BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                  SB 1036|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  SB 1036
          Author:   Cedillo (D), et al
          Amended:  4/20/10
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE REVENUE & TAXATION COMMITTEE  :  4-1, 4/14/10
          AYES:  Wolk, Alquist, Ashburn, Padilla
          NOES:  Walters

           SENATE FLOOR  :  20-11, 5/13/10 (FAIL)
          AYES:  Alquist, Ashburn, Cedillo, DeSaulnier, Ducheny,  
            Florez, Hancock, Kehoe, Leno, Liu, Lowenthal, Negrete  
            McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Romero, Simitian,  
            Steinberg, Wolk, Yee
          NOES:  Aanestad, Cogdill, Correa, Denham, Dutton, Harman,  
            Hollingsworth, Huff, Runner, Strickland, Walters
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Calderon, Corbett, Cox, Oropeza,  
            Wiggins, Wright, Wyland, Vacancy, Vacancy


           SUBJECT  :    Tax administration:  disclosure information

           SOURCE  :     Author


           DIGEST  :    This bill allows cities to contract with third  
          parties to view taxpayer information received from the  
          Franchise Tax Board. 

           ANALYSIS  :    Existing law generally prohibits unlawful  
          disclosure or inspection of any income tax return  
          information except as specified in law.  Criminal  
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               SB 1036
                                                                Page  
          2

          sanctions, including imprisonment, apply to Franchise Tax  
          Board (FTB) personnel convicted of unlawful disclosure or  
          inspection of tax records.  FTB must notify a taxpayer if  
          criminal charges have been filed for willful unauthorized  
          inspection or disclosure of their tax data.  However, FTB  
          may publish statistical data related to taxpayer  
          information so long as nothing specific to a single  
          taxpayer is disclosed.

          Existing law allows an exception to the above provisions by  
          authorizing FTB to provide tax information - name, address,  
          social security number and business activity code to a city  
          subject to a written agreement between the city and FTB.   
          The city may request information only on taxpayers who file  
          a tax return within its boundaries and   report trade or  
          business income.  Only city employees may use this  
          information; they are bound by the same confidentiality  
          requirements as FTB employees.  This statute is repealed on  
          January 1, 2014.

          This bill allows a city with a reciprocal agreement with  
          FTB to adopt a resolution to enter into a contract with a  
          third-party vendor to process the taxpayer data received by  
          FTB. 

          This bill specifies that any agent designated by the  
          resolution to examine tax records must meet certain  
          conditions, including already having an existing contract  
          with the city and executing a confidentiality statement as  
          provided by FTB. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  No    
          Local:  No

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  4/28/10)

          California Professional Firefighters
           Cities of Gilroy, Livermore, Newport Beach, Pleasanton,  
            Roseville, San Rafael, and Visalia
          League of California Cities

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  4/28/10)

          Cal-Tax 

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               SB 1036
                                                                Page  
          3

          California Chamber of Commerce

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author's office,  
          this bill is intended to assist FTB and cities exchange  
          business taxpayer information in order to identify  
          businesses that have not paid business license taxes and  
          related fees.  By authorizing cities to obtain the  
          assistance of contractors in processing tax data, this bill  
          will help cities improve tax collections, increase  
          enforcement of city business tax laws, and thereby increase  
          city revenue. 
          The contractors authorized under this bill would be  
          restricted to obtaining and filling out eight fields of  
          data required by FTB from business tax records, cross  
          referencing cities' business tax records with FTB income  
          tax records, and validating a business's existence by  
          providing additional business indicators.

          The author's office in a rebuttal to the concerns raised at  
          the policy hearing by the opposition would like to clarify  
          that this bill does not propose to share taxpayer  
          information for the purpose of collecting taxes but only  
          for the purposes of identifying to the FTB or partnering  
          city entities that have not paid their taxes and/or fees  
          do.  It does not affect the tax collection process once  
          they are identified.

           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    Opponents of this bill have  
          expressed the concern that taxpayer confidentiality could  
          be compromised if private individuals and consulting firms  
          are permitted to access taxpayer information provided by  
          the FTB.  Cal-Tax states that "the mishandling of taxpayer  
          records has been well-documented in the case of private  
          debt collection firms assigned to handle state and local  
          government tax collections, and we object to extending  
          access to these records to other private firms hired by  
          local governments to enhance local revenue."


          DLW:mw  5/26/10   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               SB 1036
                                                                Page  
          4














































                                                           CONTINUED