California 2015-2016 Regular Session Status: In Committee

AB 867 — Tax administration: refunds: property tax: state assessment: actions.

Last action — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2015-2016 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

(1) The Franchise Tax Board administers the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law and the State Board of Equalization administers the Sales and Use Tax Law and various other tax and fee laws. Counties, cities, and districts, as specified, are authorized to impose local sales or transactions and use taxes in conformity with the Sales and Use Tax Law. Amendments to the Sales and Use Tax Law are automatically incorporated into the local laws. Those laws generally require a claim for refund to be filed within specified timeframes based on the date of overpayment or specified board action if any amount has been overpaid, as specified. Under those laws, the rule of res judicata, which provides that a matter that has been adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction may not be pursued further by the same parties is applicable only if the liability involved is for the same reporting period as was involved in the case previously determined. This bill would, notwithstanding existing law regarding the rule of res judicata, where a tax, fee, assessment, surcharge, or other amount levied or collected by the tax agency, which this bill would define to include the board and the Franchise Tax Board, has been determined to have been illegally levied or collected in a final and nonappealable decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, authorize any person who paid that tax, fee, assessment, surcharge, or other amount to file with the tax agency a claim for refund, within one year after the date of the final and nonappealable decision and would require the tax agency to refund the amount so paid. This bill would also require the tax agency to refund these amounts without the person filing a claim for refund when information in the tax agencies' records is sufficient to identify the person. This bill would, upon appropriation by the Legislature, allocate the amounts necessary to make these refunds to the applicable tax agency. (2) Existing law requires an action to recover property taxes levied on state-assessed property arising out of a dispute as to an assessment to be commenced only after payment of the taxes in issue and within 4 years after the latest of the dates that the State Board of Equalization mailed its decision or its written findings and conclusions, as provided. This bill would instead require, where the tax assessed or allocated has been determined to have been illegally assessed or allocated in a final and nonappealable decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, the action to commence no later than one year from the date the court rendered that decision. (3) This bill would make a legislative finding and declaration regarding the public purpose served by the bill.

Bill Text

What changed in the latest version

1 added · 1 removed

1 line(s) added, 1 removed.

→
Previous
Latest
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill TextBill Information PDF2 Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites | Version:
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill Text PDF2 Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites | Version:
View plain text versions (2)

Action History

  1. From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  2. Died pursuant to Article IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.

  3. Retained in suspense file.

  4. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to REV. & TAX. suspense file.

  5. Referred to Com. on REV. & TAX.

  6. From printer. May be heard in committee March 29.

  7. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Wagner · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Wagner

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Subjects

Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 867 do?
(1) The Franchise Tax Board administers the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law and the State Board of Equalization administers the Sales and Use Tax Law and various other tax and fee laws. Counties, cities, and districts, as specified, are authorized to impose local sales or transactions and use taxes in conformity with the Sales and Use Tax Law. Amendments to the Sales and Use Tax Law are automatically incorporated into the local laws. Those laws generally require a claim for refund to be filed within specified timeframes based on the date of overpayment or specified board action if any amount has been overpaid, as specified. Under those laws, the rule of res judicata, which provides that a matter that has been adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction may not be pursued further by the same parties is applicable only if the liability involved is for the same reporting period as was involved in the case previously determined. This bill would, notwithstanding existing law regarding the rule of res judicata, where a tax, fee, assessment, surcharge, or other amount levied or collected by the tax agency, which this bill would define to include the board and the Franchise Tax Board, has been determined to have been illegally levied or collected in a final and nonappealable decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, authorize any person who paid that tax, fee, assessment, surcharge, or other amount to file with the tax agency a claim for refund, within one year after the date of the final and nonappealable decision and would require the tax agency to refund the amount so paid. This bill would also require the tax agency to refund these amounts without the person filing a claim for refund when information in the tax agencies' records is sufficient to identify the person. This bill would, upon appropriation by the Legislature, allocate the amounts necessary to make these refunds to the applicable tax agency. (2) Existing law requires an action to recover property taxes levied on state-assessed property arising out of a dispute as to an assessment to be commenced only after payment of the taxes in issue and within 4 years after the latest of the dates that the State Board of Equalization mailed its decision or its written findings and conclusions, as provided. This bill would instead require, where the tax assessed or allocated has been determined to have been illegally assessed or allocated in a final and nonappealable decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, the action to commence no later than one year from the date the court rendered that decision. (3) This bill would make a legislative finding and declaration regarding the public purpose served by the bill.
Who sponsors AB 867?
AB 867 is sponsored by Wagner.
What is the current status of AB 867?
This bill died with 2015-2016 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 867?
Track AB 867 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 867

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Stay ahead of AB 867

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →