 15th use tax filing  
                deadline for personal income and corporate tax filers.  
                This legislation will also allow the Board of  
                Equalization to exempt use tax filers from the  
                penalties that could result from confusion related to  
                the current filing deadlines. The extension of the use  
                tax filing deadline and the ability to exempt filers  
                from penalties will allow the state the time necessary  
                to implement this new requirement and properly notify  
                the affected taxpayers.



            B.   Background: Use Tax

                 The BOE offers the following background on the use  
            tax: 

                 In 1933, California enacted its first retail sales  
            tax. Within a few years of the adoption of the sales tax,  
            California retailers believed they were facing unfavorable  






                                                        SB 884 - Ashburn

                                                                  Page 4
            

            competition from retailers in states that had not adopted a  
            sales tax. Customers could choose to go to a neighboring  
            state without a sales tax and avoid paying the tax on their  
            purchases. California responded to this challenge in 1935  
            by adopting a use tax. The use tax is virtually identical  
            to the sales tax, except it is imposed on the storage, use  
            or consumption of the goods; and the tax is imposed on the  
            sales price of the good. The intent of a use tax is to  
            offset the incentive to purchase from retailers in other  
            states with low sales tax rates or no sales tax. 

                 Although every state that has a sales tax imposes the  
            use tax, there has been limited success in collecting the  
            use tax from individual purchasers. Unlike the retail sales  
            tax that requires in-state retailers to pay the tax, states  
            have been unable to impose a similar compliance and  
            collection requirement on out-of-state retailers (an  
            out-of-state retailer must have physical presence in a  
            state in order to require that retailer to collect the use  
            tax). 

                 Therefore, California must rely on purchasers to  
            report their use tax obligations on their out-of-state  
            purchases, such as those made over the Internet or through  
            mail order.  And, even though a separate line is currently  
            on the state income tax return with accompanying  
            instructions in the booklet for a simple, convenient way to  
            report use tax, the compliance rate has been low.   
            Unreported use tax is the largest area of noncompliance in  
            California's sales and use tax program - an estimated $1.1  
            billion annually is attributable to unreported California  
            use tax by both businesses and individual consumers.  For  
            2009, the Franchise Tax Board (FTB) processed over 18.2  
            million returns, yet only 50,540 state income tax returns  
            had use tax reported yielding only $10 million in state and  
            local use tax revenues.  Individuals report a much greater  
            proportion of the tax than businesses (in 2009, for  
            example, businesses only reported $1.7 million of the total  
            $10 million).

                 ABX4 18 was a budget revision measure signed into law  
            on July 28, 2009.  This measure was enacted in an effort to  
            minimize this competitive advantage many out-of-state  
            retailers have over in-state retailers, and to increase the  






                                                        SB 884 - Ashburn

                                                                  Page 4
            

            collection of use taxes owed by the larger California  
            businesses that do not make sales of tangible personal  
            property, but that may be incurring a use tax liability.  

                 More than 198,000 taxpayers have been registered by  
            the BOE pursuant to these provisions and have been notified  
            to report and pay their use tax liability for purchases  
            subject to use tax for the 2009 calendar year by April 15,  
            2010. Additionally, the BOE is also requiring that these  
            taxpayers file use tax returns for calendar years 2007 and  
            2008 for their untaxed purchases.

                 Beginning in September 2009, the BOE sent these  
            taxpayers an initial notification letter informing them of  
            the new law. The letters further explained that the BOE is  
            creating an account for recipients so that they can report  
            and pay their use tax liabilities online.  Although returns  
            and payments may all be done online, the registration form  
            (a simple one-page form) must be mailed, as well as any  
            requests for relief of penalty.

                 As of June 14, 2010, the BOE has received over 245,000  
            returns by nearly 88,000 qualified purchasers, with  
            payments totaling over $25 million.  Penalty revenue of  
            $991,144 has also been collected.

            

            C.   Is this bill too generous in its penalty relief?

                 

                 SB 884 automatically relieves "qualified purchasers"  
            of penalties of late use tax payments for three  
            years--2007, 2008 and 2009--even if they have had prior  
            contact with the BOE. Many of these "qualified purchasers"  
            are tax preparers and, as such, have been targeted as a  
            specific group of taxpayers that the BOE has stepped up its  
            outreach efforts to regarding their current use tax  
            liabilities. For example, in early 2008, the BOE sent  
            information about use tax reporting state income tax  
            returns to 71,000 tax professionals in order to encourage  
            them to consider their clients' use tax liability when  
            preparing their year-end tax returns.  BOE's mailing list  






                                                        SB 884 - Ashburn

                                                                  Page 4
            

            included certified public accountants, enrolled agents, and  
            members of the California Tax Education Council.  Yet even  
            with this direct contact by the BOE, these "qualified  
            purchasers" are granted 3 years of penalty relief under SB  
            884. 



                 While it is true that some businesses may not have  
            heard about the new requirement under ABX4 18 that requires  
            taxpayers to now register and make use tax payments  
            directly to the BOE, the BOE already has the general  
            authority under current law to extend for up to one month  
            for good cause the time for making any return or payment.  
            Existing law also authorizes the BOE to relieve a person of  
            the late payment penalty, when it finds that a person's  
            failure to make a timely return or payment is due to  
            reasonable cause and circumstances beyond the person's  
            control, as specified. In fact, currently the BOE is  
            allowing taxpayers to submit one form to request relief of  
            penalty for 2007, 2008 and 2009 returns, and the BOE has  
            indicated that it would be open to relieving taxpayers from  
            the penalty, when there is reasonable cause related to the  
            late filing.  This would essentially buy taxpayers the  
            additional time they may need to file their returns without  
            incurring a penalty.



                 Thus, given the penalty relief that may be provided  
            under existing law as well as the direct contact by the BOE  
            informing "qualified purchasers" of their use tax  
            liabilities, SB 884's generous penalty relief is called  
            into question. The committee may wish to consider whether  
            such penalty abatement is too generous and even unnecessary  
            given BOE's current authority and efforts aimed at easing  
            the burden on use taxpayers under the new use tax  
            registration program. 


                 

            D.       Does this bill create inequity among use  
            taxpayers?






                                                        SB 884 - Ashburn

                                                                  Page 4
            


                       The BOE has instituted various programs that  
            encourage compliance with the use tax law.  For example,  
            before enactment of ABX4 18, the BOE instituted a statewide  
            compliance outreach effort.  Under this ongoing effort, the  
            BOE continually identifies purchasers (outside the scope of  
            ABX4 18, such as non-businesses that do not receive at  
            least $100,000 in gross receipts) that are liable for use  
            tax.  The liability for use tax has surprised many of these  
            California purchasers, but they are not covered under this  
            bill and therefore would still have to report their use tax  
            obligations for the past three years and be subject to the  
            current penalties and interest for late payments.  Thus, SB  
            884 automatically waives all penalties for one group of  
            taxpayers and not others, thereby creating inequity within  
            this program.  The committee may wish to consider if all  
            California purchasers who are billed for use tax should be  
            included in this bill.  




            Support and Opposition

                Support:                            Spidell Publishing,  
                Inc. (Sponsor), Cal Chamber of Commerce, California  
                Taxpayers' Association, California Society of Enrolled  
                Agents, 

            Betty Yee, Chairwoman, State Board of Equalization
                

                 Oppose:  None received

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

            Consultant: Meg Svoboda













                                                        SB 884 - Ashburn

                                                                  Page 4