Bill Text: CA SB1206 | 2019-2020 | Regular Session | Amended
Bill Title: Local government: broadband infrastructure development project permit processing: microtrenching permit processing ordinance.
Sponsorship: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2020-04-01 - From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. [SB1206 Detail]
Download: California-2019-SB1206-Amended.html
|
Amended
IN
Senate
April 01, 2020 |
| Introduced by Senator Lena Gonzalez |
February 20, 2020 |
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
Existing law requires that certain protections of confidentiality that apply to a communication between a client and an attorney also apply to communications between a taxpayer and any federally authorized tax practitioner in any noncriminal tax matter before the State Board of Equalization to the extent that the communication would be considered a privileged communication if it were made between a client and an attorney.
This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to those provisions.
Digest Key
Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee:Bill Text
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1.
Section 65964.5 is added to the Government Code, to read:65964.5.
(a) For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:SEC. 2.
Section 65964.6 is added to the Government Code, to read:65964.6.
(a) For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:SEC. 3.
No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code.(a)(1)With respect to tax advice, the protections of confidentiality that apply to a communication between a client and an attorney, as set forth in Article 3 (commencing with Section 950) of Chapter 4 of Division 8 of the Evidence Code, shall also apply to a communication between a taxpayer and any federally authorized tax practitioner to the extent the communication would be considered a privileged communication if it were between a client and an attorney. A federally authorized tax practitioner has the legal obligation and duty to maintain confidentiality with respect to
privileged communication.
(2)Paragraph (1) may only be asserted in any noncriminal tax matter before the State Board of Equalization.
(3)For purposes of this section:
(A)“Federally authorized tax practitioner” means any individual who is authorized under federal law to practice before the Internal Revenue Service if the practice is subject to federal regulation under Section 330 of Title 31 of the United States Code, as provided by federal law as of January 1, 2000.
(B)“Tax advice” means advice given by an individual with respect to a state tax matter, which may include federal tax advice if it relates to the state tax matter. For purposes of this subparagraph, “federal tax advice” means advice given by an
individual within the scope of
the individual’s authority to practice before the federal Internal Revenue Service on noncriminal tax matters.
(C)“Tax shelter” means a partnership or other entity, any investment plan or arrangement, or any other plan or arrangement if a significant purpose of that partnership, entity, plan, or arrangement is the avoidance or evasion of federal income tax.
(b)The privilege under subdivision (a) shall not apply to any written communication between a federally authorized tax practitioner and a director, shareholder, officer, or employee, agent, or representative of a corporation in connection with the promotion of the direct or indirect participation of the corporation in any tax shelter, or in any proceeding to revoke or otherwise discipline any license or right to practice by any governmental agency.
(c)This section shall be operative for communications made on or after the effective date of the act adding this section.
