BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                         PURSUANT TO SENATE RULE 29.10

                     SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE
                            Senator Lois Wolk, Chair
          

          BILL NO:  SB 983                      HEARING:  5/28/14
          AUTHOR:  Hernandez                    FISCAL:  No
          VERSION:  5/21/14                     TAX LEVY:  No
          CONSULTANT:  Bouaziz                  

           SALES AND USE TAXES: REVENUE SHARING AGREEMENT: CARD LOCK  
                                     SYSTEM
          

          Removes card lock systems from the definition of buying  
          company. 


                           Background and Existing Law  

          State law prohibits a local agency from entering into an  
          agreement that results in the payment, transfer, diversion,  
          or rebate of any Bradley-Burns local tax proceeds, when the  
          agreement results in a reduction of Bradley-Burns tax  
          proceeds received by another local agency from a retailer,  
          and that retailer continues to maintain a physical presence  
          within the jurisdiction of the originating local agency (SB  
          27, Hancock, 2009).  State law provides that the above  
          prohibition does not apply to a buying company, which is a  
          separate legal entity created for the purpose of performing  
          administrative functions, including acquiring goods and  
          services for a parent entity.



                                   Proposed Law  

          Senate Bill 983 excludes a retailer that contracts to sell  
          fuel through card lock system from the definition of a  
          buying company.

          The bill defines "card lock system" as a system in which  
          owners of unattended card lock fueling stations form a  
          network whereby customers may purchase fuel at any of the  
          network's participating fueling stations by use of a card  
          issued to the customer, where prices are not posted at the  
          pump, and no receipt is given at the time of delivery.





          SB 983 -- 05/21/14 -- Page 2



          The bill applies to agreements entered into on or after May  
          1, 2014 and would become effective January, 1 2015.



                               State Revenue Impact
           
          No estimate.


                                     Comments  

          1.   Purpose of the bill  .  According to the author, "The  
          Bradley Burns portion of sales and use tax revenue go to  
          the city where the sales office of the card lock fuel  
          system company is located, instead of cities that actually  
          house the fueling stations.  The allocation of the Bradley  
          Burns portion of sales and use tax revenue from these  
          transactions pose a problem for local governments with  
          these fueling stations in their jurisdiction because there  
          are a significant number of negative secondary effects  
          associated with their utilization.  The vehicles that  
          utilize these stations are generally semi-trucks, which are  
          heavy in weight, therefore causing substantial wear and  
          tear to city streets as well as traffic congestion and  
          reduced air quality.  Vehicles are fueling up in over 1,000  
          locations in cities throughout the state, but approximately  
          only 30 cities are receiving any of the estimated $137  
          million in statewide Bradley Burns' portion of tax revenue  
          generated from these transactions. In a race to find new  
          revenue sources, some cities have become too willing to  
          offer generous rebate packages for these fuel companies to  
          move their sales offices into their city, rebating up to  
          65% of tax revenue, in some instances, at the expense of  
          other cities that actually maintain the physical presence  
          for these fueling stations.  Prohibiting these types of  
          agreements ensures that cities will not be able to give  
          away public tax dollars to private oil companies and should  
          eliminate the incentive for card lock fuel companies to be  
          lured away by other cities."

          2.   Constitutional?   Section 9 of Article I of the  
          California Constitution prohibits the passage of laws  
          impairing the obligation of contracts.  SB 983 does not go  
          into effect until January 1, 2015. However, it would  
          retroactively apply to agreements entered into after May 1,  





          SB 983 -- 05/21/14 -- Page 3



          2014, giving rise to the concern that the measure impairs  
          contracts entered into on or after May 1, 2014 and before  
          January 1, 2015.  The committee may wish to consider  
          whether the bill's retroactive provisions invite legal  
          challenges.

          3.   Need for a buying company exception?   Buying companies  
          allows retailers to purchase in bulk for companywide  
          supplies, allowing the company to benefit from economies of  
          scale.  While the savings is beneficial to companies, there  
          is no sound public policy reason why buying companies  
          should be exempted from entering into rebate agreements.   
          The committee may wish to whether corporations other than  
          card lock systems should be allowed to continue to use the  
          "buying company" loophole.

          4.  Same problem, new solution  .  SB 983 originally  
          reallocated sales tax revenues based on the point of  
          delivery, like jet fuel.  Sales tax revenue from card lock  
          fuel sales amount to $137 million dollars, and the original  
          bill would shift $136 million of local revenues statewide,  
          giving rise to constitutional concerns.  However, the May  
          21st amendments removed card lock systems from the  
          definition of buying company under Government Code 53084.5  
          (a), effectively prohibiting card lock systems from  
          entering into agreements that result in the payment or  
          rebate of tax revenue to a retailer without shifting  
          Bradley-Burns sales and use tax throughout California.  Due  
          to the substantial changes to SB 983, the bill has been  
          referred to committee pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10. At the  
          29.10 hearing, the committee may not amend the bill  
          further, and may either hold the bill, or return the bill  
          as approved by the committee to the Senate Floor.

          The impetus for SB 983 is the "fiscalization of land use"  
          caused by situs-based sales tax allocation.  The  
          fiscalization of land use leads to competition among cities  
          and counties to attract land uses that generate local  
          revenues and shun land uses that need expensive public  
          services.  Some large retailers take advantage of the  
          fiscalization of land use to play one community against  
          others.  Companies ask for subsidies to incentivize  
          relocation, moving their sales tax revenues from a  
          "sending" community to a "receiving" community.  The  
          receiving community gets new revenue, but spends some of it  
          on the retailer; the subsidy to the retailer lowers its  





          SB 983 -- 05/21/14 -- Page 4



          costs; and the sending community suffers the revenue loss.


                        Support and Opposition  (05/27/14)

           Support  :  None Received.

           Opposition  :  None Received.