(1) The California Constitution establishes the Budget Stabilization Account and requires the Controller to transfer from the General Fund to the account, no later than October 1 of each fiscal year, a sum equal to 1.5% of the estimated amount of General Fund revenues for that fiscal year. The Department of Finance is required to report specified information to the Legislature, including (A) an estimate of the amount of General Fund proceeds of taxes that may be appropriated for that fiscal year, (B) an estimate of the portion of that amount that is derived from personal income taxes paid on net capital gains, and (C) the portion of the estimate in (B) that exceeds 8% of the estimate made in (A) . Notwithstanding the requirement for the Controller to transfer 1.5% of General Fund revenues for each fiscal year to the account, for the 2015–16 fiscal year to the 2029–30 fiscal year, inclusive, the California Constitution instead requires 50% of that amount and 50% of the amount described in (C) to be transferred to the Budget Stabilization Account. The California Constitution requires the remaining 50% to be appropriated for unfunded liabilities and other specified purposes. Commencing with the 2027–28 fiscal year, this measure would require the Department of Finance to report the sum of the portion of the estimate in (B) that exceeds 8%, but does not exceed 10%, of the estimate in (A) and 150% of the estimate in (B) that exceeds 10% of the estimate in (A) . The measure would require 50% of that sum and 50% of the amount equal to 1.5% of the estimated amount of General Fund revenues for the fiscal year to be transferred to the Budget Stabilization Account each fiscal year until the 2039–40 fiscal year, and it would require the remaining 50% to be appropriated for unfunded liabilities and other specified purposes. The measure would add repayment of federal loans relating to unemployment insurance to the purposes for which the remaining 50% may be appropriated. The California Constitution limits the amount that is required to be transferred to the Budget Stabilization Account for any fiscal year from exceeding an amount that would result in a balance in the account that, when the transfer is made, exceeds 10% of the estimated amount of the General Fund proceeds of taxes for the fiscal year, as specified. This measure would increase that limit to 20% of the estimated amount of the General Fund proceeds of taxes for the fiscal year. (2) The California Constitution creates the Public School System Stabilization Account in the General Fund and requires the Controller to transfer specified amounts from the General Fund to the account. Upon a proclamation by the Governor declaring a budget emergency, the Legislature may suspend or reduce transfers to the Budget Stabilization Account or Public School System Stabilization Account, return funds in the Budget Stabilization Account to the General Fund, and appropriate funds in the Public School System Stabilization Account for the support of school districts and community college districts. The California Constitution defines "budget emergency" for these purposes to mean (A) the existence of conditions of disaster or extreme peril, as declared by the Governor, or (B) a determination by the Governor that estimated resources are inadequate to fund General Fund expenditures for the current or ensuing fiscal year at a level equal to the highest amount of total General Fund expenditures estimated at the time of enactment of any of the three most recent Budget Acts. The California Constitution requires the Governor, within the first 10 days of each calendar year, to submit to the Legislature a proposed budget for the fiscal year commencing on July 1 of that calendar year. Under existing statutory law, the Director of Finance is required to submit a revised budget proposal to the Legislature on or before May 14. Under this measure, the revised budget proposal submitted on or before May 14, or any other budgetary revision required to be submitted to the Legislature, would constitute the Governor's proclamation of a budget emergency if the above-described conditions for a budget emergency exist, and if the budgetary revision proposes to suspend or reduce transfers from the General Fund to the Budget Stabilization Account or Public School System Stabilization Account, return funds in the Budget Stabilization Account to the General Fund, or appropriate money from the Public School System Stabilization Account. (3) The California Constitution prohibits the total annual appropriations subject to limitation of the State and of each local government from exceeding the appropriations limit of the entity of government for the prior year, adjusted for the change in the cost of living and the change in population. The California Constitution defines "appropriations subject to limitation" of the State for these purposes. This measure would exclude both of the following from the appropriations subject to limitation of the State commencing with the 2027–28 fiscal year: (A) transfers to the Budget Stabilization Account; and (B) transfers to a General Fund reserve account established by the Legislature known as the Projected Surplus Temporary Holding Account, provided that the amount not subject to limitation may not exceed 10% of the amount of General Fund proceeds of taxes for the applicable fiscal year. Funds withdrawn, transferred, or appropriated from those reserve accounts, if they were not counted previously as appropriations subject to limitation of the State when deposited, would constitute appropriations subject to limitation of the State in the fiscal year in which the withdrawal, transfer, or appropriation occurs.
Under existing law, there are programs providing assistance for, among other things, emergency housing, multifamily housing, farmworker housing, home ownership for very low and low-income households, and downpayment assistance for first-time home buyers. Existing law also authorizes the issuance of bonds in specified amounts pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law and requires that proceeds from the sale of these bonds be used to finance various existing housing programs, capital outlay related to infill development, brownfield cleanup that promotes infill development, and housing-related parks. Existing law, the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018, authorized, the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,000,000,000 to finance various existing housing programs, as well as infill infrastructure financing and affordable housing matching grant programs, as well as financing for a specified program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans, pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law. This bill would enact the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026, which, if adopted, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $11,250,000,000, pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law. Of the proceeds from the sale of these bonds, $10,000,000,000 would be used to finance programs to fund affordable rental housing and home ownership programs, including, among others, the Multifamily Housing Program, the CalHome Program, and the Joe Serna, Jr. Farmworker Housing Grant Program, and $1,250,000,000 would be used to provide additional funding for the above-described program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans, as provided. This bill would provide for submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 3, 2026, statewide general election, in accordance with specified law. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law provides that in an action for the breach of an obligation not arising from contract, the measure of damages, except as provided, is the amount that will compensate for all the detriment proximately caused thereby, whether it could have been anticipated or not. This bill, with respect to a civil case, claim, action, or arbitration against a network company, its subsidiary, or an app-based driver, as defined, arising from an automobile accident, would, except as specified, prohibit the maximum recovery of a plaintiff for damages for any medical expense for services rendered by a lien-based provider, as defined, from exceeding the 70th percentile of FAIR Health, Inc.'s billed charges, or the 70th percentile of a comparable commercially recognized billed charges database for the same or similar service in the applicable geographic area at the time the service was rendered. The bill would prohibit certain evidence from being introduced that exceeds the recoverable amount. This bill would provide that if a medical lien, as defined, receivable, or right to payment has been sold or otherwise transferred, the maximum recoverable medical expense damages shall not exceed the total consideration paid or payable in connection with the transaction to acquire the lien, receivable, or right to payment, as provided. The bill would require any agreement relating to the sale or transfer of a medical lien, receivable, or right to payment, and the consideration paid or payable therefor, to be discoverable, and would prohibit an undisclosed lien sale or transfer from being asserted against a defendant, insurer, settlement, judgment, or settlement proceeds. The bill would also require certain medical lien financial relationships and attorney referral information to be discoverable. This bill would make it unlawful for an attorney representing a plaintiff under a contingency fee agreement in a civil claim, action, or arbitration, as described above, to refer a client to a health care provider in which the attorney or a member of the attorney's immediate family has a direct ownership interest. The bill would also make it unlawful for an attorney to fee split or receive other specified compensation in connection with the furnishing of lien-based provider medical treatment for a plaintiff and would make it unlawful for an attorney or law firm to provide specified compensation for referrals of clients to lien-based providers for lien-based treatment. The bill would also make other actions related to the reduction of a medical lien unlawful, as specified. This bill would provide that these provisions are severable. (2) The Passenger Charter-party Carriers' Act defines a transportation network company as an organization, whether a corporation, partnership, sole proprietor, or other form, operating in California that provides prearranged transportation services for compensation using an online-enabled platform to connect passengers with drivers using a personal vehicle. Existing law requires a transportation network company to conduct, or have a third party conduct, a local and national criminal background check for each participating driver, as specified, and prohibits a transportation network company from contracting with, employing, or retaining a driver if the driver, among other things, is currently registered on the United States Department of Justice National Sex Offender Public website, has been convicted of any of certain terrorism-related or human trafficking felonies or a violent felony or, within the previous 7 years, has been convicted of any misdemeanor assault or battery, any domestic violence offense, driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or any of a specified list of felonies. A violation of the act is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine, imprisonment, or both a fine and imprisonment. This bill would additionally prohibit a transportation network company from contracting with, employing, or retaining a driver if the driver has been convicted of specified offenses or, within the previous 7 years, has been convicted of other specified offenses, including driving under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or drug. The bill would require the background check to be performed prior to the activation of a driver's account and once annually thereafter, as provided. By expanding the scope of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, provides that all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to full and equal accommodations in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever, regardless of their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status. This bill would provide that notwithstanding that act, a transportation network company or charter-party carrier of passengers, as defined, may allow a woman passenger on its online-enabled application or platform or a participating woman driver to indicate a preference to be matched with a woman driver or woman passenger, respectively, and facilitate passenger-driver matches based on such preferences. The bill would make these provisions apply retroactively, as provided. (4) 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.
Existing law, the Documentary Transfer Tax Act, authorizes the imposition of a tax by a county or city and county, as provided, with respect to specified instruments that transfer specified interests in real property. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2027, prohibit a local jurisdiction, defined to include a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county, from collecting a transfer tax, as defined, levied on the sale or transfer of a real property interest conveyed if the combined transfer tax rate levied by the local jurisdiction exceeds 1.5% of the consideration paid for or value of the real property interest conveyed, except as otherwise provided. The bill would also prohibit a local jurisdiction from levying a transfer tax on the first sale of single-family housing property occurring within 5 years of one or more housing units on the real property being destroyed or made uninhabitable by a natural disaster, as defined. By imposing new duties upon local officials with respect to transfer taxes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. 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.
Under existing law, the purpose of the California Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority Act is to advance the state's goals of reducing the levels of greenhouse gas emissions, increasing the deployment of sustainable and renewable energy sources, implementing measures that increase the efficiency of the use of energy, creating high quality employment opportunities, and lessening the state's dependence on fossil fuels and to that end to provide an alternative method of financing in providing and promoting the establishment of facilities utilizing alternative methods and sources of energy and facilities needed for the development and commercialization of advanced transportation technologies. Existing law establishes the California Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority to carry out that purpose. Existing Public Utilities Commission decisions established the California Hub for Energy Efficiency Financing program, administered by the authority and funded through charges collected by specified electrical corporations and gas corporations from their ratepayers. This bill would require the authority to administer the GoGreen Program, previously known as the California Hub for Energy Efficiency Financing program, and would authorize the authority to use moneys collected from the ratepayers of electrical and gas corporations, as directed by the commission, and other available funding sources, consistent with the program's purposes. The bill would require the program to provide financing assistance to participating lenders to support residents in financing eligible energy efficiency and decarbonization measures at costs that are competitive with or below market rates. The bill would authorize the authority to receive, administer, and deploy additional moneys from federal, state, local, or private sources to support and expand the GoGreen Program, if those moneys are used in a manner consistent with the program's goals and the parameters of the funding source. The bill would create the GoGreen Program Fund in the State Treasury and would make all moneys in the fund available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the authority for expenditure, as provided.
The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law allow various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws, including numerous motion picture credits. Existing law, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, allows a motion picture credit (motion picture credit 4.0) to be allocated by the California Film Commission on or after July 1, 2025, and before July 1, 2030, in an amount equal to 20% or 25% of qualified expenditures for the production of a qualified motion picture in this state, and limits the aggregate amount of the credit that may be allocated for a fiscal year to $330,000,000, as specified. Existing law requires the California Film Commission to certify a credit amount equal to 96 percent of the total credit allocated to a qualified taxpayer, unless the qualified taxpayer chooses to submit a diversity workplan and the California Film Commission determines that the qualified taxpayer has met or made a good-faith effort to meet the diversity goals in its diversity workplan, as specified. This bill, for motion picture credit 4.0, if a qualified taxpayer chooses to submit a diversity workplan, would remove the good faith effort standard, and instead would require the California Film Commission to determine whether the qualified taxpayer met the diversity goals in its diversity workplan, as provided. The bill would also correct erroneous cross-references in those provisions. Existing law also allows a credit for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2022, and before January 1, 2032, in an amount equal to 20% or 25%, or as modified, of qualified expenditures paid or incurred during the taxable year by a qualified motion picture produced in this state at a certified studio construction project. Existing law defines a qualified motion picture for these purposes in the same manner as the motion picture credit and additionally requires that the qualified motion picture provide a diversity workplan that is approved by the commission. Existing law requires the California Film Commission to increase a qualified motion picture applicant's credit percentage by 4 percentage points if the applicant has met or made a good faith effort to meet the diversity goals in its diversity workplan. This bill, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, would remove the good faith effort standard, and instead would allow the California Film Commission to increase a qualified motion picture applicant's credit percentage by 4 percentage points if the applicant has met the diversity goals in its diversity workplan. 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 state sales and use tax laws impose a tax on retailers measured by the gross receipts from the sale of tangible personal property sold at retail in this state of, or on the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, tangible personal property purchased from a retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state. The California Emergency Services Act authorizes the Governor to proclaim a state of emergency in an area affected, or likely to be affected, thereby if certain criteria are met, including there are conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the state caused by conditions such as air pollution, fire, flood, storm, epidemic, riot, drought, cyberterrorism, sudden and severe energy shortage, electromagnetic pulse attack, or plant or animal infestation or disease. The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law allow various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws. This bill would allow, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2027, and before January 1, 2032, a credit against those taxes to a qualified taxpayer, as defined, in an amount equal to qualified tax payments made during the taxable year, subject to certain limitations. The bill would define "qualified tax payment" to mean an unreimbursed sales or use tax payment paid or incurred by the qualified taxpayer in the taxable year for certain tangible personal property purchased proximate to the date upon which a natural disaster destroyed a qualified taxpayer's principal residence, major appliances, or residential furniture to replace those items, as specified. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals that the tax expenditure will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill also would include additional information required for any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law authorizes a public agency to establish a contractual assessment program, under which public agency officials and individual property owners may enter into voluntary contractual assessments to finance certain improvements to real property, as specified. To finance those improvements, existing law authorizes a public agency to issue bonds, or to advance its own funds and later sell bonds to reimburse itself for those advances. Under the program, those bonds or advances would be repaid through the voluntary contractual assessments, which constitute a lien against the lots and parcels land, as specified. To establish a contractual assessment program, existing law requires the legislative body of the public agency to adopt a resolution that, among other things, provides certain details of the program, including the kinds of projects and the geographic area within which properties would be eligible for financing under the program. Existing law authorizes a public agency to establish a contractual assessment program to finance certain kinds of improvements that are attached to real property, including energy or water efficiency improvements. This contractual assessment program is commonly known as a Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program. The California Financing Law requires the Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation to license and regulate persons who administer a contractual assessment program on behalf of a public agency, as specified. Existing law, the Wildfire Safety Finance Act (act) , authorizes the legislative body of any public agency that has accepted the designation of Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone to create a voluntary contractual assessment program to finance wildfire safety improvements, as specified. The act defines "wildfire safety improvements" as, among other things, permanent wildfire resilience and safety improvements fixed to existing real property. The act prohibits a wildfire safety improvement financed under the act from being used as a part of a project to construct a new home or to rebuild or reconstruct a home that was destroyed or damaged in a fire. Existing law repeals the Wildfire Safety Finance Act on January 1, 2029. This bill would indefinitely extend the operation of certain provisions of the Wildfire Safety Finance Act and would revise the requirements on a legislative body of a public agency to establish a voluntary contractual assessment program under the act. In this regard, the bill would eliminate the requirements that the legislative body accept a designation of Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The bill would instead authorize any public agency that has established a PACE program or established a special tax relating to a specified community facilities district to enter into voluntary contractual assessments with property owners to finance the installation of wildfire safety improvements, as defined. The bill would, until January 1, 2035, modify the projects eligible for financing under the act to, among other things, include wildfire safety improvements consisting of Class A fire-rated roofs, enclosed eaves, fire-resistant vents, multipane windows, and other wildfire safety improvements identified in regulations adopted by the Department of Insurance, as specified. The bill would also, until January 1, 2035, include improvements that contribute to the defensible space Zones 1 and 2 of a property, which includes the space between 0 and 100 feet from each side and from the front and rear of the structures that can be fixed to a building or structure, as specified. The bill, until January 1, 2035, would require a program administrator providing wildfire safety improvements to have a hardship program that includes a process for requesting that a program administrator remove a lien if a wildfire destroys the property or improvements. Existing law requires a program administrator to submit, for each PACE program it administers, a biannual report to the public agency that includes certain information, including the number of PACE assessments funded, by city, county, and ZIP Code. This bill would require that report to include the total number of wildfire safety improvements, including the average cost of each product type. The bill would also require the report to include the estimated total amount of savings produced by the wildfire safety improvements installed in the calendar year by city, county, and ZIP Code. The bill would require a program administrator providing wildfire improvements to file a report to the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature by January 1, 2030, that includes the information included in the above-described report provided to the public agency, information relating to complaints regarding the wildfire safety improvements, and a description of the above-described hardship program, as specified.
Existing property tax law, pursuant to constitutional authorization, provides for a "welfare exemption" for property used exclusively for religious, hospital, scientific, or charitable purposes and that is owned or operated by certain types of nonprofit entities, if certain qualifying criteria are met. That law provides a partial welfare exemption in the case of residential rental property used for lower income households, as specified, calculated as that percentage of the value of the property that is equal to the percentage that the number of units serving lower income households represents of the total number of residential units. This bill would provide a partial welfare exemption in the case of certain residential rental property used for low- and moderate-income households. The partial exemption would be equal to that percentage of the value of the property that is equal to the percentage that the number of units serving low- and moderate-income households, as defined, represents of the total number of residential units, as provided. The bill would require an owner to make specified certifications relating to the use of the property. By expanding the duties of local tax officials, and by expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would declare that its provisions are severable. 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. Existing law requires the state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
