Sales and use taxes: income taxes: written advice.
The bill's amendments are essential in enhancing taxpayer rights by delineating the process through which taxpayers can seek relief if they have acted based on written advice from the tax authorities. The revisions ensure that all guidelines issued until December 31, 2020, remain enforceable unless modified or superseded. Essentially, it reinforces the reliability of written communications from the tax authorities, which is crucial for tax compliance and legal adherence, thus potentially reducing disputes over tax liabilities arising from misinterpretation of tax obligations.
Assembly Bill 2528, introduced by Assembly Members Diep and Gipson, amends Sections 6596 and 21012 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, primarily addressing the circumstances under which taxpayers may receive relief from the payment of sales and use taxes, penalties, and interest based on their reasonable reliance on written advice from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) or the Franchise Tax Board (FTB). The bill mandates that both entities must confirm receipt of such requests for written advice within 30 days and provide a response within 180 days, thereby establishing clearer timelines for taxpayer inquiries regarding tax obligations.
Overall, the sentiment around AB 2528 appears favorable, especially among those advocating for taxpayer rights and clarity in tax regulations. By enforcing a structure for timely advice and response from the tax departments, the bill is seen as a progressive step towards a more equitable tax atmosphere. Conversely, there may be concerns regarding the implications of such legislative changes on the administrative burden of the tax authorities, as they may be tasked with adhering to stricter deadlines for responses.
One notable contention surrounding AB 2528 lies in the balance between providing timely information to taxpayers and the capacity of the tax authorities to respond within the prescribed timeframes. Critics might argue that the 180-day response requirement could overwhelm resources, ultimately impacting the quality of the guidance provided. Despite these concerns, supporters assert that the bill serves to establish much-needed transparency and accountability in the tax advisory process.