State Board of Equalization:
Implementation of New Business Use Tax Program Creating Major Headaches

Implementation of the new business use tax registration and reporting program, enacted last year in a budget trailer bill, is causing major headaches for taxpayers, the State Board of Equalization was told March 24 at a meeting of the Board's Legislative Committee.

ABX4 18 (Assembly Budget Committee) requires people who receive $100,000 in gross receipts in business operations, who are not registered as retailers with the board, to register and file a use tax return by April 15.

So far, board staff has taken a hard line in implementing the statute. They have asked for returns for 2007 and 2008 in addition to 2009, although the earlier years are not specifically mentioned in the new statute. In addition, in letters that notified taxpayers of the new reporting requirement, they threatened taxpayers that they can go back eight years.

Staff told the Legislative Committee that statutes authorize this and they wanted to leave the eight year throw-back option open. However, at the outset of the meeting, Margaret Shedd, head of the board's Legislative Unit, pointedly said that the board did not sponsor or support the legislation.

To date, $4.3 million has been collected from use tax returns filed.

Testifying before the committee, Gina Rodriquez, Spidell Publications' Sacramento editor, said tax practitioners are reporting that a significant number of their clients did not even receive a notice and registration form from the board. Board Member Jerome Horton asked how the staff identified taxpayers to send notices to. Staff said they used 2007 federal income tax data and admitted this was old data, and that a number of taxpayers could have been missed.

Ms. Rodriquez added that April 15 is the worst possible deadline, as tax practitioners are preparing millions of income tax returns and will be unable to file the use tax returns on time. On top of this, she said that many people don't believe the law applies to service providers, and lawyers are threatening to go to court. She added that the State Bar has not informed lawyers that the law applies to them.

The problem is that the new use tax reporting section (Revenue and Taxation Code Section 6225) does not define "gross receipts." As a result, taxpayers must rely on the general definition in Section 6012 to see if they exceed the $100,000 threshold – and if their gross receipts are not included in that definition, they are excluded in determining if the threshold is exceeded.

Board Member Michelle Steel said her husband got a letter from the BOE and she called the office and could not get through. "It is not simple to file," she said. She called the new law a "totally ridiculous" bill. Acting Board Member Barbara Alby said she is getting panicky phone calls from legislators, and added, "They were part of the sausage making on this bill."

Deputy State Controller Marcy Jo Mandel, representing Controller John Chiang, raised another problem. She asked why taxpayers who already had satisfied their use tax liability (by paying on their income tax returns) are required to send in a use tax return under the new law. Board staff said they were requiring that they do so, but would allow a credit.

It also is unclear if persons covered by the new filing requirement can use the income tax reporting method for use tax owed for 2009. They may not be able to, which is a problem since many people have already filed their 2009 income tax. Ms. Mandel said if they have reported use tax on their income tax forms, they should not be penalized.

Ms. Rodriquez urged an extension of the due date. Staff said this was impossible. Board Member Betty Yee said she sympathizes with the hardship, but changing the due date is beyond the board's authority. She added that the attempt of a legislative fix might create more chaos than already exists.

Staff said taxpayers could ask for relief of late filing penalties, and they would be generous in abating penalties for "reasonable cause."

Some observers wondered what this means, in view of the fact that staff has taken a hard line in the bill's implementation. What is "generous"? What will be considered "reasonable cause"? Further, as board staff reminds the board over and over during appeals, taxpayers cannot rely on oral advice from the staff.

Cal-TaxReports, March 29, 2010

© 2010 California Taxpayers' Association. All Rights Reserved.