Individual legislator voting records for this vote are not currently available. Includes all politicians who were in office at any point during the 2011-2012 Legislature.

SB 116 - An Act to Amend Sections 17062, 23101, 23151, 23153, and 25128 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 25128.5 Of, to Amend, Repeal, and Add Sections 17073.5 and 25136 Of, and to Add Sections 6377, 17137, 25128.7, and 25136.1 To, the Revenue and Taxation Code, Relating to Taxation, to Take Effect Immediately, Tax Levy.

Income taxes: exclusions: deductions: sales: single sales factor: sales and use taxes: manufacturing. 2011-2012 Legislature. View bill details
Author(s):
Summary:
(1)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. That law provides various exemptions from those taxes.

On… More
(1)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. That law provides various exemptions from those taxes.

On and after March 1, 2012, this bill would provide partial exemptions equal to specified percentages of state sales and use taxes imposed at a combined rate of 5% for the sale of, and the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, tangible personal property, as defined, purchased for use by a qualified person, as defined, primarily in any stage of manufacturing, processing, refining, fabricating, or recycling of tangible personal property; in research and development; to maintain, repair, measure, or test specified tangible personal property; and by a contractor for use in a construction contract with a qualified person, as specified. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board and the State Board of Equalization to provide specified information to the Director of Finance and would require the director to make certain determinations regarding whether this act has caused or will cause a net increase or decrease in the amount of revenues and to correspondingly increase or decrease the exemption to certain taxpayers that received only a limited exemption, as specified.

The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law authorizes counties and cities to impose local sales and use taxes in conformity with the Sales and Use Tax Law, and existing law authorizes districts, as specified, to impose transactions and use taxes in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law, which conforms to the Sales and Use Tax Law. Exemptions from state sales and use taxes are incorporated in these laws.

This bill would specify that this exemption does not apply to local sales and use taxes and transactions and use taxes.

(2)The Personal Income Tax Law imposes taxes based upon taxable income. That law also allows specified credits, exemptions, and exclusions, and imposes an alternative minimum tax with respect to certain items of tax preferences.

This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, exclude from taxable income under this law an amount equal to 10% of the business income of a taxpayer, not to exceed $5,000, as specified, but would require the amount excluded to be included as an item of tax preferences for purposes of the alternative minimum tax.

(3)The Personal Income Tax Law allows a standard deduction, as defined, in computing the income subject to tax.

This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, increase the standard deduction by 27%, as specified.

(4)The Corporation Tax Law imposes taxes measured by income at a rate of 8.84%, as specified. The Corporation Tax Law imposes a minimum franchise tax of $800, except as provided, on every corporation incorporated in this state, qualified to transact intrastate business in this state, or doing business in this state, and a tax in an amount equal to the minimum franchise tax on every limited liability company registered, qualified to transact business, or doing business in this state, as specified.

This bill would, for taxable years beginning on and after January 1, 2012, reduce that rate to 8.34% on the amount of net income that is less than or equal to $50,000 for the taxable year, except as specified. The bill would reduce the annual minimum franchise tax to $750 for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012.

(5)The Corporation Tax Law imposes taxes measured by income and, in the case of a business with income derived from or attributable to sources both within and without this state, apportions the income between this state and other states and foreign countries in accordance with a specified 4-factor formula based on the property, payroll, and sales within and without this state, except that in the case of an apportioning trade or business that derives more than 50% of its gross business receipts from conducting one or more qualified business activities, as defined, business income is apportioned in accordance with a specified 3-factor formula. That law, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2011, allows a taxpayer to have that income apportioned in accordance with a single sales factor formula, except as provided, pursuant to an irrevocable annual election, as specified. That law also provides that sales of tangible and intangible personal property are in this state in accordance with specified criteria.

This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, revise the rules which determine whether a taxpayer is doing business within this state, revise the provisions which determine whether specific sales occur in this state, and require a taxpayer, except as provided, to apportion its income in accordance with a single sales factor.

(6)This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature.

(7)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.

(8)This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy. Hide
 
Status:
The bill was voted on by the Senate on September 10, 2011. 
Senate Vote: On Passage

DID NOT PASS on September 10, 2011.

voted YES: 22 voted NO: 15
3 voted present/not voting

Other Votes:

An Act to Amend Sections 17062, 23101, 23151, 23153, and 25128 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 25128.5 Of, to Amend, Repeal, and Add Sections 17073.5 and 25136 Of, and to Add Sections 6377, 17137, 25128.7, and 25136.1 To, the Revenue and Taxation Code, Relating to Taxation, to Take Effect Immediately, Tax Levy.

SB 116 — 2011-2012 Legislature

Summary
(1)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. That law provides various exemptions from those taxes.

On and after March 1, 2012, this bill would provide partial exemptions equal to specified percentages of state sales and use taxes imposed at a combined rate of 5% for the sale of, and the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, tangible personal property, as defined, purchased for use by a qualified person, as defined, primarily in any stage of manufacturing, processing, refining, fabricating, or recycling of tangible personal property; in research and development; to maintain, repair, measure, or test specified tangible personal property; and by a contractor for use in a construction contract with a qualified person, as specified. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board and the State Board of Equalization to provide specified information to the Director of Finance and… More
(1)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. That law provides various exemptions from those taxes.

On and after March 1, 2012, this bill would provide partial exemptions equal to specified percentages of state sales and use taxes imposed at a combined rate of 5% for the sale of, and the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, tangible personal property, as defined, purchased for use by a qualified person, as defined, primarily in any stage of manufacturing, processing, refining, fabricating, or recycling of tangible personal property; in research and development; to maintain, repair, measure, or test specified tangible personal property; and by a contractor for use in a construction contract with a qualified person, as specified. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board and the State Board of Equalization to provide specified information to the Director of Finance and would require the director to make certain determinations regarding whether this act has caused or will cause a net increase or decrease in the amount of revenues and to correspondingly increase or decrease the exemption to certain taxpayers that received only a limited exemption, as specified.

The Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law authorizes counties and cities to impose local sales and use taxes in conformity with the Sales and Use Tax Law, and existing law authorizes districts, as specified, to impose transactions and use taxes in accordance with the Transactions and Use Tax Law, which conforms to the Sales and Use Tax Law. Exemptions from state sales and use taxes are incorporated in these laws.

This bill would specify that this exemption does not apply to local sales and use taxes and transactions and use taxes.

(2)The Personal Income Tax Law imposes taxes based upon taxable income. That law also allows specified credits, exemptions, and exclusions, and imposes an alternative minimum tax with respect to certain items of tax preferences.

This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, exclude from taxable income under this law an amount equal to 10% of the business income of a taxpayer, not to exceed $5,000, as specified, but would require the amount excluded to be included as an item of tax preferences for purposes of the alternative minimum tax.

(3)The Personal Income Tax Law allows a standard deduction, as defined, in computing the income subject to tax.

This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, increase the standard deduction by 27%, as specified.

(4)The Corporation Tax Law imposes taxes measured by income at a rate of 8.84%, as specified. The Corporation Tax Law imposes a minimum franchise tax of $800, except as provided, on every corporation incorporated in this state, qualified to transact intrastate business in this state, or doing business in this state, and a tax in an amount equal to the minimum franchise tax on every limited liability company registered, qualified to transact business, or doing business in this state, as specified.

This bill would, for taxable years beginning on and after January 1, 2012, reduce that rate to 8.34% on the amount of net income that is less than or equal to $50,000 for the taxable year, except as specified. The bill would reduce the annual minimum franchise tax to $750 for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012.

(5)The Corporation Tax Law imposes taxes measured by income and, in the case of a business with income derived from or attributable to sources both within and without this state, apportions the income between this state and other states and foreign countries in accordance with a specified 4-factor formula based on the property, payroll, and sales within and without this state, except that in the case of an apportioning trade or business that derives more than 50% of its gross business receipts from conducting one or more qualified business activities, as defined, business income is apportioned in accordance with a specified 3-factor formula. That law, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2011, allows a taxpayer to have that income apportioned in accordance with a single sales factor formula, except as provided, pursuant to an irrevocable annual election, as specified. That law also provides that sales of tangible and intangible personal property are in this state in accordance with specified criteria.

This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, revise the rules which determine whether a taxpayer is doing business within this state, revise the provisions which determine whether specific sales occur in this state, and require a taxpayer, except as provided, to apportion its income in accordance with a single sales factor.

(6)This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature.

(7)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.

(8)This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy. Hide
Learn More
At LegInfo.ca.gov
Title
An Act to Amend Sections 17062, 23101, 23151, 23153, and 25128 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 25128.5 Of, to Amend, Repeal, and Add Sections 17073.5 and 25136 Of, and to Add Sections 6377, 17137, 25128.7, and 25136.1 To, the Revenue and Taxation Code, Relating to Taxation, to Take Effect Immediately, Tax Levy.
Author(s)
Kevin De Leon, Darrell Steinberg
Co-Authors
Subjects
  • Income taxes: exclusions: deductions: sales: single sales factor: sales and use taxes: manufacturing
Major Actions
Introduced1/19/2011
Referred to Committee
Passed Senate Committee on Governance and Finance3/23/2011
Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations5/02/2011
Passed Senate Committee on Governance and Finance7/13/2011
Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations8/15/2011
Failed passage in Senate9/10/2011
Bill History
Chamber/CommitteeMotionDateResult
select this voteSenate Committee on Governance and FinanceDo pass, but re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.3/23/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Governance and Finance
6 voted YES 3 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsDo pass.5/02/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
6 voted YES 2 voted NO 1 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenate Committee on Governance and FinanceThat the Assembly amendments be concurred in, but first be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.7/13/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Governance and Finance
6 voted YES 3 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsDo pass.8/15/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
6 voted YES 2 voted NO 1 voted present/not voting
currently selectedSenateW/O REF. TO FILE SB116 De León9/10/2011This bill DID NOT PASS the Senate
22 voted YES 15 voted NO 3 voted present/not voting
ActionDateDescription
Introduced1/19/2011
1/19/2011Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
1/20/2011From printer. May be acted upon on or after February 19.
2/10/2011Referred to Com. on GOV. & F.
2/23/2011From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on GOV. & F.
3/03/2011Set for hearing March 23.
3/23/2011From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 3. Page 430.) (March 23). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
select this voteVote3/23/2011Do pass, but re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.
4/01/2011Set for hearing April 11.
4/04/2011Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
4/13/2011Set for hearing May 2.
select this voteVote5/02/2011Do pass.
5/03/2011From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 2. Page 846.) (May 2).
5/04/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
7/07/2011Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
7/11/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10. From committee: Be re-referred to Com. on GOV. & F. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10. (Ayes 5. Noes 0. Page 1790.) Re-referred to Com. on GOV. & F.
7/12/2011Set for hearing July 13.
select this voteVote7/13/2011That the Assembly amendments be concurred in, but first be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
7/13/2011From committee: Pursuant to Senate Rule 29.1 that the measure be re-referred to Com. on APPR. pursuant to Joint Rule 10.5. (Ayes 6. Noes 3. Page 1838.) (July 13). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
7/14/2011Set for hearing August 15.
select this voteVote8/15/2011Do pass.
8/16/2011From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 2. Page 1985.) (August 15).
8/17/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
8/18/2011Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
8/22/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
8/29/2011Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
8/30/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
9/02/2011Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
9/06/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
9/08/2011Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
9/09/2011Senate Rule 29.3(b) suspended. (Ayes 21. Noes 13. Page 1324.) From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. Withdrawn from committee. (Ayes 21. Noes 13. Page 2472.) Ordered to third reading.
9/10/2011Read third time. Refused passage. (Ayes 22. Noes 15. Page 2487.)
currently selectedSenate Vote on Passage9/10/2011W/O REF. TO FILE SB116 De León

Total contributions given to Senators from interest groups that…

12 Organizations Supported and 3 Opposed; See Which Ones

Organizations that took a position on
An Act to Amend Sections 17062, 23101, 23151, 23153, and 25128 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 25128.5 Of, to Amend, Repeal, and Add Sections 17073.5 and 25136 Of, and to Add Sections 6377, 17137, 25128.7, and 25136.1 To, the Revenue and Taxation Code, Relating to Taxation, to Take Effect Immediately, Tax Levy.: W/O REF. TO FILE SB116 De León

12 organizations supported this bill

Apple
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE (2011, March 21). BILL ANALYSIS. Retrieved March 21, 2011, from Leginfo.
BayBio
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE (2011, March 21). BILL ANALYSIS. Retrieved March 21, 2011, from Leginfo.
Biocom
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE (2011, March 21). BILL ANALYSIS. Retrieved March 21, 2011, from Leginfo.
California Healthcare Institute
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE (2011, March 21). BILL ANALYSIS. Retrieved March 21, 2011, from Leginfo.
Change.org
de Leon, Kevin (2011). SB 116 (De Leon) California First—Bringing Jobs Back to California. Retrieved March 25, 2011, from Change.org.
City of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa
(2011, August 17). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved November 25, 2013, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Community College League of California
(2011, August 17). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved November 25, 2013, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Genentech
(2011, August 17). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved November 25, 2013, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Hunger Action Los Angeles
(2011, August 17). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved November 25, 2013, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
Qualcomm
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE (2011, March 21). BILL ANALYSIS. Retrieved March 21, 2011, from Leginfo.
Ronald O. Loveridge, Mayor of Riverside
(2011, August 17). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved November 25, 2013, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
St. Mary's Center
(2011, August 17). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved November 25, 2013, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.

3 organizations opposed this bill

California Chamber of Commerce
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE (2011, March 21). BILL ANALYSIS. Retrieved March 21, 2011, from Leginfo.
California Manufacturers & Technology Association
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE (2011, March 21). BILL ANALYSIS. Retrieved March 21, 2011, from Leginfo.
California Taxpayers Association
(2011, August 17). Senate Floor Analysis. Retrieved November 25, 2013, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.

Need proof?

View citations of support and opposition

Includes reported contributions to campaigns of Senators in office on day of vote, from interest groups invested in the vote according to MapLight, January 1, 2009 – December 31, 2012.
Contributions data source: FollowTheMoney.org

Contributions by Legislator

Namesort iconPartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
That Supported
$ From Interest Groups
That Opposed
Vote
Elaine AlquistDCA-13$0$0
Joel AndersonRCA-36$14,500$8,500
Tom BerryhillRCA-14$8,450$11,800
Sam BlakesleeRCA-15$0$0
Ron CalderonDCA-30$9,600$6,400
Anthony CannellaRCA-12$7,500$8,900
Ellen CorbettDCA-10$3,250$0
Lou CorreaDCA-34$14,500$6,335
Kevin De LeonDCA-22$30,593$4,000
Mark DeSaulnierDCA-7$8,100$0
Bob DuttonRCA-31$14,400$8,150
Bill EmmersonRCA-37$9,100$6,950
Noreen EvansDCA-2$1,200$1,000
Jean FullerRCA-18$9,450$4,000
Ted GainesRCA-1$10,900$8,500
Loni HancockDCA-9$4,200$0
Tom HarmanRCA-35$7,200$4,000
Ed HernandezDCA-24$24,114$1,000
Bob HuffRCA-29$10,400$21,600
Christine KehoeDCA-39$5,000$2,000
Doug La MalfaRCA-4$150$4,500
Mark LenoDCA-3$9,250$0
Ted LieuDCA-28$34,300$1,000
Carol LiuDCA-21$1,600$0
Alan LowenthalDCA-27$0$0
Gloria Negrete McLeodDCA-32$8,250$4,470
Alex PadillaDCA-20$15,264$3,900
Fran PavleyDCA-23$14,225$0
Curren PriceDCA-26$14,641$1,000
Michael RubioDCA-16$26,039$8,188
Sharon RunnerRCA-17$0$1,000
Joe SimitianDCA-11$3,000$1,000
Darrell SteinbergDCA-6$33,400$0
Tony StricklandRCA-19$35,300$14,000
Juan VargasDCA-40$12,792$5,900
Mimi WaltersRCA-33$10,500$8,500
Lois WolkDCA-5$8,166$0
Rod WrightDCA-25$19,500$10,674
Mark WylandRCA-38$13,000$5,500
Leland YeeDCA-8$12,700$4,000

Add Data Filters:

Legislator Filters
Legislator Filters
Show All
NamePartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
That Supported
$ From Interest Groups
That Opposed
Vote
Elaine AlquistDCA-13$0$0
Joel AndersonRCA-36$14,500$8,500
Tom BerryhillRCA-14$8,450$11,800
Sam BlakesleeRCA-15$0$0
Ron CalderonDCA-30$9,600$6,400
Anthony CannellaRCA-12$7,500$8,900
Ellen CorbettDCA-10$3,250$0
Lou CorreaDCA-34$14,500$6,335
Kevin De LeonDCA-22$30,593$4,000
Mark DeSaulnierDCA-7$8,100$0
Bob DuttonRCA-31$14,400$8,150
Bill EmmersonRCA-37$9,100$6,950
Noreen EvansDCA-2$1,200$1,000
Jean FullerRCA-18$9,450$4,000
Ted GainesRCA-1$10,900$8,500
Loni HancockDCA-9$4,200$0
Tom HarmanRCA-35$7,200$4,000
Ed HernandezDCA-24$24,114$1,000
Bob HuffRCA-29$10,400$21,600
Christine KehoeDCA-39$5,000$2,000
Doug La MalfaRCA-4$150$4,500
Mark LenoDCA-3$9,250$0
Ted LieuDCA-28$34,300$1,000
Carol LiuDCA-21$1,600$0
Alan LowenthalDCA-27$0$0
Gloria Negrete McLeodDCA-32$8,250$4,470
Alex PadillaDCA-20$15,264$3,900
Fran PavleyDCA-23$14,225$0
Curren PriceDCA-26$14,641$1,000
Michael RubioDCA-16$26,039$8,188
Sharon RunnerRCA-17$0$1,000
Joe SimitianDCA-11$3,000$1,000
Darrell SteinbergDCA-6$33,400$0
Tony StricklandRCA-19$35,300$14,000
Juan VargasDCA-40$12,792$5,900
Mimi WaltersRCA-33$10,500$8,500
Lois WolkDCA-5$8,166$0
Rod WrightDCA-25$19,500$10,674
Mark WylandRCA-38$13,000$5,500
Leland YeeDCA-8$12,700$4,000

Interest Groups that supported this bill

$ Donated
Biotech products & research$154,391
Paging & cellular phones and services$108,549
Computer manufacture & services$58,500
Schools & colleges$58,278
Health & welfare policy$41,716
Welfare & social work$34,500
Democratic-based groups (but not official party committees) and generic liberal/progressive ones$4,500
Public official (elected or appointed)$4,100

Interest Groups that opposed this bill

$ Donated
Chambers of commerce$88,900
Manufacturing$48,366
Fiscal & tax policy$39,500
Loading…
Date Range of Contributions
Enter a custom date range