At the same time, proponents of a split roll continue to use every avenue at their disposal to try to change Proposition 13 protections afforded by voters to all property owners in the state. AB 448 (Ammiano; D-San Francisco) introduced last year and noted by the author as an incremental step on a path to “nuke Proposition 13,” is set for a hearing on Monday in a last ditch attempt to move the bill before a Constitutional deadline rendered the bill inactive for the year.
AB 448 seeks to impose a split roll by triggering more frequent reassessments of property owned by legal entities. The bill would redefine the term “change in ownership,” so that reassessment of property occurs at fair market value when, cumulatively, 100% of ownership interests transfer in a rolling three-year period.
The bill defines a “single transaction,” as not just a single transaction, but would include cumulative transactions in a three-year period. For example, just one share of corporate stock that is transferred as many times as the number of shares outstanding will trigger a reassessment under this bill. And the provisions don’t just apply to stock churning, but also apply to interests in partnerships, LLCs, and other legal entities.
Because so many business and taxpayer advocate groups moved to strongly oppose the measure at the hearing, and a Board of Equalization analysis notes that the measure would amount to a $77 million per year tax increase on California businesses, we understand the measure may not be heard.
Although the bill seems to be stalled again, we will watch the proceedings closely and represent your interests should that change.
Read Similar Post on This Topic
What Do You Think. Please Leave a Comment.
There are no comments yet, please leave one.