BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 1700
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   April 18, 2012

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Felipe Fuentes, Chair

                   AB 1700 (Butler) - As Amended:  April 17, 2012 

          Policy Committee:                              Local 
          GovernmentVote:6-3
                        Revenue and Taxation                  7-1

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program: 
          Yes    Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill provides that a transfer, occurring on or after 
          January 1, 2013, of a co-tenancy interest in real property from 
          one co-tenant to the other that takes effect upon the death of 
          the transferor co-tenant, does not constitute a change in 
          ownership if specified requirements are satisfied.  Because 
          there would then be no change of ownership under the law, a 
          reassessment of the property's value will not be triggered.

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          1)This bill would lead to a reduction in property tax payments 
            for all local governments, including schools, which could 
            require the state to backfill a portion of the losses.  
            However, the Board of Equalization (BOE) estimates that few 
            co-owners would benefit from this bill and BOE estimates 
            property taxes would be reduced statewide by approximately 
            $100,000.  Assuming that approximately 50 percent of property 
            taxes are allocated to schools, the expected increase in state 
            backfill is about $50,000.  The cost of this bill is 
            correlated with residential property values.  The losses to 
            the state would be higher if home values were to increase.

          2)The bill provides there will be no state reimbursement of 
            property tax loss to other units of local government from 
            implementing this bill.

          3)BOE estimates that it would incur minor absorbable costs to 
            implement the bill.  This bill is keyed a state-mandated local 
            program as assessors could incur some very minor reimbursable 








                                                                  AB 1700
                                                                  Page  2

            costs to adjust property tax bills.  

           COMMENTS  

           1)Rationale  .  According to the author, this bill protects 
            surviving co-owners from the financial hardship of property 
            reassessment when a loved one passes away.  The author notes 
            that people who live and own a home together and are 
            unmarried, whether by choice or because of the law, should be 
            treated equally to married couples.  The sponsor, Equality 
            California, writes that California has a strong policy 
            interest in keeping surviving co-owners in their homes, 
            especially in times of crisis or when they are grieving the 
            loss of a loved one.  Equality California believes that AB 
            1700 would benefit many Californians, including same-sex 
            couples, seniors and families.

           2)Background  .  Existing law protects from property tax increase 
            transfers of real property between married people, registered 
            domestic partners, parents and their children, grandparents 
            and their grandchildren, and also joint tenants who are 
            "original transferors," that is, the creators of the joint 
            tenancy.  

            This bill creates an exclusion from property tax reassessment 
            for transfers of interest in principal residences between any 
            two people who live together, including unmarried people, 
            persons who are not registered domestic partners, siblings, 
            friends, companions or just roommates who share the cost of 
            housing.  While existing law names family members, this bill 
            widens the exemption further in the case of co-tenants who are 
            not family members.

           3)Previous legislation  .  Similar legislation in prior years 
            includes AB 2735 (De Leon, 2010), which would have applied to 
            transfers between the dates of January 1, 2011 and January 1, 
            2021, and AB 103 (De Leon, 2009) which would have applied to 
            transfers between the dates of January 1, 2010 and January 1, 
            2020.  Both bills were held on the Suspense File of this 
            committee.  Another similar bill, SB 153 (Migden, 2008), was 
            vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.



           Analysis Prepared by  :    Roger Dunstan / APPR. / (916) 319-2081 








                                                                  AB 1700
                                                                  Page  3