BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 2421
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  June 25, 2014


                     ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON REVENUE AND TAXATION
                                Raul Bocanegra, Chair

                   AB 2421 (Nestande) - As Amended:  June 17, 2014


          Majority vote.  Fiscal committee.  Tax levy.

           SUBJECT  :  Corporation Tax Law:  credits:  Homeless and Foster  
          Youth Opportunities Investment Act

           SUMMARY  :  Enacts the Homeless and Foster Youth Opportunities  
          Investment Act.  Specifically,  this bill  :  

          1)Contains the following legislative findings and declarations:

             a)   Providing tax incentives to encourage private  
               investments for the common good is sound public policy.

             b)   Expanding educational opportunities and improving the  
               quality of, and access to, educational services within the  
               state are valid public purposes that the legislature may  
               promote using its sovereign power to determine tax policy.

             c)   Creative tax policy can inspire greater charitable  
               contributions and public-private partnership that ensure  
               additional resources for the education of all children in  
               California.

             d)   Encouraging voluntary support for education, without  
               prejudice for or against any state-sanctioned educational  
               enterprise promotes the state's interest and common good in  
               providing the highest quality education to all children in  
               the state.

             e)   At a time when fiscal realities challenging California's  
               education system demand innovative ways to deliver vital  
               education services to public private pupils in kindergarten  
               and grades 1 through 12, and in college, charitable giving  
               for educational purposes should be stimulated.

             f)   California benefits from ensuring accessibility and  








                                                                  AB 2421
                                                                  Page  2

               viability of strong public, as well as, private school and  
               college options in educating students, especially for those  
               with the greatest needs: our homeless and foster youth.

          2)Allows, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1,  
            2015, and before January 1, 2020, a credit under the  
            Corporation Tax (CT) Law equal to 50% of a taxpayer's monetary  
            contributions made during the taxable year, not to exceed  
            $200,000, to a "qualified K-College education scholarship  
            organization" to fund qualified K-College education  
            scholarships.

          3)Defines "qualified K-College education scholarship  
            organization" or "ESO" to mean an organization that meets the  
            following requirements:

             a)   Is organized and operated with the purpose of providing  
               qualified K-College education scholarships to specified  
               pupils attending a public, charter, or private school in  
               California.  Organizations with three or more years of  
               audited financial statements must distribute at least 80  
               percent of contributions for which a credit is claimed, and  
               organizations with fewer than three years of audited  
               financial statements must distribute at least 90 percent of  
               contributions for which a credit is claimed;

             b)   Makes qualified K-College education scholarships  
               available for specified pupils from more than one school;

             c)   Retains data on the progress of the specified pupils  
               participating in qualified K-College education scholarships  
               on nationally available norm-referenced tests to evaluate  
               the programs efficacy;

             d)   Submits financial and compliance audit reports performed  
               by a certified public accountant to the Franchise Tax Board  
               (FTB).

             e)   Submits quarterly reports on the number of qualified  
               K-College education scholarship recipients and the schools  
               that the recipients attend to the State Department of  
               Education.

             f)   Applies to participate in this credit program with the  
               State Department of Education;








                                                                  AB 2421
                                                                  Page  3


             g)   Is formed as any of the following:

               i)     A nonprofit public benefit corporation described in  
                 Corporations Code (CC) Section 5110 et seq.;

               ii)    A nonprofit religious corporation described in CC  
                 Section 9110 et seq.; 

               iii)   A duly authorized foreign nonprofit corporation that  
                 has complied with all registration requirements in the CC  
                 Section 6910, as specified; or,

               iv)    Is an organization exempt from federal income tax as  
                 an organization described in Internal Revenue Code (IRC)  
                 Section 501(c)(3).

          4)Defines "qualified education-related expenses" to mean  
            expenses paid or incurred for the purchase of books, service,  
            and other materials that support academic success, including  
            computers, software, tutoring, and other academic support.

          5)Defines "qualified K-College education scholarship" to mean  
            any of the following:

             a)   Financial assistance for a specified pupil to partially  
               or fully pay for the fees associated with the general costs  
               of transportation to attend a private, public, or charter  
               school or to attend school-related activities and other  
               educationally beneficial programs;

             b)   Financial assistance for a specified pupil to attend  
               college courses after graduation from high school provided  
               by any public college or independent, nonprofit college  
               where the specified pupil has been admitted to attend; and,

             c)   Financial assistance for a specified pupil attending a  
               public, charter, or private school for qualified  
               education-related expenses, not provided by the  
               McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 1987.

          6)Defines "specified pupil" to mean an individual who has  
            applied for a K-College education scholarship and who is  
            either within foster care, has been placed in a foster care  
            system within the State of California, or has been placed with  








                                                                  AB 2421
                                                                  Page  4

            a relative caretaker through child protective services at any  
            time prior to graduating high school, or who was at any time  
            prior to graduating high school, or is currently a homeless  
            youth as defined by Government Code Section 11139.3 or the  
            McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 1987.  A specified  
            pupil is not required to be previously enrolled in a public  
            school or charter school to participate.

          7)Defines "private school" to mean a person, firm, association,  
            partnership, limited liability company, or corporation  
            offering or conducting private school instruction in the State  
            of California on the elementary or high school level, that  
            meets all of the following:

             a)   Is accredited by the Western Association of Schools and  
               Colleges or an affiliated organization;

             b)   Has filed a current private school affidavit with the  
               State Department of Education in accordance with Section  
               33190 of the Education Code;

             c)   Complies with applicable provisions of the Health and  
               Safety Code;

             d)   Complies with applicable provisions of the California  
               Fair Employment and Housing Act (Part 2.8 (commencing with  
               Section 12900) of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government  
               Code);

             e)   Utilizes background checks in connection with hiring all  
               school employees, consistent with the standards set forth  
               in Education Code Section 44237(a);

             f)   Requires a specified pupil to take nationally available  
               norm-referenced test; and,

             g)   Has obtained, if it has been in operation for less than  
               three years, a surety bond or letter of credit in an amount  
               equal to the value of the education scholarship payment for  
               one quarter.

          8)Provides that "private school" also means an institution that  
            meets the definition of a "qualifying institution" in  
            Education Code Section 69432.7.  A "private school" does not  
            include program of instruction offered by a tutor or a  








                                                                  AB 2421
                                                                  Page  5

            non-accredited private school to a pupil who is exempt from  
            compulsory full-time education as provided for in Education  
            Code (commencing with Section 48220).

          9)Provides that the taxpayer shall receive a certification by  
            the State Department of Education upon a determination that  
            the contribution meets the necessary requirements.

          10)Provides that the scholarship tax credit shall be in lieu of  
            any other credit or deduction that the taxpayer may otherwise  
            claim pursuant to the CT law for the same monetary  
            contribution, as specified, and requires the credit to be  
            claimed on a timely filed original return.

          11)Limits the aggregate amount of the tax credits allowed to $10  
            million for each calendar year but authorizes the Legislature  
            to increase the amount.

          12)Provides that the FTB and the State Department of Education  
            shall administer the credit, and that the allocation of  
            credits be made on a first-come, first-served basis.  

          13)Provides that the FTB is required to do all of the following:

             a)   Adopt rules and regulations as necessary or appropriate  
               to implement this credit;

             b)   Track credits claimed;

             c)   Post aggregate totals of the credits claimed on the  
               Internet Web site of the FTB; and,

             d)   Determine when the aggregate total of the credits  
               reaches $10 million for a calendar year.

          14)Provides that the State Department of Education is required  
            to do all of the following:

             a)   Adopt rules and regulations necessary to determine  
               whether an ESO and a contribution meet specified  
               requirements;

             b)   Submit a list of eligible ESOs that comply with  
               specified requirements to the FTB annually by March 15;









                                                                  AB 2421
                                                                  Page  6

             c)   Establish application forms and procedures; and,

             d)   Certify that the contributions meet specified  
               requirements.

          15)Provides that this bill shall remain in effect only until  
            December 1, 2020, and as of that date is repealed.

          16)Takes effect immediately as a tax levy.

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Provides various tax credits designed to provide tax relief to  
            taxpayers who incur certain expenses, e.g., child adoption, or  
            to influence behavior, i.e. to provide incentives for  
            taxpayers to perform various activities that they may not  
            otherwise undertake. 

          2)Allows individual and corporate taxpayers to deduct certain  
            expenses as itemized deductions. 

          3)Allows deductions for monetary charitable contributions,  
            gifts, or property to qualified organizations formed for  
            religious, charitable, educational, scientific, or literary  
            purposes.  A charitable contribution is defined as a  
            contribution or gift made exclusively for public purposes.   
            Individual taxpayers can claim charitable contributions as an  
            itemized deduction and can deduct the greater of the standard  
            deduction or itemized deductions from their adjusted gross  
            income (AGI) when computing taxable income.  Corporate  
            taxpayers can claim charitable contributions up to 10% of the  
            corporation's taxable income, without regard to the amount of  
            charitable contribution, but the amount in excess of the 10%  
            limitation may be carried over for five years.

          4)Imposes limitations on the amount of deduction for individual  
            charitable contributions, depending on the individual's AGI  
            and the amount of contributions, the types of organizations  
            that receive the donations, and the type of property donated.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  The FTB estimates that this bill will reduce  
          general fund revenue by $1.6 million in fiscal year (FY)  
          2014-15, $6.1 million in FY 2015-16, and $8.3 million in FY  
          2016-17.









                                                                  AB 2421
                                                                  Page  7

           COMMENTS  :   

           1)Author's Statement  .  The author has provided the following  
            statement in support of this bill:

               The use of tax policy to influence behavior is an important  
               tool for governments.  AB 2421 presents a unique  
               opportunity to incentivize corporate donations to provide  
               key resources for foster and homeless youth.  These  
               vulnerable populations face daunting challenges when  
               striving to receive a quality education.  They need support  
               from their community to achieve their goals particularly  
               since many do not have the luxury of receiving help that  
               would traditionally come from a student's family.  Working  
               through non-profits, AB 2421 would provide college  
               scholarships to help bridge the gap between the true cost  
               of attending college and currently available financial aid.  
                It would also provide scholarships to purchase school  
               supplies and cover transportation costs to school-related  
               activities.  Given that foster and homeless youth tend to  
               have drastically lower college completion rates than  
               traditional students, it is clear there is a need to  
               provide additional support to help them achieve their  
               goals. 

           2)Arguments in Support  .  Supporters of this bill state that the  
            scholarships provided by this program "would provide homeless  
            and foster youth with financial assistance toward the general  
            costs of transportation to attend a public, charter or private  
            school (and school-related activities), or the purchase of  
            qualified education-related expenses which support their  
            academic success, or to attend college courses after  
            graduation from high school provided by any public or  
            independent, non-profit college."   Supporters explain that  
            "creating tax incentives to encourage private investments for  
            the common good is sound public policy."  Furthermore, "[t]his  
            bill would inspire greater philanthropic contributions, and  
            public-private partnerships, to ensure new resources that  
            deliver vital education services to highly at-risk public and  
            private school students from kindergarten into college."

           3)Arguments in Opposition  .  Opponents state that "[i]n the last  
            several years, K-College education alone has taken over $25  
            billion in cuts.  This does not include cuts that have hit the  
            California Community Colleges, CSU, and the UC systems."   








                                                                  AB 2421
                                                                  Page  8

            Opponents "believe in financing public education directly from  
            public funds, and oppose any education funding systems (e.g.,  
            vouchers, coupons, scholarships, tuition tax credits) that  
            would allocate public tax monies to either individuals or  
            non-public agencies."  Finally, opponents and other  
            organizations "worked hard in the fall of 2012 to add revenues  
            to the General Fund via the tax initiative, Proposition 30.   
            Why would the Legislature consider a measure that will take  
            away from the General Fund, when so many people worked so hard  
            to increase those General Fund revenues?"

           4)What does this bill do  ?  This bill would provide a tax  
            incentive for contributions made to nonprofits that provide  
            scholarships to foster youth for transportation and qualified  
            educational expenses of attending a public, private, or  
            charter school, or for the cost of attending a public of  
            private college.  The amount of credit is limited to 50% of  
            the amount of the monetary contribution made during the  
            taxable year, and may not exceed $200,000.  Unlike many other  
            tax incentives, the proposed tax credit is capped and  
            allocated.  The credit is effective only for five taxable  
            years, from 2015 until 2020; and the annual aggregate amount  
            of the credit may not exceed $10 million (although this bill  
            authorizes the Legislature to increase this amount).  The  
            Department of Education and the FTB are required to allocate  
            and certify the credits on a first-come, first-served basis,  
            up to $10 million for each taxable year.  The credit is not  
            refundable and, in many respects, is similar to a grant  
            program.

           5)Is it Necessary to Include Transportation Costs and  
            School-Related Fees  ?  This bill provides that a "qualified  
            K-College education scholarship" includes financial assistance  
            to pay for the fees associated with the general costs of  
            transportation to attend a public, charter, or private school,  
            or to attend school-related activities and other educationally  
            beneficial programs. This bill also allows for financial  
            assistance to pay for expenses incurred for the purchase of  
            books, services, and other material that support academic  
            success, including computers, software, tutoring, and other  
            academic support.

            The California Supreme Court ruled in Hartzell v. Connell  
            (1984) 35 Cal.3d 899, 201) that pupil fees violate the  
            constitutional right to a free education.  Specifically, the  








                                                                  AB 2421
                                                                  Page  9

            court ruled that extracurricular activities also must be free  
            because they are an integral component of public education and  
            a part of the educational program.  In September 2010, the  
            American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a class action  
            lawsuit alleging the unconstitutional assessment of pupil fees  
            by school districts [Jane Doe, et al. v. State of California,  
            et al., (Super. Ct. Los Angeles County, 2010, BC445151)].  The  
            lawsuit was brought forward because ACLU reports showed that  
            more than 50 public school districts required pupils to pay  
            fees for textbooks, workbooks, science labs, physical  
            education uniforms, classroom materials, and extracurricular  
            activities.  Instead of moving forward with the lawsuit, the  
            ACLU and interested parties sought a legislative solution.  As  
            a result, AB 1575 (Lara), Chapter 776, Statutes of 2012, which  
            was sponsored by ACLU, codified the long held constitutional  
            prohibition on the imposition of pupil fees and established  
            procedures to ensure compliance with the prohibition.

            Since the passage of AB 1575, many schools have stopped  
            imposing fees for participation and, in some cases, are paying  
            for items that were traditionally paid for by pupils and  
            parents.  Most recently, school districts have informed  
            parents that caps and gowns will be provided free of charge.   
            Within the last year, parents throughout California have been  
            utilizing compliance procedures to challenge school districts  
            that require families to pay for Advanced Placement exams,  
            classrooms supplies, workbooks, and school uniforms.  (Loretta  
            Kalb, California to Schools:  Student don't have to pay for  
            graduation attire, other items 'integral' to education,  
            Sacramento Bee, May 7, 2014.)  In some cases, parents and  
            activists are even challenging "supply lists" posted by school  
            for returning student.  One parent, in the San Juan School  
            District, received a letter outlining a list of supplies that  
            children would need at the beginning of the year.  The list  
            included items such as tissue paper, binders, pencils and  
            pens.  The supplies cost parents between $70 and $100.  In  
            response to the challenge to required supplies, the school  
            notified parents that all necessary materials will be provided  
            to school children and that "supply lists" are suggestions,  
            not required for full participation.  Schools across  
            California have begun making similar changes to "required"  
            items and fees that are imposed on pupils.  As such, many  
            public schools have stopped imposing fees for many of the  
            expenses contemplated by this bill.  Therefore, expenses  
            relating to transportation, books, services, and other  








                                                                  AB 2421
                                                                  Page  10

            materials, if any, will likely be those imposed by private  
            schools.  

            The fact that these scholarships will likely provide funding  
            to pay for expenses incurred while attending private schools  
            raises certain constitutional issues.  Specifically,  
            California's Constitution prohibits the state from helping "to  
            support any school, college, university, hospital, or other  
            institution controlled by any religious creed, church, or  
            sectarian denomination whatever."  By establishing an indirect  
            subsidy program for expenses related to attending private  
            schools, this bill may be challenged under the Constitution  
            for inappropriately using public funds to support private,  
            sectarian institutions.  The Committee may wish to amend the  
            bill to limit the use of scholarship funds only for expenses  
            and tuition costs related to attending a college and  
            university courses after high school graduation. 

           1)Ensuring Compliance  .  This bill provides that qualifying  
            contributions be made by corporations to a "qualified  
            K-College education scholarship organization," which, in  
            general, includes nonprofit organizations that provide  
            K-College education scholarships to homeless or foster youth.   
            Each organization is required to retain data on the progress  
            of pupils, submit financial records to the FTB, submit  
            quarterly reports to the State Department of Education, and  
            must apply to participate in the program.  Depending on how  
            many nonprofits apply to participate in the program, it may be  
            difficult for the two agencies to ensure that all nonprofits  
            comply with the law.  


            The California Student Aid Commission (Commission) operates as  
            the principal state agency responsible for administering  
            financial aid programs for students attending public and  
            private universities, colleges, and vocational schools in  
            California.  Its mission is to make education beyond high  
            school financially accessible to all Californians.  Along with  
            the Cal Grant program, the Commission also administers the  
            California Chafee Grant for Foster Youth program, which  
            provides up to $5,000 a year to individuals who are or were in  
                                                                                   foster care and have financial need.  Having the Homeless and  
            Foster Youth Opportunities Investment Act administered by the  
            Commission would make it easier for FTB and the State  
            Department of Education to ensure compliance and to make  








                                                                  AB 2421
                                                                  Page  11

            future improvements.  Also, having the Commission distribute  
            scholarships may also help inform foster youth of other  
            financial assistance that may be available, such as the  
            California Grant for Foster Youth and Cal Grant programs.   
            Therefore, the Committee may wish to amend the bill to have  
            the Homeless and Foster Youth Opportunities Investment Act  
            administered exclusively by the Commission. 


           2)The Not-so-Dormant Commerce Clause  :  The credit available  
            under the Homeless and Foster Youth Opportunities Investment  
            Act applies only in connection with California-based schools.   
            By limiting the credits to in-state activity, this bill could  
            arguably be susceptible to challenge under the dormant  
            commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution.  


            The U.S. Constitution authorizes Congress to regulate commerce  
            with foreign nations, and among the several states.  (U.S.  
            Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 3.)  While the  
            commerce clause is phrased as a positive grant of regulatory  
            power, it "has long been seen as a limitation on state  
            regulatory powers, as well as an affirmative grant of  
            congressional authority."  [Fulton Corp. v. Faulkner (1996)  
            516 U.S. 325, 330.]  This negative aspect, commonly referred  
            to as the dormant commerce clause, prohibits economic  
            protectionism in the form of state regulation that benefits  
            "instate economic interests by burdening out-of-state  
            competitors."  (Ibid.) 


            Both the U.S. Supreme Court and the California courts have  
            addressed challenges to various state tax provisions on  
            dormant commerce clause grounds.  Most recently, the Court of  
            Appeal struck down a California statute that allowed taxpayers  
            a deferral for income received from the sale of stock in  
            corporations maintaining assets and payroll in California,  
            while providing no such deferral for income from the sale of  
            stock in corporations maintaining assets and payroll  
            elsewhere.  [Cutler v. Franchise Tax Board (2012) 208  
            Cal.App.4th 1247, 1250.]  Specifically, the court held that  
            "the deferral provision discriminates on its face on the basis  
            of an interstate element in violation of the commerce clause."  
             (Ibid.)  









                                                                  AB 2421
                                                                  Page  12


            Thus, while no court decision has yet invalidated, as a  
            general matter, a state income tax credit that provides an  
            incentive for in-state activity, such credits may be subject  
            to constitutional challenge.  Any potential constitutional  
            infirmity could be remedied by expanding this bill's  
            definition of public, private, and charter schools to include  
            schools located outside of California.  While such a proposal  
            would be geographically neutral, it is hard to argue that  
            California should subsidize contributions that end up  
            benefiting schools located in other states.


           3)Related Legislation  :

             a)   AB 2422 (Nestande) would enact similar legislation by  
               creating the STEAM Investment and Incentive Act.  AB 2422  
               was held on this Committee's Suspense File.

             b)   AB 943 (Nestande) would have enacted similar legislation  
               by creating the Education Investment Incentives Act.  AB  
               943 was held on this Committee's Suspense File.

           4)Prior Legislation  :

             a)   AB 2582 (Nestande), of the 2012 Legislative Session,  
               would have provided a tax credit for contributions to  
               public school co-curricular activities, to an educational  
               improvement organization that supports innovative programs  
               in public schools, as specified, or to an educational  
               scholarship organization.  AB 2582 was never heard by this  
               Committee. 

             b)   SB 1542 (Negrete-McLeod), of the 2011-12 Legislative  
               Session, would have created an income tax credit for  
               contributions made to a local educational advancement  
               program organization.  SB 1542 was never by this Committee.  
                

             c)   AB 279 (Duvall), of the 2009-10 Legislative Session,  
               would have allowed a tax credit for taxable years beginning  
               on and after January 1, 2010, equal to the amount of the  
               total contribution made by a qualified taxpayer to a  
               scholarship granting organization during the taxable year.   
               AB 279 was held on this Committee's Suspense File. 








                                                                 AB 2421
                                                                  Page  13


             d)   AB 2605 (Nakanishi), of the 2007-08 Legislative Session,  
               would have allowed a personal income tax credit to  
               qualified taxpayers for each dependent attending a  
               nonpublic school.  AB 2605 was held on this Committee's  
               Suspense File. 

             e)   AB 2561 (Niello), of the 2007-08 Legislative Session,  
               would have provided an income tax credit for costs paid or  
               incurred for private school tuition.  AB 2561 was held on  
               this Committee's Suspense File. 

             f)   SB 1768 (Hollingsworth), of the 2005-06 Legislative  
               Session, would have provided an income tax credit for  
               contributions made to a school tuition organization or a  
               public school.  SB 1768 died in the Senate Revenue and  
               Taxation Committee.


           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          California Association of Private School Organizations
          California Catholic Conference

           Opposition 
           
          California Teachers Association
           
          Analysis Prepared by  :  Carlos Anguiano / REV. & TAX. / (916)  
          319-2098