Tax administration: disclosure of information: Franchise Tax Board and cities.
Summary
Existing law authorizes, until December 31, 2013, a city that has entered into a reciprocal agreement, as defined, with the Franchise Tax Board, to exchange tax information, as provided. Existing law limits the use of the tax data received from the Franchise Tax Board to business tax administration purposes and provides that any other use or disclosure of the information is punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would extend the authorization until January 1, 2019, and extend the repeal date of the provisions relating to the reciprocal agreements between the Franchise Tax Board and cities. This bill would add an additional limitation on the use of the tax data to require the data to be utilized in a form and manner to safeguard the tax information, as prescribed. Because this bill would continue the operation of the reciprocal agreement exchange, and the unauthorized use of such information would be a crime, it 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2013
Committee Review
Sep 2013
Senate Passage
May 2013
Assembly Passage
Sep 2013
Signed into Law
Oct 2013
Introduced Feb 11, 2013
Signed Oct 3, 2013
Floor votes · Senate May 28, 2013 · Assembly Sep 11, 2013
How they voted
31–5
Passed
Total votes 36
May 28, 2013
D
Democratic27
100% Yea
R
Republican9
55% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
31
Key actions
12
Committee
12
Amendments
2
Oct 3, 2013
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Sep 11, 2013
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (46-19-3)
assembly
Sep 11, 2013
Upper · Passed
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 32. Noes 7. Page 2375.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
upper
Sep 11, 2013
Introduced
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
upper
Aug 30, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 4.) (August 30).
lower
Aug 21, 2013
Committee
Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Aug 13, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Aug 12, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (August 12). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Aug 12, 2013
Committee
Set, first hearing. Referred to REV. & TAX. suspense file.
lower
Aug 8, 2013
Lower · Passed
Hearing postponed by committee.
lower
Jun 14, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on REV. & TAX.
lower
May 28, 2013
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (31-5)
senate
May 20, 2013
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 4. Noes 2. Page 989.) (May 20).
upper
May 8, 2013
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
May 7, 2013
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 751.) (May 1).
upper
Apr 15, 2013
Upper · Passed
Hearing postponed by committee.
upper
Feb 21, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on GOV. & F.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Ed Hernandez
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 211
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 211. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline