In City & County of San Francisco v. All Persons Interested in the Matter of Proposition C, Dkt. A158645 (Cal. App., June 30, 2020), the California Court of Appeal upheld Proposition C—a voter initiative that created a new local business tax in San Francisco. The court upheld the initiative that was enacted by a simple majority of electors. This ruling answers a question that was been heavily debated since the California Supreme Court’s decision in California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, 3 Cal. 5th 924 (Cal. 2017). That is, do special taxes proposed by voter initiative require a supermajority of voters to pass? This decision expressly narrows the supermajority requirement to only those tax measures proposed directly by local governments and will likely trigger more tax initiatives proposed and passed by citizen groups.
As the weather is heating up, the Texas tax front continues to bring hot and exciting developments in the Lone Star State. Two of the latest updates usher in a change to the sourcing of local sales tax for certain internet sales and the end of Texas’s internet access tax. Internet Sales The Texas Comptroller has adopted amended regulations under 34 Tex. Admin. Code § 3.34 relating to the location where an internet order is…
Numerous states have provided tax relief in response to the COVID-19 outbreak, often in the form of tax filing and payment deadline extensions. At this time, 41 states and Washington, D.C. have provided a corporate income tax filing and/or payment deadline extension. Most recently, Florida extended its May 1, 2020 corporate income tax deadlines to August 3, 2020 for filing and June 1, 2020 for payment. Since the payment deadline is sooner than the filing deadline, the Florida Department of Revenue advised corporate taxpayers to submit payments based on their best estimate of the tax that would be due with the return. Some states have also extended income tax deadlines for partnerships and other business entities and many states have extended individual income tax deadlines.
Many employees continue to telecommute due to the COVID-19 outbreak. As discussed in our previous blog post on state tax nexus and apportionment issues, out-of-state employers may need to consider whether a telecommuting employee’s activities could create nexus, exceed Public Law 86-272 protections, or impact the employer’s state income tax apportionment factor (particularly in states with a payroll factor or a sales factor where receipts are sourced based on cost of performance).