
David R. Doerr, principal contributor
Ronald W. Roach, editor
The State Board of Equalization took a strong stand for property taxpayer rights last week by voting to oppose most provisions in AB 1027 (Caldera), the county assessor-sponsored omnibus anti-taxpayer bill. As the state agency designated by law to oversee county assessment practices, the board found fault with virtually all anti-taxpayer provisions in the measure.
Key provisions of the bill opposed by the board are limits on the board in issuing assessment handbooks, provisions allowing assessors more authority in changing Proposition 13 base-year values, repeal of the burden of proof on assessors to support escape assessments, authorization for assessors to make value-in-use assessments, a change in the filing date for business property statements to March 31, authorization for assessors to demand information during appeals, expanded assessor subpoena power; county standing to participate in the state assessee valuation process, and local appeals boards rules of procedure.
BOE Member Dean Andal challenged county government lobbyist Dan Wall on a number of the bill's provisions. Mr. Andal said the board now gives more notice and allows more input than required under the Administrative Procedures Act.
He also said assessors had no standing to participate in state-assessed property valuation as the Constitution rests sole authority with the state. BOE Chair Ernest Dronenburg, Vice Chair Johan Klehs, and Rex Halverson, representing Controller Kathleen Connell, also had a number of critical observations regarding the bill.
Other BOE developments:
Claimant Attorney Clayton J. Vreeland explained that the activities of the non-profit foundation, which operates St. Jude, St. Joseph's and Mission Hills hospitals, are different than activities of for-profit hospitals in three ways: (1) They are controlled and operated by the foundation, not by physicians; (2) They provide services regardless of the ability to pay, and (3) They conduct research and education for themselves and for the community. Mr. Vreeland stated that the foundation operates these hospitals for charitable purposes.
Member Klehs inquired as to the revenue and operating budget of St. Jude Hospital. The bottom line was $113,500 of charitable services in 1996, or less than one percent for charity. Member Andal asked if there is a standard for charity and staff responded, "No, but exemptions have previously been granted to properties with two percent or three percent charity." In effect, there is no published guideline and, therefore, no standard.
The claim was taken under submission by unanimous consent.
The staff amendments respond to Cal-Tax's concern that taxpayers would have to provide records rather than have them "available" for examination as previously provided.
The Assembly Appropriations Committee last Wednesday passed AB 1362 (Mazzoni), which would allow local governments to continue collecting taxes imposed without voter approval that were found illegal by the state Supreme Court in 1995.
Advocates for the bill, especially the California State Association of Counties, repeatedly claimed that the bill is only about preventing refunds on taxes already collected and spent. Proponents were allowed a lengthy time to argue their case. Cal-Tax's Stephen Kroes tried to point out that the bill's proponents had given erroneous statements but was told by committee Chair Carole Migden to limit his testimony to one more sentence. Mr. Kroes emphasized that proponents were wrong to claim that this bill was only about refunds when its greatest effect is to allow continued collection of illegal taxes without ever bringing them into compliance with Proposition 62's vote requirement.
A spokeswoman for the Department of Finance made very positive remarks about how the bill would avoid hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue losses for local governments, but then said, since she did not have a file on the bill, the department had no position. The vote was 12-7.
Legislation conforming many provisions of California personal income and bank and corporation tax law to federal law changes made since 1992 cleared its first legislative hurdle last week. SB 455 (Alpert), conforming to more than 50 federal law provisions, was approved unamiously by the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee.
Committee Chair Dede Alpert said the most significant provisions of the bill are increasing the amount that small unincorporated businesses may expense (up to $25,000) and the pension simplification provisions. Testifying in support of the bill were Gina Rodriquez of Spidell Publishing and Cal - Tax's David R. Doerr.
Water interests urged conformity to federal "contributions in aid of construction" provisions. The Department of Finance said passage of the bill would increase revenues over the estimated revenues in the proposed budget by $12 million and voiced neutrality on the measure.
(A complete outline of provisions in the bill is available on Cal - Tax Online -- http://www.caltax.org -- in the Members-Legislative Section, which is open to online subscribers. Subscription information is on the website.)
Other committee developments:
Opponents said the bill would lead to "buttlegging," work a hardship on low-income people and reduces funding for other programs funded by cigarette taxes.
Speaking in opposition, Lenny Goldberg said the industry was the most massively subsidized industry in a long time and it would not be able to compete even with the credit.
The Senate Constitutional Amendments Committee last Wednesday passed by a 3-1 vote SCA 12 (O'Connell), which would allow local school bonds to be approved by majority vote instead of the long-standing two-thirds vote requirement. Cal-Tax's Stephen Kroes argued against the measure, saying that property owners need the two-thirds vote to protect against renters imposing tax increases on owners while the owners often have no vote.
Some observers compared last week's Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee hearing to films directed by legendary Italian director Federico Fellini. At a minimum, it was the most bizarre hearing in a bizarre legislative session.
For openers, the hearing started nearly two and one-half hours late, due to a Republican caucus. At the hearing, a coterie of rather disheveled witnesses, purporting to represent organizations unfamiliar to most observers, harangued the committee on pending enterprise zone legislation. They said, among other things, that zones increase disease and limit worker pay.
The Department of Finance opposed legislation proposing a five percent personal income tax cut in each of the next two years on the basis that the bill was a big revenue loss and also was inconsistent with Governor Pete Wilson's proposal last year for a 15 percent cut.
Lenny Goldberg, representing the California Tax Reform Association, and usually a foe of legislation reducing revenue, suggested amendments to legislation allowing a $500 tax credit for children up to the age of 13 that would have substantially increased the revenue loss.
Assemblywoman Dion Aroner, who had castigated enterprise zone proposals all afternoon, meekly voted "aye" on Assembly Speaker Cruz Bustamante's proposal to create new enterprise zones.
To the surprise of many, the committee approved four enterprise zone proposals, despite the fact that most carried price tags substantially higher than other bills being sent to the suspense file. The last Democratic chair of the committee, ex-Assemblywoman Juanita McDonald, refused to allow enterprise zone bills out of the committee.
A key difference this year is that three of the four enterprise zone bills are carried by Democratic authors -- including Speaker Bustamante and Majority Leader Antonio Villaraigosa -- and the key witness for the fourth was a Democrat, Supervisor Roger Dickinson of Sacramento County.
Enterprise zone bills approved by the committee:
The private bidders, including Boeing, say they cannot compete with the Utah bid unless they, too, have tax incentives.
Supervisor Dickinson said the issue is whether a $240 million payroll stays in California or is lost to Utah. In response to the Department of Finance opposition due to revenue loss, Mr. Dickinson said there will be no revenue at all if Utah wins the bid, which it will unless California acts to give the private bidders similar tax exposure as enjoyed by the public bidder in Utah.
Mr. Villaraigosa said five years was not enough time to help the community rebuild, and a five-year extension was warranted.
In critical comments, Ms. Aroner said the zone was too big and observed that Slauson Avenue does not look any different. Mr. Goldberg also spoke against the measure.
Testifying against the bill was a contingent from what appeared to be makeshift organizations, including witnesses from the "Save Our Cities Campaign Foundation." One witness said that making more of these zones would "increase the amount of disease." An organizer of the Western Service Workers contended that the purpose of the incentive zone is to keep wages low, not exceeding 150 percent of the minimum wage. AB 3 was approved on a vote of 7-2.
Mr. Goldberg objected to the bill, saying it would mostly benefit those with higher incomes. The Department of Finance opposed the large revenue loss. The revenue loss estimates range from $460 million in 1997-98 to $700 million in 2000-01.
Major support was voiced by Fred Main of the California Chamber of Commerce; Carrie-Lee Coke of the California Manufacturers Association; Cal-Tax's David R. Doerr; Barry Weissman of the California Unitary Tax Council; Sande George of George R. Steffes, Inc., and Jeanette Bunch of San Diego Gas and Electric Company. Opposition was expressed by Mr. Goldberg and the Department of Finance, based on a projected $21 million tax loss.
The California Supreme Court last Tuesday heard arguments in the State Board of Equalization's appeal of rulings that fees imposed on paint manufacturers for lead-poisoning abatement are unconstitutional taxes. A decision in Sinclair Paint Company v. State Board of Equalization is due within 90 days.
Lawyers for Sinclair won at the trial and appellate district levels with arguments that fees imposed by 1991 legislation are actually taxes that failed to receive two-thirds approval of the Assembly and Senate, as required by Proposition 13. The courts agreed that the fee is a tax because there is no direct benefit, regulatory or otherwise, to the payer of the "fee." The Wilson Administration's Department of Health Services has intervened in support of the BOE's appeal.
Deputy Attorney General William Carter contended that fees are legal as part of a broader reading of the law that there is a connection between the provider of the product and the problem it causes. He said the lead "fee" even achieves a pro-taxpayer "Proposition 13 goal" by shifting the burden from the general taxpaying public to the industry that caused the problem.
Gene Livingston, attorney for Sinclair, said there must be some benefit to the payer of a "fee." Otherwise, he said, it is a tax. "What do you have left of Proposition 13 if the Legislature can pass a tax with a majority vote?" asked Mr. Livingston, referring to the 1978 constitutional amendment. "There probably is sufficient nexus for a tax, but not a fee," he said. "We are no more regulated before or after payment of that 'fee.' ... not one penny goes toward that law that regulates the paint industry."
Property Tax Overrides. The Senate Loval Government Committee last week approved SB 867 (Lee), authorizing certain local agencies to increase ad valorem property tax to fund employee pensions, if two-thirds of voters approve.
Madera Sales Tax. The Senate last week approved (28-1) SB 355 (Monteith), allowing the City of Madera to impose a 0.5 percent sales tax with two-thirds voter approval.
May Revise. State Department of Finance staffers are "lashed to the mast," putting in long hours to produce the May Revise to the governor's January budget proposal about a week earlier than in recent years. The due date is this Wednesday, says a department official. Legislative leaders have asked that the revisions, featuring a fresh revenue forecast, be issued earlier so there would be more time to react and pass a budget bill by the June 15 constitutional deadline.
Treasure Chest Advertising Company. The California Supreme Court has denied requests for publication of a key appellate court decision (Treasure Chest Advertising Company v. County of Los Angeles) requiring assessors to take economic obsolescence into account in valuing property (See Caltaxletter of February 24).
May 12: SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE HEARING
Location: Room 4203, State Capitol, at 9:30 a.m.
Subjects: Among bills on calendar are SB 110 (Dills), relating to local sales tax
allocations, and SB 890 (O'Connell), reducing the minimum corporate
franchise tax.
May 12: ASSEMBLY REVENUE AND TAXATION COMMITTEE HEARING
Location: Room 126, state Capitol, at 1:30 p.m.
Subjects: Among bills on calendar are AB 83 (Villaraigosa), adding 10 percent and
11 percent personal income tax rates; AB 479 (Pringle), Governor
Wilson's 5 percent corporate tax rate cut; AB 724 (Lempert), allowing 100
percent net operating loss carry forwards, and AB 1364 (Wayne),
disallowing certain advertising deductions.
May 14: ASSEMBLY APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE HEARING
Location: Room 4202, State Capitol, at 8:30 a.m.
Subjects: Among bills on calendar are AB 41 (Murray), conforming to federal small
business expensing provisions; AB 372 (Batttin), establishing a tax credit
for computer donations, and AB 1499 (Caldera), conforming to federal
changes in the R & D credit.
| Taxletter Section | Member Section | Home |
© Copyright 1997, California Taxpayers' Association. All rights reserved.