A recent decision out of the Los Angeles County Superior Court marks a significant win for taxpayers involving the use of alternative apportionment and successful challenges to the Franchise Tax Board’s (“FTB”) regulations, which the court found to be inconsistent with the statute as applied. On February 26, 2026, the court in Smithfield Packaged Meats Corp. v. California Franchise Tax Board ordered the FTB (in a Proposed Statement of Decision, which becomes final after an…
California’s long-anticipated market-based sourcing “guidance” is finally out. Legal Ruling No. 2022-01 provides the Franchise Tax Board’s take on how to find the market in certain business-to-business sales. Though the guidance emphasizes that a seller should look to where its direct customer receives the benefit of sales of services, it keeps with current market-based sourcing trends amongst states and directs taxpayers to source such receipts based on the location of the taxpayer’s customer’s customer. The…
An out-of-state corporation, whose sole connection to California was a 0.2% interest in a manager-managed California limited liability company, was not “doing business” in California for purposes of the California corporate franchise tax according to the California Court of Appeal for the Fifth Appellate District in its recently-issued decision, Swart Enterprises, Inc. v. Franchise Tax Board, Case No. F070922. The appellate court’s decision affirmed the judgment of the California Superior Court and overturned the rationale articulated by the Franchise Tax Board (“FTB”) in FTB Ruling 2014-01 (July 22, 2014), which was issued by the FTB while the Swart case was pending.