BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �




                     SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE
                            Senator Lois Wolk, Chair
          

          BILL NO:  SB 560                      HEARING:  1/8/14
          AUTHOR:  Anderson                     FISCAL:  Yes
          VERSION:  1/6/14                      TAX LEVY:  Yes
          CONSULTANT:  Grinnell                 

                                DISASTER RELIEF
          

          Enacts exemptions and exclusions for firms that currently  
          lack taxable nexus in California, but gain it when  
          providing disaster relief in the state.


                           Background and Existing Law  

          The United States Constitution grants the power to Congress  
          to "regulate Commerce with foreign nations, and among the  
          several states, and with the Indian Tribes;" a provision  
          widely known as the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8).  
           The United States Supreme Court established a doctrine,  
          known as the "dormant" or "negative" Commerce Clause, which  
          bars states from regulating or taxing interstate commerce.   
           States generally determine their own standards for taxing  
          a multistate or multinational corporation's activity  
          consistent with this doctrine.

          One important standard for states to determine whether and  
          when a state can assert that a multistate or multinational  
          taxpayer has taxable nexus in a state, thereby compelling  
          the taxpayer to file returns and pay taxes due based on his  
          or her economic activity in that state.  Generally, states  
          apply different standards to determine whether a taxpayer  
          has nexus for sales and use tax than for income tax.  A  
          firm can have income tax nexus in a state, but not sales  
          tax nexus in that same state because of these varying  
          standards.

          I.  Income Taxes.  In California, taxpayers have income tax  
          nexus if they are "doing business in the state," which  
          means that the taxpayer actively engaged in any transaction  
          for the purpose of financial or pecuniary gain or profit in  
          California, or is organizationally or commercially housed  
          in the state.  In 2009, the Legislature added specific  
          measurements on top of this standard (ABx3 15  




          SB 560 - 1/6/13 -- Page 2



          (Kerkorian)/SBx3 15 (Calderon), 2009).  Currently, a  
          taxpayer has taxable nexus in the state if he or she has  
          amounts of any of the following that exceed either $509,500  
          (an amount set at $500,000 in 2009 and since indexed for  
          inflation), or 25% of his or her total in any taxable year:  

              Sales in the state,
              Value of personal property in the state,
              Compensation payments made in the state.
          When a taxpayer has nexus, he or she must comply with the  
          state's tax law, including filing returns in a timely  
          fashion, even if he or she derived no income from the  
          state.  

          II. Sales and Use Taxes.  California law imposes the Sales  
          and Use tax, currently 7.5%, plus any locally adopted sales  
          taxes (up to 2%), on the gross receipts when transferring  
          tangible personal property in this state.  Many items are  
          fully exempted from the sales and use tax in this state  
          (prescription drugs, food, poultry litter) but only a  
          handful are partially exempted from the sales tax at the  
          rate of 5.5%; specifically: farm equipment and machinery;  
          diesel fuel used for farming and food processing;  
          teleproduction and postproduction equipment; timber  
          harvesting equipment and machinery; and racehorse breeding  
          stock.

          III.  Disasters.  Natural disasters such as flood, fire,  
          drought, and hurricanes sever power and telecommunication  
          lines, destroy cell towers, and damage water and sewer  
          pipelines.  State and local agencies may contract with  
          firms to help restore damaged infrastructure.  However,  
          firms that previously did not have a taxable nexus in a  
          state will likely gain it if they deploy personnel and  
          purchase items for use in disaster relief.  In response,  
          the National Conference of State Legislatures designed a  
          model statute to exclude the income gained by individuals  
          and businesses that currently lack nexus, but gain it when  
          they come into a state to help with a disaster.  The author  
          wants to enact that model stature in California.

                                         
                                  Proposed Law  

          Senate Bill 560 enacts exclusions against the income tax,  
          and exemptions from the sales and use tax for purchasing  





          SB 560 - 1/6/13 -- Page 3



          property, for taxpayers that currently do not have nexus in  
          California who perform disaster-related work in the state,  
          as defined.  The disaster must be a state of emergency  
          declared by the Governor or the President.  Exclusions and  
          exemptions apply only during the disaster period, which  
          must begin within ten days of the Governor or President's  
          proclamation , and lasts up to 60 days after the Governor  
          or President declares the disaster terminated.   
          Additionally, the exclusion and exemption apply only when a  
          state or local agency, or a registered business, requests  
          the taxpayer to perform the work.   

          The income tax exclusion applies to taxable years beginning  
          on or after January 1, 2015.  The exclusion applies to  
          limited partnerships (LPs), limited liability partnerships  
          (LLPs), limited liability companies (LLCs), and  
          corporations.  

          The sales and use tax exemption applies to purchases made  
          on or after January 1, 2015, and to any property used to  
          repairing, installing, building, or rendering services that  
          relate to infrastructure damaged, impaired, or destroyed by  
          the disaster.  The taxpayer will be exempt from both state  
          and local shares of the sales and use tax.  Additionally,  
          the taxpayer must furnish the retailer with an exemption  
          certificate, and the property must be used primarily, or  
          more than 50%, in disaster or emergency related work, for  
          the exemption to apply.  The measure also makes legislative  
          findings and declarations supporting its purpose.  


                               State Revenue Impact
           
          According to the Franchise Tax Board (FTB), SB 560's  
          revenue losses depend on the number, type, and magnitude of  
          declared state disasters or emergencies, but estimate that  
          for every $100 million in payments made to taxpayers  
          affected by the bill, the bill results in a state revenue  
          loss of $1.2 million.

          The Board of Equalization estimates annual revenue losses  
          resulting from SB 560 of between $968,500 and $4.5 million,  
          because of the unknown number, type, and magnitude of  
          future disasters.

          Both estimates were based on the 4/1/13 version of the  





          SB 560 - 1/6/13 -- Page 4



          measure; however, 1/6/14 amendments are unlikely to change  
          the above estimates significantly.


                                     Comments  

          1.   Purpose of the bill  .  According to the author, "The  
          most important thing in a disaster is the response to the  
          human needs. Senate Bill 560 will ensure that taxes don't  
          take precedence over the lives of its citizens.  Whether  
          its wildfire, earthquake, or another declared emergency, we  
          can make sure restoration and repair of damage to lives and  
          property is encouraged, not penalized. This bill is a way  
          to incentivize doing good in our communities and easing the  
          burdens on those who in the darkest times are easing ours."

          2.   Trade-offs  .  For firms called in to provide disaster  
          relief that currently don't have taxable nexus in  
          California, complying with the state's tax laws can be a  
          significant burden.  Locating forms, calculating tax, and  
          filing returns can be time-consuming. Paying preparers or  
          purchasing tax software can be costly.  However, millions  
          of California taxpayers effectively comply with the state's  
          tax laws each day, so why should the Legislature exclude  
          income for out-of-state firms that's included for its  
          California counterparts? In reducing a compliance burden,  
          the measure could be granting a competitive advantage to  
          out-of-state firms.  Additionally, the measure will result  
          in revenue losses to the state, as firms that would have  
          had to pay tax will not under the bill, that will have to  
          be replaced by reducing public services or increasing other  
          taxes.  As such, the Committee may wish to consider whether  
          the foregone revenue resulting from SB 560's helpful change  
          is worth the tradeoff of cuts in spending or taxes on other  
          activities that it necessitates.  

          3.   Evidence  ?  SB 560 presumes that complying with the  
          state's tax laws is a significant enough burden to deter  
          service providers from entering California to help during a  
          disaster.  However, what evidence indicates that this  
          burden reduces disaster response readiness by limiting the  
          number of firms willing to respond?  Exempting and  
          excluding one set of taxpayers from tax should be based on  
          experience and evidence.  The Committee may wish to  
          consider whether sufficient cause exists to necessitate SB  
          560.





          SB 560 - 1/6/13 -- Page 5




          4.   Do's and don'ts  .  SB 560 takes on a difficult, thorny  
          corner of tax law when excluding income and exempting  
          purchases from tax when a firm enters a state to provide  
          disaster relief services.  As such, the measure focuses on  
          excluding the tax on a firm entering the state because of  
          the disaster.  However, SB 560 leaves unchanged three other  
          effects of tax law that could also apply to the firm and  
          its employees during the same disaster, such as:
             1.   The taxpayer's obligation to file returns in  
               California.  SB 560 exempts income, but doesn't amend  
               nexus requirements.
             2.   Any employee of a firm affected by SB 560 would  
               have to file a return in California, and include any  
               California-source income, to the extent that he or she  
               earned income in California during the disaster.
             3.   Any owner of an LLC, LLP, or LP could not exclude  
               the income from his or her return, as the measure  
               doesn't explicitly exclude his or her income which is  
               subject to tax as owner of the pass-through.  Instead,  
               the bill wipes out the income for these entities,  
               which generally aren't subject to tax.

          5.   Waiting for superman  .  The solution contemplated in SB  
          560 has also drawn the attention of Congress, as firms that  
          operate across state lines seek clarity and relief from tax  
          compliance.  Congress is currently considering the Mobile  
          Workforce State Income Tax Simplification Act of 2013,  
          which prohibits the wages or other remuneration earned by  
          an employee who performs employment duties in more than one  
          state from being subject to income tax in any state other  
          than the state of the employee's residence, and the state  
          within which the employee is present and performing  
          employment duties for more than 30 days during the calendar  
          year.  The Act also exempts employers from withholding of  
          tax and information reporting requirements for employees  
          not subject to income tax. 

          6.   Suggested amendments  :  The Committee may wish to  
          consider the following technical amendments.
                 The disaster period currently ends 60 days after  
               the date when the Governor, Legislature (by joint  
               resolution), or the President declares the end of the  
               disaster.  However, the Governor and the Legislature  
               don't proclaim ends of disasters, so the measure's tax  
               exemption and exclusion could last indefinitely.  The  





          SB 560 - 1/6/13 -- Page 6



               measure should be amended to provide a 60 day period,  
               and allow the Governor or his or her designee to  
               designate a shorter or longer period based on the  
               amount and kind of disaster relief work caused by that  
               specific disaster.
                 Substitute "qualified person" with "qualified  
               taxpayer" to more properly reflect terminology used in  
               the Personal Income and Corporation Tax Laws.
                 Delete references that make the measure's exclusion  
               and exemption contingent "upon request registered  
               business."  First, verifying such requests would be  
               difficult and costly, and likely subject to dispute.   
               Second, California businesses don't "register," they  
               incorporate with the Secretary of State or are  
               taxpayers as defined by the Personal Income and  
               Corporation Tax Laws.


                         Support and Opposition  (1/6/15)

           Support  :  Brian Dempsey, Fire Chief, Seaside, CA, Frank  
          Parra, Director of Emergency Services, National City Fire  
          Department, Big Bear Valley Community Response Team, Julian  
          Cuyamaca Resource Center, Kern River Valley Community  
          Response Team, 

           Opposition  :  Unknown.