Expected to boost Bay Area housing bond prospects; Cal Chamber opposes; requires majority of voters to approve

By Allen D. Payton

MTC/ABAG-backed Assembly Constitutional Amendment 1, which would lower the vote threshold for local special taxes and bonds to fund affordable housing, transportation, resilience and other public infrastructure projects from two-thirds to 55%, will go to voters in November 2024.

The state Legislature last month approved sending the amendment, authored by Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, to voters with the backing of the entire Bay Area legislative delegation. MTC and ABAG sent letters of support to Sacramento and MTC/ABAG legislative staff actively lobbied the bill to help get it over the finish line.

Similar bills have been proposed over the past two decades but until now none were approved by the house of origin, a hurdle that itself requires a two-thirds vote. Other supporters included Nonprofit Housing Association of Northern California, Enterprise Community Partners, the California Professional Firefighters, and individual cities and counties. 

The Bay Area is preparing to place a regional housing bond on the November 2024 ballot, with 80% of funds flowing to counties and several large cities and 20% designated for regionwide programs administered by the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA).

“While Bay Area voters have a long history of generously supporting taxes to fund transportation and housing improvements, measures in some parts of the region have repeatedly fallen short of the two-thirds margin,” MTC-ABAG Executive Director Andrew Fremier noted.  “ACA 1 would reinstate the ability of voting majorities to address vital community needs.”

The election of ACA 1 co-author Robert Rivas to the Assembly speakership helped build momentum for the proposed amendment, as did the nonprofit housing community’s raising of $10 million to gather signatures for a citizen’s initiative if the legislature didn’t approve the amendment.  

California Chamber of Commerce Opposes

The constitutional amendment is opposed by the California Chamber of Commerce. In a report by policy advocate Preston Young before it passed, he claims ACA1 would increase costs for key sectors, will erode taxpayer safeguards and would harm California workers.

Preston wrote, “This would provide increased tax authority for many local government agencies in California—not just cities and counties, but thousands of potentially overlapping special districts.

In a letter sent to legislators recently, the CalChamber pointed out that while it’s important to improve infrastructure and increase housing availability, higher property, sales and parcel taxes on working Californians run counter to the goal of making the state more affordable for all.

Businesses engaged in manufacturing, research and development, teleproduction and post-production, and agriculture face a significant sales and use tax burden in California.

The sales and use tax is supposed to be a tax on the final point of sale of a product, yet many businesses—including businesses conducting research and development, manufacturing, filming activities, and agriculture—are taxed for equipment purchases.

Taxation of business inputs for these industries leads to a pyramiding effect throughout the production process, leading to higher costs for purchases made by consumers, the CalChamber explained in its letter. To counter this pyramiding effect and incentivize business growth in the state, California offers a partial state-level sales tax exemption for purchases made by these industries. However, purchases made by these businesses are still subject to local transactions and use taxes.

Equipment purchases represent a significant portion of capital investment for existing businesses and start-ups. Tax increases promoted by ACA 1 would defeat the purpose of the state-level exemption provided by the state and make it more cost-prohibitive to conduct these business activities in California, the CalChamber warned.

ACA 1 would allow local jurisdictions to approve Bradley-Burns sales tax increases with a 55% vote of the electorate, eliminating the uniformity and certainty provided by the Bradley-Burns sales tax.

This would represent a monumental change to sales and use tax policy in the state, the CalChamber said. Unlike the transactions and use tax—which is capped at 2% per county and requires statutory authority to exceed the cap—the local 1.25% sales tax (referred to as the Bradley-Burns sales tax) is uniformly applied across the state and voters are not authorized to approve increases to the rate.

“California already has the highest state-imposed sales tax in the country, and the combined sales tax rates in some jurisdictions are among the highest in the United States,” the CalChamber said. “Allowing localities to modify their Bradley-Burns sales tax rates, without a cap on rate increases, paves the way for excessive combined sales tax rates in parts of the state—increasing costs for residents and businesses.”

More than four decades ago, prompted by years of rising taxes, Californians resoundingly approved Proposition 13 to provide a check on local governments’ taxing authority, and to ensure a greater representative voice for those who would be taxed. Proposition 13 also limits taxes on property to 1% of the property’s assessed value.

Reducing the vote threshold would diminish the people’s voice on tax increases and would erode property tax safeguards. The CalChamber pointed out that a May 2022 Public Policy Institute of California poll found that 64% of registered voters believe Proposition 13 has benefitted taxpayers, and this support reaches across nearly every major demographic.

After comparing the costs of operating in California versus other states, many employers left the state in recent years. A Hoover Institution report found that from 2018 to 2022, at least 352 companies relocated their headquarters out of California—with many businesses citing the state’s tax burden as the deciding factor in their relocation.

The relocation of these companies and their employees to lower-cost states has a major impact on state and local tax revenue, causes unemployment for workers who cannot move to the new location, and is a sign that California must find ways to be more competitive, the CalChamber stressed.

“Tax increases such as those promoted in ACA 1 would be a step in the wrong direction and would encourage more companies to move workers and investments to other states,” the CalChamber said.

Indeed, Californians are sensitive to this problem. A 2020 Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll found that 78% of voters “agreed that taxes in California were already so high that they were driving many people and businesses out of the state.”

Majority Vote Needed to Pass

According to a report by the California Globe,  Article XVIII, Section 4 of the California Constitution, “requires a proposed amendment or revision to be submitted to the electors and, if approved by a majority of votes, takes effect on the fifth day after the Secretary of State files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on, but the measure may provide that it becomes operative after its effective date.”

The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors is seeking individuals interested in serving on the Measure X Community Fiscal Oversight Committee. Measure X is the countywide half-cent sales tax that passed by voters in Nov. 2020 “to keep Contra Costa’s regional hospital open and staffed; fund community health centers; provide timely fire and emergency response; support crucial safety-net services; invest in early childhood services; protect vulnerable populations; and for other essential county services, shall the Contra Costa County measure levying a ½ cent sales tax, exempting food sales, providing an estimated $81,000,000 annually for 20 years that the State cannot take, requiring fiscal accountability, with funds benefiting County residents.” 

The committee was established by the Board of Supervisors on May 16, 2023 to advise the Board of Supervisors on financial audits of Measure X tax funds. There are currently five vacancies on the committee.

The Committee has the following duties:

1. Review, on an annual fiscal year basis, the expenditure of tax revenue generated by Measure X, to ensure it conforms to (i) the stated intent of the ballot measure, and (ii) the Board’s direction for specific allocations.

2. Oversee an annual audit of expenditures of tax revenue generated by Measure X.

3. Prepare an annual report of expenditures of tax revenue generated by Measure X.

Requirements:

• Civic-minded
• Interested in volunteering for public service
• Experience with auditing principles and financial management best practices

If you have the skills and experience required, we want to hear from you!

How do I apply?

Submit an application online here: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/6408/Boards-and-Commissions-Database

For more information, contact Adam Nguyen at 925-655-2048 or Adam.Nguyen@cao.cccounty.us.

Urges voters, taxpayers to call the Capitol to protect Prop 13, see committee members phone numbers below

ACA 1 would make it easier to raise local special taxes by removing the Prop. 13 taxpayer protection of the two-thirds vote of the electorate required to pass

ACA 13 was just introduced last week as a devious attempt to stop the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act from passing when it’s on the ballot in Nov. 2024.

By Jon Coupal

Prior to the successful passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, Howard Jarvis tried several times to bring property tax relief to beleaguered California homeowners. While coming close, it wasn’t until 1978 when voters overwhelmingly passed Proposition 13 over the opposition of virtually every political institution and newspaper in California.

As they say, timing is everything. What changed the political dynamic so abruptly in 1978 was the fact that thousands of California homeowners were being taxed out of their homes. That also explains why, to this day, Proposition 13 retains its popularity even as the state has become more “progressive.”

Last week there were two competing press events over Assembly Constitutional Amendment 1 (ACA 1), a proposal that would erase part of Proposition 13. As the head of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, I was joined at a news conference on the Capitol’s west steps on Wednesday by several legislators who have unequivocally expressed their continued support for Proposition 13 and opposition to ACA 1. Also present were several representatives of other taxpayer groups as well as business organizations suffering under California’s excessive tax burdens.

ACA 1 is a direct attack on Proposition 13 because it would cut the vote threshold needed to pass local special taxes, dropping it from the current two-thirds vote required by Proposition 13 to only 55%. That change would make it easier for local governments to raise taxes.

Since Proposition 13 was enacted in 1978, voters have continued to support the important two-thirds vote protection. That support was reaffirmed with the passage of pro-taxpayer initiatives in 1986, 1996 and 2010.

Many people may not know that the two-thirds vote requirement did not originate in 1978. It has been in the California Constitution since 1879! For more than a century, local property owners have been protected against excessive bond debt by the requirement that local bonds – repaid only by property owners – need a two-thirds vote of the local electorate.

ACA 1 repeals the two-thirds vote protection for tax increases to support “infrastructure,” a term so expansive that local governments would be able to raise taxes for almost any purpose with a vote of just 55% of the electorate. This is a hatchet that chops away at the taxpayer protections in Proposition 13.

ACA 1 proponents are aware of Prop. 13’s enduring popularity, so not once in their over one-hour press event did they mention Proposition 13 by name. Instead, they talked about “protecting democracy,” “local control,” and taking on “right-wing interests.” (Are Californians “right wing” for wanting to keep their home instead of being taxed out of it?) Nor did the supporters of ACA 1 provide any specific example of exactly what lowering the two-thirds vote would purchase, other than to claim that it was essential to address California’s dual crises of housing and homelessness.

Opponents of ACA 1 have noted that making it easier to raise taxes makes no sense in one of the highest taxed states in America. No other state comes close to California’s 13.3% top marginal income tax rate, and we also have the highest state sales tax in America as well as the highest gas tax, not to mention gas prices. And even with Prop. 13, we rank 14th out of 50 states in per capita property tax collections. Californians pay enough.

This is a critical time. As of this writing, ACA 1 has cleared one legislative committee and may be heard by the full Assembly as early as this week. However, its main proponent, Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, admitted at her press conference that she didn’t quite have the votes yet. For that reason, the time is now for all defenders of Proposition 13 and advocates for limited taxation to contact their Assembly representatives and let them know that a vote for ACA 1 is a vote against Proposition 13.

This issue is so important to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association that we will withhold our endorsement from any current legislator who fails to vote no on ACA 1.

Committee Hearings this Week, Taxpayers Urged to Call the Capitol

Your immediate help is needed to fight against two proposed constitutional amendments moving fast through the state Assembly. Both of these measures are attacks on PROPOSITION 13. We’re asking all HJTA members and supporters to please call the members of two committees that will be hearing these bills on Wednesday. Please call as soon as possible! Here’s all the information:

NO on ACA 1 – Hearing date: Wednesday, 8/23, Assembly Appropriations Committee

ACA 1 is a direct attack on Proposition 13 that would remove the taxpayer protection of the two-thirds vote of the electorate required to pass local special taxes. If this measure is enacted, local taxes and bonds for “infrastructure” (nearly everything) and public housing projects would pass with just 55% of the vote instead of 66.67%. This makes it easier to raise taxes, and your taxes could go up after every election.
Please call the members of the Assembly Appropriations Committee and urge a NO vote on ACA 1:

Chris Holden (Chair) – (916) 319-2041
Megan Dahle (Vice Chair) – (916) 319-2001
Isaac Bryan – (916) 319-2055
Lisa Calderon – (916) 319-2056
Wendy Carrillo – (916) 319-2052
Diane Dixon – (916) 319-2072 (Please thank Assemblywoman Dixon for opposing ACA 1)
Mike Fong – (916) 319-2049
Gregg Hart – (916) 319-2037
Josh Lowenthal – (916) 319-2069
Devon Mathis – (916) 319-2033 (Please thank Assemblyman Mathis for opposing ACA 1)
Diane Papan – (916) 319-2021
Gail Pellerin – (916) 319-2028
Kate A. Sanchez – (916) 319-2071
Esmeralda Soria – (916) 319-2027
Akilah Weber, M.D. – (916) 319-2079
Lori Wilson – (916) 319-2011 – Represents portions of Eastern Contra Costa County

NO on ACA13 – Hearing date: Wednesday, 8/23, Assembly Elections Committee

ACA 13 was just introduced last week as a devious attempt to stop the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act from passing when it’s on the ballot in November 2024. The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act is our initiative constitutional amendment that will restore the Proposition 13 protections that have been eroded by the courts. 

Some of the measure’s key provisions include:

• Require all new taxes passed by the Legislature to be approved by voters
• Restore two-thirds voter approval for all new local special tax increases
• Clearly define what is a tax or fee
• Require truthful descriptions of new tax proposals
• Hold politicians accountable by requiring them to clearly identify how revenue will be spent before any tax or fee is enacted

But ACA 13 would create special rules that make it harder to pass citizen initiatives like this one. If ACA 13 is enacted, the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act would require a two-thirds vote to pass, instead of the simple majority vote that has been required for all other constitutional amendments since 1849!

Please call the members of the Assembly Elections Committee and urge a NO vote on ACA 13:

Gail Pellerin (Chair) – (916) 319-2028
Tom Lackey (Vice Chair) – (916) 319-2034
Steve Bennett – (916) 319-2038
Bill Essayli – (916) 319-2063
Alex Lee – (916) 319-2024
Evan Low – (916) 319-2026
Blanca Rubio – (916) 319-2048

Please also call your own state representatives and urge them to vote NO on ACA 1 and NO on ACA 13. You can look up their names and contact information at findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov.

Thank you for your help in this critical fight to protect Proposition 13. We greatly appreciate you!
Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

Payment plan for low-income customers, penalty waivers for all bridges, Express Lanes

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)’s Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) today launched a public information campaign to raise travelers’ awareness of two new programs available through the Bay Area FasTrak® customer service center to help people with overdue tolls, penalties and fees get out of debt.

Bay Area FasTrak® now offers a payment plan program for individuals with outstanding toll debt whose household income is no more than 200 percent of the federal poverty level (about $60,000 for a family of four). The Bay Area Toll Payment Plan is open to all who have received toll violations on Bay Area bridges or express lanes. For those who qualify, violation penalties will be waived and any remaining balance of at least $100 can be paid off over time in the payment plan.

This program is intended to provide a way for people with overdue tolls, fees and penalties to get out of debt, and it is not limited to Bay Area residents.

Eligible participants may apply at the program website at bayareatollpaymentplan.org or by mailing or faxing a paper application. Both the website and the paper application are available in English, Spanish, Chinese and Vietnamese.

To ensure those who are income eligible are aware of and have assistance applying for Bay Area Toll Payment Plan, BATA is conducting extensive outreach to social services and housing agencies, as well as to dozens of community-based organizations and other human services programs.

BATA and partner toll agencies last month also began offering full or partial one-time violation penalty waivers that are available to all customers, regardless of income. BATA, the Golden Gate Bridge Highway & Transportation District and MTC’s Bay Area Infrastructure Financing Authority unit will waive all penalties associated with toll violations on their facilities on a one-time basis. The Alameda County Transportation Commission, the San Mateo County Express Lanes Joint Power Authority and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) each will waive one penalty per customer for toll violations on their Express Lane facilities.

The one-time penalty waivers will be available to customers through September 2024. To obtain a waiver or to find out if you have overdue toll violations, customers must call the Bay Area FasTrak® Customer Service center at 877-BAY-TOLL (877-229-8655) and pay all outstanding tolls and any DMV fees owed. Eligible customers who choose to enter into a payment plan must make their first payment to receive the penalty waiver.

MTC is the regional transportation planning, financing and coordinating agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area. BATA manages the Bay Area’s FasTrak electronic toll payment system and administers all toll revenue from the Bay Area’s seven state-owned toll bridges.

Don’t pay a fee to have your property taxes reduced

(Martinez, CA) – Many property owners throughout Contra Costa County are receiving an official looking document in the mail regarding a fee-based service to have their property’s taxable value reduced. Although these mailers have the appearance of an official government document, the correspondence is not from the Contra Costa County Assessor or any other Contra Costa County Office. 

The California Attorney General’s Office has posted warnings to California property owners on their website about the practices of these companies. For more information, please visit the Attorney General’s Consumer Alert at https://oag.ca.gov/consumers/general/prop_tax_scam.

Current scam mailers are requiring both a $40 county filing fee with the Clerk of the Assessment Appeals Board for a formal appeal, and a contingent fee of 30% of any tax savings as a result of filing the application. 

It is important for property owners to know that the Contra Costa County Assessor’s Office does not charge a fee to complete an informal value review for our taxpayers.

Property owners who believe the current market value of their property is less than the assessed value, can file a FREE “Request for Value Review (Prop 8)” form with the Contra Costa County Assessor’s Office. Please visit our webpage at http://www.cccounty.us/assessor and select “Review Your Value” to find a downloadable application.

Local tax base increases by almost $15 billion, to over $267 billion

Oakley, Antioch, Lafayette had greatest increases, San Pablo, San Ramon, Hercules had lowest

By Allen D. Payton

Just in time for Independence Day, when Americans celebrate our victory over the British in the battle against King George III and his onerous taxes, the “2023-2024 Assessor’s Close of Roll Affidavit” was signed by Assessor Gus S. Kramer and subscribed and sworn to the County Clerk-Recorder’s Office, on June 30. The 2023-2024 Assessment Roll has been delivered to the County Auditor, as required by law.

The increase to the local tax base for 2023-2024 is over $14.96 billion. This represents a 5.94% increase in assessed value and brings the total net local assessment roll to more than $266.67 billion. The 2023-2024 assessment roll is the highest to date in Contra Costa County’s history.

Cities with the largest increases in assessed value include Antioch, Oakley and Lafayette with increases ranging up to 8.49%. San Pablo, San Ramon and Hercules saw the lowest assessed value increases ranging from 4.30% down to 3.86%.  The assessment roll now consists of 379,442 parcels, an increase of 1,202 over the previous year.

“I would like to acknowledge and commend the employees of the Assessor’s Office for their continued dedication and hard work which resulted in the completion and delivery of the 2023-2024 assessment roll,” Kramer wrote in his letter.

The Assessor’s annual letter to the Assessment Roll Reports can be found at: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/79697/2023-2024-BOS-Close-of-Assessment-Roll-Letter-and-Reports-to-the-CCC-Board-of-Supervisors?bidId= 

The report shows the total Secured Value of property in the county, which includes all the real estate, is now over $267.6 billion. The Unsecured Value is the business equipment which includes computers, desks, chairs and machinery, Kramer explained. That total is now almost $7.8 billion.

“Local Exemptions (which total almost $8.7 billion) are what churches and non-profits enjoy, as well as all the homeowners’ exemptions. That’s a $7,000 deduction you have to apply for which saves you about $70 a year on your property taxes,” he shared. “That’s something I’m livid with the legislature for not increasing. In Idaho the homeowners’ exemption is 50%. Prior to Prop 13 in California, it was 25% but the legislature has never adjusted it. It should have been indexed or something.”

Asked about the difference between the charts in the report of $1 billion in the total Secured Value Kramer said. “It’s less than one-third of one percent, but we know what it is and we’re working it out. We had to get the report in by the July 1 due date.”

To learn more about your property taxes visit Assessor | Contra Costa County, CA Official Website, call (925) 313-7400 or email customerservice@assr.cccounty.us.

Due to impact of winter storms; includes quarterly tax payments

The Internal Revenue Service announced on Feb. 24, 2023, that California storm victims, including Contra Costa County residents and businesses, now have until October 16, 2023, to file various federal individual and business tax returns and make tax payments. The deadline was previously extended to May 15 on January 10 and didn’t include Contra Costa. But that changed the following day. Then on Thursday, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced state tax returns will also not be due until Oct. 16, as well.

The IRS is offering relief to any area designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). This means that individuals and households that reside or have a business in Alameda, Colusa, Contra Costa County qualify for tax relief. The current list of eligible localities is always available on the Tax Relief in Disaster Situations page on IRS.gov.

The tax relief postpones various tax filing and payment deadlines that occurred starting on January 8, 2023. As a result, affected individuals and businesses will have until Oct. 16, 2023, to file returns and pay any taxes that were originally due during this period.

This includes 2022 individual income tax returns due on April 18, as well as various 2022 business returns normally due on March 15 and April 18. Among other things, this means that eligible taxpayers will have until Oct. 16 to make 2022 contributions to their IRAs and health savings accounts.

The Disaster Assistance and Emergency Relief for Individuals and Businesses page has details on other returns, payments and tax-related actions qualifying for the additional time.

The IRS automatically provides filing and penalty relief to any taxpayer with an IRS address of record located in the disaster area. Therefore, taxpayers do not need to contact the agency to get this relief. However, if an affected taxpayer receives a late filing or late payment penalty notice from the IRS that has an original or extended filing, payment or deposit due date falling within the postponement period, the taxpayer should call the number on the notice to have the penalty abated.

In addition, the IRS will work with any taxpayer who lives outside the disaster area but whose records necessary to meet a deadline occurring during the postponement period are located in the affected area. Taxpayers qualifying for relief who live outside the disaster area need to contact the IRS at 866-562-5227. This also includes workers assisting the relief activities who are affiliated with a recognized government or philanthropic organization.

Individuals and businesses in a federally declared disaster area who suffered uninsured or unreimbursed disaster-related losses can choose to claim them on either the return for the year the loss occurred (in this instance, the 2023 return normally filed next year), or the return for the prior year (2022, normally filed this tax season). Be sure to write the FEMA declaration number – 3591-EM − on any return claiming a loss. See Publication 547 for details.

The tax relief is part of a coordinated federal response to the damage caused by these storms and is based on local damage assessments by FEMA. For information on disaster recovery, visit disasterassistance.gov.

California Extension Matches IRS

In addition, California is extending the tax filing deadline for Californians impacted by December and January winter storms to October 16, 2023 – aligning with the IRS

In addition to tax relief measures that Governor Gavin Newsom announced in January, California is also extending the state tax filing and payment due dates to October 16, 2023 for Californians impacted by the winter storms in December and January. This aligns California with the Biden Administration, which announced that the IRS extended various due dates until October 16, as well.

“As communities across the state continue recovering from the damage caused by the winter storms, California is working swiftly to help recovering Californians get back on their feet,” said Governor Newsom. “The state is aligning with the Biden Administration and extending the tax filing deadline in addition to the tax relief announced earlier this year.”

Last month, Governor Newsom announced tax relief for those impacted by winter storms, giving people the ability to claim a deduction for disaster loss and extending certain filing deadlines.

The following counties are eligible for this extended tax relief, per the IRS announcements here and here:

Residents and businesses in Alameda, Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Contra Costa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Humboldt, Inyo, Kings, Lake, Los Angeles, Madera, Marin, Mariposa, Mendocino, Merced, Mono, Monterey, Napa, Nevada, Orange, Placer, Riverside, Sacramento, San Benito, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Francisco, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Siskiyou, Solano, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Tulare, Tuolumne, Ventura, Yolo, and Yuba counties who have been affected by severe winter storms, flooding, landslides, and mudslides are eligible for tax relief.

TAX EXTENSION

To help alleviate some of the hardship many have endured during this trying period, the FTB has extended the filing and payment deadlines for individuals and businesses in California until October 16, 2023.

This relief applies to deadlines falling on or after January 8, 2023, and before October 16, 2023, including the 2022 individual income tax returns due on April 18 and the quarterly estimated tax payments, typically due on January 17, 2023 and April 18, 2023. Those payments were previously extended to May 15, 2023 for those impacted by winter storms.

The IRS announced tax relief for Californians affected by these winter storms. Taxpayers affected by these storms qualify for an extension to October 16, 2023 to file individual and business tax returns and make certain tax payments. This includes:

• Individuals whose tax returns and payments are due on April 18, 2023.
• Quarterly estimated tax payments due January 17, 2023, April 18, 2023, June 15, 2023, and September 15, 2023.
• Business entities whose tax returns are normally due on March 15 and April 18.
• PTE Elective Tax payments due on June 15, 2023.

CLAIMING DISASTER LOSSES

Taxpayers affected by a presidentially declared disaster may claim a deduction for a disaster loss. Taxpayers may claim a disaster loss when filing either an original or amended tax year 2022 tax return.

When filing their return, taxpayers should write the name of the disaster in blue or black ink at the top of their tax return to alert FTB. If filing electronically, taxpayers should follow the software instructions to enter disaster information. If a taxpayer receives a late filing or payment penalty notice related to the postponement period, they should call the number on the notice to have the penalty abated.

Additional information and instructions are available in FTB Publication 1034, 2022 Disaster Loss: How to Claim a State Tax Deduction.

Disaster victims can receive free copies of their state returns to replace those lost or damaged. To do so, they should use form FTB 3516 and write the name of the disaster in blue or black ink at the top of the request.

For a complete list of all disasters declared in California, see the chart on FTB’s disaster loss webpage.

 

 

Sacramento – On Wednesday, July 27, 2022, the California State Board of Equalization (BOE) held the first of at least three public Property Tax Abatement Workgroup meetings. The Board received presentations from policy experts and stakeholders on the development of new housing, focusing on how to best address the need to build 2.5 million new housing units to address California’s housing gap, including how to provide new housing opportunities for the “missing middle.” The workgroup consists of Board Chair Malia M. Cohen, who represents District 2 and District 3 Board Member Antonio Vazquez.

“As Chair of the Board of Equalization, which administers California’s $85 billion property tax system, I am deeply encouraged by today’s discussion with housing policy experts,” said Chair Malia M. Cohen. “The presentations of these experts both highlighted the reality of our housing crisis, associated equity issues, and the opportunity to address the development of new housing through creative and innovative solutions.”

“Today’s meeting focused on property tax abatements as a tool to incentivize new housing construction and increase the inventory of affordable housing. Property tax abatements have been used before, particularly in New York City, to build tens of thousands of new housing units to address the housing needs of the ‘missing middle’. It makes sense to consider whether similar property tax abatement strategies could work in California,” Cohen concluded.

In upcoming meetings of the Property Tax Abatement Workgroup, the BOE will examine strategies to ensure that revenue for schools and local governments are protected under any property tax abatement programs. The BOE will also explore how local government, labor, businesses, and developers can work collaboratively to build new housing under such abatement programs.

The BOE will hold additional meetings of the Property Tax Abatement Workgroup at the Board’s upcoming August 31st and September 28th board meetings. At the conclusion of the BOE’s Property Tax Abatement Workgroup, the Board will issue a report.

The agenda of the July 27, 2022 meeting of the Property Tax Abatement Workgroup can be found at this link: https://www.boe.ca.gov/meetings/pdf/2022/072622-PAN-Jul.pdf

As the BOE Board Member for District 2 Cohen represents nearly 10 million constituents residing in 23 counties in Northern and Central California, extending from Del Norte County in the north to Santa Barbara County in the south, including Contra Costa County. She is the youngest Constitutional Officer serving in California and is the first African American woman to be elected as chair of the Board of Equalization in its 141-year history.

The Board of Equalization is California’s statewide elected tax board. Its five members include four members elected in districts, and the State Controller. Under its constitutional mandate, the BOE oversees the assessment practices of the state’s 58 county assessors, who are charged with establishing values for approximately 13.6 million assessments each year. In addition, the BOE assesses the property of regulated railroads and specific public utilities and is responsible for the alcoholic beverage tax and tax on insurers.

Note: This news release may discuss complex tax laws and concepts. It may not address every situation and is not considered written advice. Changes in law or regulations may have occurred since the time this news release was written. If there is a conflict between the text of this news release and the law, decisions will be based upon the law and not this news release.