Existing law, the Corporation Tax Law, imposes taxes based upon gross income, and defines "gross income" as all income from whatever source derived, unless specifically excluded. Existing law allows various credits against the taxes imposed by that law. The Corporation Tax Law conforms to federal law in its treatment of certain exclusions and credits. Existing law provides for certain programs for free legal services for indigent persons. This bill would, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2027, and before January 1, 2032, enact the No Tax Breaks for ICE Contractors Act of 2026, which would deny all tax credits otherwise available under the Corporation Tax Law to any taxpayer that contracts with United States Department of Homeland Security, except as provided. The bill would establish the California Immigrant Resilience Fund in the State Treasury. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board, in consultation with the Department of Finance, to estimate the amount of additional revenue resulting from the provisions of the bill, notify the Controller of that amount, and require the Controller to transfer that amount to the fund. The bill would make moneys in the fund available to provide immigration-related services, including removal defense, as provided, upon appropriation by the Legislature. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within 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. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law authorizes various local governmental entities, subject to certain limitations and approval requirements, to levy a transactions and use tax for general or specific purposes, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in the Transactions and Use Tax Law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all taxes that may be imposed in accordance with that law in any county not exceed 2%. This bill would authorize, until December 31, 2031, the County of Los Angeles, by an ordinance adopted by the county, to levy a tax pursuant to the Transactions and Use Tax Law at a rate not to exceed 0.5% for general and special purposes, subject to voter approval, as specified. The bill would also authorize, until December 31, 2031, the County of Contra Costa, by an ordinance adopted by the county, to levy a tax pursuant to the Transactions and Use Tax Law at a rate not to exceed 0.625% for general or specific purposes, subject to voter approval, as specified. The bill would authorize those taxes to exceed the 2% limit described above. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Contra Costa and Los Angeles. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law establishes a public school financing system that requires state funding for county superintendents of schools, school districts, and charter schools to be calculated pursuant to a local control funding formula, as specified. Existing law requires the local control funding formula, in part, to be based on average daily attendance, as defined. For purposes of the local control funding formula, existing law requires a school district's fiscal year average daily attendance to be computed using the 2nd principal apportionment regular average daily attendance for the greater of the current fiscal year, the prior fiscal year, or the average of the 3 most recent prior fiscal years, as specified. This bill, for purposes of the local control funding formula, would require a school district's fiscal year average daily attendance to be computed using the average of the 5 most recent prior fiscal years, if that average is greater than the 3 averages described above.
Existing law prescribes the procedures by which a proposed ordinance may be submitted to the governing board of a district by an initiative measure. These procedures do not apply to specified districts, including a district formed under a law that does not provide a procedure for elections. This bill would authorize the voters of any district that has authority to impose a transactions and use tax for transportation purposes to impose a retail transactions and use tax by an initiative measure. The bill would prohibit the initiative tax from exceeding the maximum authorized rate for a tax imposed by an ordinance enacted by the governing body of the district, and the bill would require the initiative measure to contain all spending limitations and substantive accountability standards applicable to a tax imposed by an ordinance enacted by the governing body. To the extent the bill would increase the duties of county elections officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, until January 1, 2031, authorizes the State Air Resources Board to adopt a regulation establishing a system of market-based declining aggregate emissions limits for sources or categories of sources that emit greenhouse gases (market-based compliance mechanism) that meets certain requirements. Existing law establishes the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and requires all moneys, except for fines and penalties, collected by the state board from the auction or sales of allowances as a part of a market-based compliance mechanism to be deposited into the fund and requires the Legislature to appropriate moneys in the fund for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the state, as provided. Existing law, the California Climate Crisis Act, declares that it is the policy of the state both to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net-negative greenhouse gas emissions thereafter, and to ensure that by 2045, statewide anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 85% below the 1990 levels. This bill would enact the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Act of 2025 and would establish the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Program to be administered by the California Environmental Protection Agency to require fossil fuel polluters to pay their fair share of the damage caused by greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere during the covered period, which the bill would define as the time period between the 1990 and 2024 calendar years, inclusive, resulting from the extraction, production, refining, sale, or combustion of fossil fuels or petroleum products, to relieve a portion of the burden to address cost borne by current and future California taxpayers. The bill would require the agency, within 90 days of the effective date of the act, to determine and publish a list of responsible parties, which the bill would define as an entity with a majority ownership interest in a business engaged in extracting or refining fossil fuels that, during the covered period, did business in the state or otherwise had sufficient contact with the state, and is determined by the agency to be responsible for more than 1,000,000,000 metric tons of covered fossil fuel emissions, as defined, in aggregate globally, during the covered period. This bill would require the agency, within one year of the effective date of the act, to conduct and complete a climate cost study to, among other things, quantify the total damage amount, which the bill would define as all past and future climate harms and damages to the state from January 1, 1990, through December 31, 2045, inclusive. The bill would require the agency to update the climate cost study, not less frequently than every 5 years, through January 1, 2045, as provided. The bill would require the agency, within 60 days of the completion of the climate cost study, to determine and assess, as provided, a cost recovery demand for each responsible party listed, which represents the responsible party's proportionate share of the total damage amount. The bill would require responsible parties to pay their cost recovery demand, as provided. The bill would require the collected cost recovery demands to be deposited in the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund, which the bill would create in the State Treasury. The bill would, upon appropriation by the Legislature, require moneys in the fund be expended for, among other things, qualifying expenditures, which the bill would define to include expenditures for projects and programs to mitigate, adapt, or respond to the damages and costs caused to the state from climate change. The bill would require all interest earned on moneys that have been deposited into the fund to be retained in the fund for use in implementing the program. The bill would require the agency to determine the initial implementation costs for the act, as provided, and would require the agency to assess an amount allocated equitably among responsible parties to cover those costs. This bill would require the Director of Finance, within 45 days of the effective date of the act, to perform an initial assessment of the reasonable and appropriate initial implementation costs that will be incurred by the agency. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district that determines during a fiscal year that its revenues are less than the amount necessary to meet its current year expenditure obligations to request an emergency apportionment through the Superintendent of Public Instruction, subject to specified requirements. Existing law authorizes emergency apportionments to be provided through an interim loan from the General Fund and lease financing made available by the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank, which is authorized to issue bonds for purposes of the emergency apportionments and related costs, or as an alternative to lease financing, as an emergency apportionment from the General Fund. Existing law prescribes the financing conditions on emergency apportionments, including the calculation of the interest rate. Existing law, notwithstanding any other law, authorizes the Inglewood Unified School District, through the State Department of Education, to request cashflow loans from the General Fund for a total of up to $55,000,000 for emergency operational purposes, as provided. Existing law requires the interest on these loans to be charged at the annual rate of return of the Pooled Money Investment Account, plus an additional 2%. This bill, notwithstanding any other law, and once the Inglewood Unified School District has successfully repaid at least 10 years of a General Fund cashflow loan made pursuant to those provisions, would authorize the school district to seek, and would require the Department of Finance to grant, a waiver of interest on that loan for the next succeeding fiscal year if specified conditions are met, including, among other conditions, that the Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools, in consultation with the County Office Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, determines that the school district is making substantial progress towards fiscal solvency and that a waiver of interest would help the school district to exit receivership, as provided. In each subsequent fiscal year, the bill would authorize the school district to seek, and would require the Department of Finance to grant, a subsequent waiver of interest for the applicable fiscal year if the school district again meets those same requirements. To the extent the bill would impose additional duties on the Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Inglewood Unified School District. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
(1) Existing law creates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission as a local area planning agency for the 9-county San Francisco Bay area with comprehensive regional transportation planning and other related responsibilities. Existing law creates various transit districts located in the San Francisco Bay area, with specified powers and duties relating to providing public transit services. This bill would establish the Public Transit Revenue Measure District with jurisdiction extending throughout the boundaries of the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara and the City and County of San Francisco and would require the district to be governed by the same board that governs the commission, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a retail transactions and use tax applicable to the entire district to be imposed by the board of the district or by a qualified voter initiative for a duration of 14 years, and in an amount of 0.5% in each of the above-described counties located within the district and 1% in the City and County of San Francisco, subject to voter approval at the November 3, 2026, statewide general election. After payments are made for various administrative expenses, the bill would require the district to transfer specified portions of the proceeds of the tax to the commission for allocation to certain programs and other purposes and for allocation to the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, commonly known as Caltrain, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, and other specified transit agencies, for transit operations expenses, and would require the district to transfer specified portions of the proceeds of the tax directly to other specified local transportation agencies, including the San Mateo County Transit District and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, for public transit expenses, as prescribed. By adding to the duties of local officials with respect to elections procedures for this bill on behalf of the district, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires the commission to develop regional transit service objectives, develop performance measures of efficiency and effectiveness, specify uniform data requirements to assess public transit service benefits and costs, and formulate procedures for establishing regional transportation priorities in the allocation of funds for transportation purposes. This bill would require the commission to contract with, and manage, a third-party consultant to conduct a financial efficiency review of the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, Caltrain, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, as specified. The bill would require the review to be completed in 2 phases, with the analysis for the 2nd phase only required if the tax measure is approved by the voters of the Public Transit Revenue Measure District. The bill would require the consultant to transmit the analysis for each phase to an oversight committee, which the bill would create with a prescribed membership, for review and adoption. The bill would require a transit operator subject to the financial efficiency review to take specified actions in response to the analysis for the first phase and, subject to review of the oversight committee, to adopt an implementation plan that describes the cost-saving measures identified in the analysis for the 2nd phase that the operator plans to implement, as specified. The bill would require a transit operator subject to the financial efficiency review to verify its compliance with the requirements of the review as a condition of receiving funds from the tax measure approved by the voters of the district. The bill would require each transit operator to which the commission allocates funds to comply with a maintenance of effort requirement as a condition of receiving those funds, as provided. This bill would require the commission, if the tax measure is approved by the voters of the district and other conditions are satisfied, to establish an ad hoc adjudication committee for a transit operator subject to the above-described financial efficiency review to assess and adjudicate petitions submitted by a participating county transportation entity, as defined, or a county board of supervisors with regard to the performance of the transit operator within the geographic jurisdiction of the entity submitting the petition, as provided. As part of this process, the bill would require an ad hoc adjudication committee, among other things, to determine whether to direct the commission to withhold funding from the tax measure allocated to the transit operator if the committee agrees with a claim regarding the performance of the transit operator, as specified. This bill would require the commission to submit a report to the Legislature on or before March 31, 2026, on its forecast of the impacts to ridership on the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, Caltrain, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency from planned transportation projects and strategies included in its adopted regional transportation plan. By adding to the duties of the commission, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The Bay Area County Traffic and Transportation Funding Act authorizes the formation of county transportation authorities in each of the 9 bay area counties, and provides for the imposition of a retail transaction and use tax in each of those counties of either 12 of 1% or 1%, subject to voter approval, with revenues to be used for various transportation purposes. This bill would instead provide that a retail transaction and use tax imposed under those provisions in the County of San Mateo or the City and County of San Francisco may be imposed in 18 of 1% increments up to 1%. (4) This bill would declare that its provisions are severable. (5) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
The Local Transportation Authority and Improvement Act authorizes a county board of supervisors to create or otherwise designate a local transportation authority in the county that may impose a transactions and use tax for transportation purposes subject to voter approval and other specified requirements. Pursuant to that authority, the county board of supervisors of the County of Sacramento created the Sacramento Transportation Authority (STA) . This bill would provide that the allowable expenditure categories for revenues from a tax imposed by STA include the construction, modernization, and improvement of infrastructure, as defined, that supports infill or transit-oriented development in areas nominated by local governments, and included in regionally adopted plans that advance state greenhouse gas emissions reduction objectives, as specified. The bill would also authorize STA to impose a transactions and use tax under the act in a geographic area that comprises less than the total area of the County of Sacramento, subject to the approval of voters within that area and other specified requirements. Existing law authorizes regional transportation agencies and the Department of Transportation to apply to the California Transportation Commission to develop and operate high-occupancy toll lanes or other toll facilities. Under existing law, revenue generated from the operation of a toll facility under these provisions is available to the sponsoring agency for the expenses related to the toll facility and for other uses within the corridor from which the revenue is generated pursuant to an expenditure plan developed by the sponsoring agency. Existing law authorizes a regional transportation agency to issue bonds to finance construction-related expenditures for a toll facility, and construction-related expenditures that are included in the expenditure plan, payable from the revenues generated from the toll facility. Existing law defines regional transportation agency for these purposes to mean, among other things, a joint exercise of powers authority subject to the consent of a transportation planning agency for the jurisdiction in which the transportation project will be developed. For purposes of these provisions, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments, the Yolo Transportation District, and the department formed a joint powers authority, known as the Capital Area Regional Tolling Authority (CARTA) , to apply to the commission to develop and operate toll facilities in the Sacramento region. This bill would authorize STA to issue bonds to finance costs of high-occupancy toll lanes or other toll facilities within the County of Sacramento approved by the commission pursuant to the above-described provisions. The bill would authorize those bonds to be payable from toll revenue or any other funds lawfully available to STA for those purposes, including sales tax revenue. Before STA issues bonds payable from toll revenue for a toll facility operated by CARTA, the bill would require STA to enter into an agreement with CARTA regarding the application of toll revenue to pay for bonds issued by STA and would require the governing board of CARTA to review and approve a toll facility expenditure plan.
Existing law authorizes various local governmental entities, subject to certain limitations and approval requirements, to levy a transactions and use tax for general or specific purposes, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in the Transactions and Use Tax Law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all taxes that may be imposed in accordance with that law in any county not exceed 2%. This bill would authorize the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, by an ordinance adopted by the council, to levy a tax pursuant to the Transactions and Use Tax Law at a rate not to exceed 1%, for general and special purposes, subject to voter approval on or after January 1, 2026, and before January 1, 2032. The bill would authorize the board to exceed the 2% limit described above to impose the retail transactions and use tax. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of San Luis Obispo.
The Corporation Tax Law, in modified conformity with federal tax law, provides an exemption from the taxes imposed by that law for specified organizations. Existing law references federal tax law to give priority to tax-exempt organizations, or to require tax-exempt status, for the purpose of certain grants and service contracts. This bill would provide that where specified federal tax law is referenced to determine eligibility for any state grant or service contract, or for the disbursement of state or local funds, it is deemed to also refer to the relevant provision of the Corporation Tax Law. Existing law designates the State Department of Social Services as the single agency with full power to supervise every phase of the administration of public social services, including services for refugees, immigrants, and asylees, except as specified. Existing law requires the department to allocate federal funds for refugee social services programs to eligible counties and, in certain circumstances, to qualified nonprofit organizations. Existing law requires the department, subject to an appropriation, to provide grants to qualified nonprofit organizations through contracts to provide certain immigration-related legal services to persons residing in, or formerly residing in, the state. Existing law requires the department to administer a rapid response program to award grants or contracts to entities, including nonprofit organizations, that provide critical assistance to immigrants during times of need. Existing law, subject to an appropriation, establishes the Enhanced Services for Asylees and Vulnerable Noncitizens program to provide resettlement services for persons granted asylum by the United States Attorney General or the United States Secretary of Homeland Security or who are eligible to receive refugee cash assistance and services as victims of crime. Existing law requires a grant or contract awarded pursuant to that program to be executed only with a qualified nonprofit organization. Existing law defines "qualified nonprofit organization" or "nonprofit organization" for purposes of these provisions to include a nonprofit organization that, among other things, is exempt from federal income taxation, as specified. This bill would revise the definition of "qualified nonprofit organization" or "nonprofit organization" under the above-described provisions to additionally include a nonprofit organization that meets specified requirements to qualify for state tax-exempt status. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
