Archive for the “California Budget” Category
It is hard to say since California Proposition 25 language in the bill (tax increases requiring a 2/3′rds super majority) makes for some legal incongruity and the fact that Governor Jerry Brown vetoed the enabling California Budget bill .
Here is the bill.
ABX1 28 (Blumenfield)
State Board of Equalization: administration: retailer engaged in business in this state.
The Sales and Use Tax Law imposes a tax on retailers measured by the gross receipts from the sale of tangible personal property sold at retail in this state, or on the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of tangible personal property purchased from a retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state, measured by sales price. That law defines a ?retailer engaged in business in this state? to include retailers that engage in specified activities in this state and requires every retailer engaged in business in this state and making sales of tangible personal property for storage, use, or other consumption in this state to register with the State Board of Equalization and to collect the tax from the purchaser and remit it to the board.
This bill would further define a retailer engaged in business in this state as a retailer that has substantial nexus with this state and a retailer upon whom federal law permits the state to impose a use tax collection duty. The bill would also include specified retailers as retailers engaged in business in this state and would eliminate an exclusion.
This bill would include in the definition of a retailer engaged in business in this state any retailer entering into agreements under which a person or persons in this state, for a commission or other consideration, directly or indirectly refer potential purchasers, whether by an Internet-based link or an Internet Web site, or otherwise, to the retailer, provided the total cumulative sales price from all sales by the retailer to purchasers in this state that are referred pursuant to these agreements is in excess of $10,000 within the preceding 12 months, and provided further that the retailer has cumulative sales of tangible personal property to purchasers in this state of over $500,000, within the preceding 12 months, except as specified. This bill would also provide that a retailer entering into specified agreements to purchase advertising is not a retailer engaged in business in this state and would define a retailer to include an entity affiliated with a retailer under federal income tax law, as specified. This bill would further provide that these provisions would not apply if the retailer can demonstrate that the referrals wold not satisfy specified United States constitutional requirements, as provided.
This bill would also include as a retailer engaged in business in this state as a retailer that is a member of a commonly controlled group, as defined under the Corporation Tax Law, and a member of a combined reporting group, as defined, that includes another member of the retailer?s commonly controlled group that, pursuant to an agreement with or in cooperation with the retailer, performs services in this state in connection with tangible personal property to be sold by the retailer.
This bill would provide that the provisions of this bill are severable.
This bill would appropriate $1,000 from the General Fund to the State Board of Equalization for administrative operations.
The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. Governor Schwarzenegger issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 6, 2010. Governor Brown issued a proclamation on January 20, 2011, declaring and reaffirming that a fiscal emergency exists and stating that his proclamation supersedes the earlier proclamation for purposes of that constitutional provision.
This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared and reaffirmed by the Governor by proclamation issued on January 20, 2011, pursuant to the California Constitution.
This bill would declare that it is to take immediate effect as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
The lawyers will have to get together on this one but at first blush and with the solence coming from Amazon and Overstock.com, my bet is that the legislation is dead.
Thank goodness! I can keep my meager Amazon Associate status – at least for today.
2 Comments »
Posted by Flap in California, California Budget, California Economy, California Unemployment, Flap's California Morning Collection, Jerry Brown, tags: California, California Budget, California Economy, California Unemployment, Flap's California Morning Collection, Jerry Brown
A morning collection of links and comments about my home, California.
The big news in California today is the Jerry Brown veto of the California State budget yesterday. A budget passed over the objections and votes of the California GOP. In other words, Brown vetoed (the first such veto in California history) his own Democratic Party’s majority passed budget.
So, what is everyone concerned about in the Capitol today?
Why, it is whether California Legislators will get paid.
In the meantime, the California economy continues in a downward spiral and unemployment actually increased this past month.
No word on the ridiculous Amazon Tax, but I assume that it was vetoed with the California Budget veto yesterday. But, I could be wrong. How convenient for the Governor though.
On to the links…..
California loses 29,200 jobs in May, a blow to recovery
California’s economic recovery stumbled in May as employers shed 29,200 jobs from payrolls, a surprisingly large loss in a state that had been on the mend. The state’s unemployment rate still dropped to 11.7%, from 11.8% the month before, according to numbers released this morning by the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The numbers follow a slate of bad economic news throughout the country. The nation added just 54,000 jobs in May, and its unemployment rate grew to 9.1%. The previous three months, it had added an average of 220,000 jobs a month. Home prices have dropped in California and the nation to surprising lows as sales slow.
California has the second-highest unemployment rate in the nation, after Nevada, although Nevada’s unemployment rate dropped significantly in May, to 12.1% from 14.9% the year before.
California had added an adjusted 14,900 jobs in April, after cutting a net 11,600 in March. It experienced five straight months of job growth from October through February.
“We do know that the picture is not terribly rosy,” said Johannes Moenius, an economist at University of Redlands.
Brown’s big budget bet
Gov. Jerry Brown’s veto of the new state budget Democrats passed this week represents a gamble that California’ deadlocked Legislature can find its way to a bipartisan solution that has evaded it all year.
Brown, in his veto message, blamed Republicans for refusing to go along with his proposal for a special election at which voters would be asked to ratify the extension of about $10 billion in taxes due to expire at the end of this month.
Brown also slammed his fellow Democrats, indirectly, by describing the budget they passed as filled with “legally questionable maneuvers, costly borrowing and unrealistic savings.” He noted that it would leave the state’s books unbalanced for years to come and add billions of dollars of new debt to the California’s already overburdened balance sheet.
But Brown’s rejection of the budget does not guarantee he is going to get anything better from the Legislature in the days and weeks ahead.
Republicans remain opposed to new taxes, and even to extending the temporary taxes that are about to expire. Democrats remain opposed to making the kind of spending cuts that would be required to balance the budget without those taxes. There appears to be very little middle ground.
Los Angeles Dodgers and Los Angeles Marathon: Judge extends McCourt talks, deal might be close
Superior Court Judge Scott Gordon on Thursday rescinded his finding that Frank and Jamie McCourt were at an impasse in their settlement talks, and he set a hearing for later today to determine if a deal had been reached. “I think we are close,” said Jamie’s lawyer Dennis Wasser, according to AP. “Hopefully, we can get it done tonight.
Dan Walters: If California legislators get paid, vetoed budget is giant charade
That presumes, of course, that the Democratic budget somehow put pressure on Republicans. In fact, it may have had the opposite effect of increasing their leverage on Brown to make concessions to get his centerpiece, an extension of expiring sales, income and car taxes, on the ballot.
A complicating factor is that Steinberg, Pérez and public employee unions really don’t want the fall election that Brown seeks on taxes, fearing – with good reason – that voters would reject them.
Still another is the new state law that strips legislators of salaries and expense checks, about $400 per day each, if a budget is not passed by June 15.
Controller John Chiang has appointed himself the law’s enforcer. Legislative leaders contend that Wednesday’s budget action complies, but Brown’s declaration that the budget was unbalanced gives Chiang grounds to stop the paychecks if he wishes.
Chiang was waffling Thursday, saying he wants “to complete our analysis” before deciding whether to pay lawmakers at the end of the month.
If Chiang pays legislators, the rejected budget will look like a giant charade by Democrats to evade the law.
Non-Californians at UC campuses get summer subsidy
A taxpayer subsidy that out-of-state students enrolled in the University of California system have been receiving for years is under scrutiny as the schools search for extra revenue.
During the regular school year, nonresidents pay up to three times as much as students from California, bringing the universities a few hundred million dollars. But partly due to measures taken to boost summer enrollment, they are spared from paying higher fees for summer classes.
“It seems out of sync,” said Steve Boilard, director of higher education policy for the Legislative Analyst’s Office.
Enjoy your morning!
1 Comment »
I am returning Senate Bill 69 and Assembly Bill 98 without my signature
Brown announced the veto in a press release Thursday. “Unfortunately, the budget I have received is not a balanced solution,” his statement said. “It continues big deficits for years to come and adds billions of dollars of new debt. It also contains legally questionable maneuvers, costly borrowing and unrealistic savings. Finally, it is not financeable and therefore will not allow us to meet our obligations as they occur.”
Read the governor’s official veto message here.
The plan contains higher taxes, billions of dollars in delayed payments to schools, and various accounting maneuvers to balance the books. Brown had previously warned that he would not sign a budget containing such accounting gimmicks.
Democratic leaders in the Assembly and Senate said the plan they passed Wednesday was crafted without input from the administration.
It is unclear whether state lawmakers will receive their paychecks in the wake of the veto. Under a law passed by voters last year, legislators lose pay if they fail to send the governor a budget by June 15. Lawmakers said Wednesday they believe the budget they passed meets that test, but Controller John Chiang, California’s chief financial officer, will decide whether to issue their paychecks.
Brown’s veto is the latest twist in a budget process that has been just as divisive and partisan as it was under his predecessor, Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The ball is back in the California’s Legislature’s court, which I am positive they do not appreciate, especially if the California Controller decides to withhold their paychecks.
The Democrats who control the Legislature will either have to make more cuts or make some sort of deal with the Republicans to raise revenue – but in return for something. The likelihood of a deal with the GOP is extremely unlikely.
Plus, the unions who own the Democrats don’t want a tax election before 2012, because they wish to use their campaign cash to win a 2/3′rds super majority in the Legislature at the November 2012 general election.
So, it is the Schwarzenegger years all over again = budget gridlock and accounting tricks. But, Brown vetoed THAT budget today – so, what is next?
All eyes and ears in the California Legislature today will be on California Controller John Chiang to see if they get paid.
Bet they move fast, if their paychecks are withheld.
1 Comment »
A morning collection of links and comments about my home, California.
Well, California has a “balanced” budget, albeit a Democrat majority vote one and questionably balanced. It will be within the purview of California State Controller John Chiang to decide whether the passed budget legislation is indeed balanced or he is empowered by California law to ding (meaning withhold) the paychecks of California Legislators.
California Governor Jerry Brown continues (supposedly) to negotiate with the Republicans in order to schedule a tax election or pass tax extensions to make budget revenues easier for him and the majority Democrats. No deal so far.
Brown who can either sign, allow it to become law or veto the budget has scheduled a High Noon 12 PM PDT news conference and we will all learn more then – if it doesn’t leak out before = likely. Brown has 12 days to take or not take action.
So, on to the links.
California Democrats pass budget with taxes, cuts and tricks
Democratic lawmakers passed a rare on-time state budget Wednesday over Republican objections, but the plan — balanced with a blend of taxes, cuts and clever accounting — faces an uncertain fate at the hands of Gov. Jerry Brown.
After warning for months that devastating cutbacks to schools and public safety would occur without the renewed taxes that Brown has sought but has been unable to sell to Republicans, Democrats averted the most severe reductions.
But they did so by returning to old strategies that have papered over California’s deficits for years: delaying the payment of billions in bills, skipping debt repayments and penciling in money that may not materialize.
Using their new authority to pass a budget on a majority vote — and under threat of lost pay if a spending plan was not approved by Wednesday — the Democrats pushed through provisions to hike car registration fees and local sales tax rates and force online retailers, such as Amazon.com, to collect sales tax.
The plan would also cut more deeply into higher education, the courts and local law enforcement.
“It is not perfect. It is Plan B,” said Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento), who nonetheless called the package “worthy of the governor’s signature.”
Democrats said they hoped Brown would continue to negotiate with Republicans for the taxes he wants, to make some of their cutbacks unnecessary. But their blueprint puts Brown in a political pickle. It asks him to break two pledges central to his campaign for governor: no new taxes without voter approval and no more smoke-and-mirrors budgeting.
Brown has not said whether he will sign the document; he has 12 days to decide.
Fight Breaks Out on California Assembly Floor During Budget Debate
A fight broke out Wednesday on the Assembly floor as Assemblyman Warren Furutani confronted Assemblyman Don Wagner over comments deemed offensive.
The two members jawed angrily in each other’s faces before Furutani, D-Gardena, appeared to give Wagner a shove, prompting several colleagues to separate them in the final minutes of the day’s budget session.
The dispute brought the house to a standstill for a couple of minutes during debate over a controversial redevelopment plan.
The two-bill proposal compels redevelopment agencies to backfill state coffers and give money to local governments under threat of elimination. Wagner, R-Irvine, testified that it was comparable to a shakedown scheme and referred to the popular HBO show, “The Sopranos.”
That prompted Assemblyman Anthony Portantino, D-La Cañada Flintridge, to demand an apology for the Sopranos reference “as a proud Italian American.”
Wagner retorted that he’d “apologize to any Italian Americans who are not in the Mafia and engaged in insurance scams,” setting off a murmur among lawmakers.
Minutes later, Furutani and Wagner were in each other’s faces and had to be broken up by three other lawmakers. The back of the Assembly chamber was soon flooded with legislative aides who came to see the commotion.
Democrats’ budget bills at a glance
The budget bills Democrats approved Wednesday include a combination of tax and fee increases, spending cuts and revenue assumptions. Democrats and Gov. Jerry Brown previously took steps to reduce the state’s deficit by $11.4 billion, primarily through spending cuts.
Here are some of the key provisions of the latest bills:
Taxes and fees:
— $12 annual fee on car registrations to pay for Department of Motor Vehicle services. The department’s costs previously were covered by a voter-approved increase in the vehicle license fee increase that expires July 1.
— $150 annual fee on homes in rural areas that depend on the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection for wildfire protection.
— A quarter-cent local sales tax. A 1 percent increase in the state sales tax is scheduled to expire June 30, so consumers would see a net reduction of three-quarters of a cent in the sales tax they pay on goods.
— Requiring online retailers such as Amazon.com to collect California sales taxes, a change projected to net $200 million annually.
Additional spending cuts:
— University of California, $150 million.
— California State University, $150 million.
— California courts, $150 million.
— County offices of education, $50 million.
Field Poll: California voters favor revamping “three-strikes” law
Most California voters see a court order to reduce the state’s prison population by 30,000 inmates as a serious problem, and nearly three out of four say it is time to revamp the state’s “three-strikes” law, a Field Poll out today finds.
The poll comes on the heels of last month’s ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court ordering California to address its prison overcrowding problem, and 79 percent of those surveyed said the matter is serious.
But there were not similar margins of support for Gov. Jerry Brown’s plans to transfer lower-risk inmates from prisons to county jails.
The poll found 51 percent of voters support the plan, with 37 percent saying it is a bad idea. Yet less than a majority of voters would support an extension of temporary tax increases to pay for it, the poll found.
The most significant finding came when voters were asked whether the state’s three-strikes law, which passed in 1994, should be modified to allow judges and juries more discretion when sentencing a criminal for a third felony.
The poll found 74 percent of voters would support allowing that discretion to ease prison overcrowding, with 24 percent opposed.
Enjoy your morning!
Flap’s California Morning Collection Archive
So, on to California Governor Jerry Brown for either his signature or veto.
For only the second time in 25 years a California spending plan was passed on time. One interesting part of that balancing act is an online sales tax, something lawmakers have been reluctant to approve in the past.
It seems like a no-brainer, the state needs money, so why not tax purchases online? We pay a tax when we buy the same products in the store. But critics say this tax could actually hurt some businesses in California. Those big online retailers, like Overstock and Amazon, have found a way around this law in other states. They just sever ties with businesses they deal with in the states with the tax. So companies that sell product to Overstock could lose Overstock as a client. This has put some small companies out of business.
The California state legislature needed to close a $9.6 billion deficit and this is expected to bring in $200 million a year in revenue. Some so called brick and mortar stores support this; they think it’s unfair that their product is taxed, but the same items online are not. The big question is do the benefits outweigh the possible side effects?
So, what happens next?
California Governor Jerry Brown can either sign the legislation, veto or allow it to become law. Brown has scheduled a 12 noon PDT new conference on the California budget and maybe we will know more then.
No word from Amazon or Overstock.com, but I bet their attorneys are preparing to file the lawsuits as soon as Brown makes his decision.
There will probably be a few court challenges.
One in federal court regarding the constitutionality of the nexus and the Commerce Clause. The other in California State Court regarding the imposition of a new tax without the 2/3′rds vote requirement of California Proposition 26.
Stay tuned…..and in the meantime, read this piece about yesterday’s legislative vote and what may portend for California.