California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB1171

Introduced
2/17/17  
Introduced
2/17/17  
Refer
3/9/17  
Refer
3/9/17  
Report Pass
4/24/17  
Report Pass
4/24/17  
Refer
4/25/17  
Refer
4/25/17  
Report Pass
5/11/17  
Report Pass
5/11/17  
Refer
5/11/17  
Refer
5/11/17  
Report Pass
5/17/17  
Engrossed
5/26/17  
Engrossed
5/26/17  
Refer
5/26/17  
Refer
5/26/17  
Refer
6/8/17  

Caption

Personal income taxes: return filing extension.

Impact

The primary implications of AB1171 focus on the challenges faced by partnerships in meeting the accelerated filing deadlines imposed by previous legislative changes. The bill is designed to provide a relief measure, especially for the 2016 taxable year, presuming reasonable cause in instances where partnerships fail to file by the standard due date. This intent is to minimize penalties associated with non-compliance during a transitional period that has been notably complex for tax filers.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1171, introduced by Assembly Members Obernolte and Ridley-Thomas, aims to amend the California Revenue and Taxation Code concerning personal income tax return filing extensions. The bill modifies the existing law by allowing the Franchise Tax Board (FTB) to grant extensions for filing returns, increasing the maximum allowable extension period from six to seven months for those partnerships who file returns. This adjustment is significant for ensuring that partnerships can comply with tax filing requirements without incurring penalties for late submissions, particularly in the context of complex partnership returns.

Sentiment

Discussions surrounding AB1171 reflect a general sentiment of support towards providing tax relief and easing compliance burdens on partnerships. Legislative supporters argue that the bill addresses the legitimate challenges historical due dates pose. However, there may be some contention from parties who believe further scrutiny is necessary to avoid abuse of extended filing privileges, thus presenting a balance between ensuring compliance while still providing necessary support to taxpayers.

Contention

Notable points of contention in the debates surrounding AB1171 include concerns over the potential for excessive leniency being granted to partnerships, possibly leading to reduced tax compliance. Critics may argue that while the intention to provide extensions is commendable, it is essential to maintain robust accountability measures. The bill includes provisions to preempt penalties for partnerships meeting specific criteria, which may lead to varying interpretations of what constitutes 'reasonable cause' among the FTB and filers alike.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB274

Administration of taxes: notice of deficiency assessment.

CA AB2660

Income taxes: administration: nonresident aliens: identifying numbers: group filing.

CA SB790

Income taxes: partnerships: audit adjustments: elections.

CA AB1582

Income taxes: withholding: real property sales: Katz-Harris Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights Act: report.

CA AB2529

Income taxation: like kind exchanges: withholding.

CA SB352

Income taxes: withholding: real property sales.

CA AB1432

Minimum franchise tax: annual tax: businesses.

CA AB1518

Income taxes: administration: nonresident aliens: identifying numbers: group filing.