Showing posts with label california business law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label california business law. Show all posts

California Annual Minimum Franchise Tax Repeal Proposed

A bipartisan commission appointed by Governor Schwarzenegger has recently proposed sweeping overhauls of California's tax laws, including reduction of personal income tax rates, the elimination of the corporate tax, and the elimination of the $800 per yaer minimum annual franchise tax levied on corporations, LLCs, and LLPs doing business in the state. The committee did, however, propose a 4% business net profits tax, exempting small businesses with less than $500,000 in revenues.

The recommendations are only that, and must be acted upon by the legislature and governor in order to become law.

For more information see:

Commission on the 21st Centuray Economy Press Release dated September 29, 2009

California Attorney General Targets Annual Minutes "Scam"

California's attorney general has filed suit against a nyumber of individuals and companies to combat what he calls a scam targeting small businesses:
News Release
October 08, 2009
For Immediate Release
Contact: (916) 324-5500

Brown Sues 8 Individuals and 6 Businesses Operating Scams Targeting California Small Businesses

San Diego - Continuing his fight against "rip-off artists" operating in California, Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. filed suit today against eight individuals and six businesses that operated scams targeting small business owners. The lawsuits, filed today in San Diego Superior Court, seek to recover more than $3 million.

Schedule note: Brown is in San Diego this morning and is available to speak about these cases at approximately 10:30 -- at the Hilton Bayfront Hotel - downtown (Indigo A Room, 1 Park Blvd in San Diego 92101.

"These cases will send a powerful signal that small business owners must be on the alert," Brown said. "These rip-off artists sent official-looking documents through the mail for the sole purpose of duping small business owners into paying them money - for no value in return."

The three cases are separate scams, each following a similar theme. The defendants mailed to small businesses solicitations that appeared to be government documents featuring an official-looking seal, an official-sounding name, citations to the Corporations Code and a "reply by" date. The forms claimed that the business was in danger of losing its corporate or limited liability status if payment was not made within a short period of time.

In the first case, Anthony Williams operated Compliance Annual Minutes Board that mailed to California businesses official-looking forms demanding that the recipient complete the form and return it with payment of an "Annual Fee" of $150 or risk loss of corporate status. Williams claimed that in exchange for payment, he would provide corporate minutes. Instead, he prepared generic fictitious minutes for the business owners who paid his fee.

The next case involved George Alan Miller, Rebecca Miller, Arghisti Keshishyan and Kristina Keshishyan who together operated two corporations and one limited liability company: Annual Review Board, Inc., Business Filings Division and Corpfilers.com, LLC. Miller and his co-conspirators mailed solicitations to California limited liability companies and corporations, demanding that the recipients complete the form and return it with payment or risk penalties, fines and suspension. The payment amounts varied from $195 to $239, but all mailers were designed to be official-looking government documents that misled the recipients into sending money.

In the third case, Maria Jones operated Corporate Filings Division and Corporate Compliance Filings, Inc., which mailed official-looking forms entitled "Annual Minutes Disclosure Statement" to California businesses, implying that the recipient business was required to complete the form and return it with payment of an "Annual Fee" of $175 or risk loss of corporate status. In exchange for payment, Jones agreed to provide corporate minutes. The information she solicited, however, was inadequate for legitimate corporate minutes, and she instead provided fictitious minutes.

All defendants are accused of violating:

- Business and Professions Code section 17533.6 (Deceptive Solicitation Statute)
- Civil Code section 1716 (Phony Billing Statute)
- Business and Professions Code section 17500 (False Advertising Statute)
- Unfair business practices within the meaning of Business and Professions Code section 17200.

In all three cases, the Attorney General's Office seeks civil penalties, injunction and other equitable remedies and costs.

Since 2004, the Attorney General's Office has received more than 5,000 complaints against a growing number of individuals who mailed solicitations made to look like governmental forms to small businesses in California. Today's announcement adds to the five cases the office has already successfully handled since these scams were brought to the office's attention....
See also: California Corporate Compliance Annual Minutes

California FTB LLC Fee Refunds and Case Updates

Claims are due this summer for certain claims for refunds of LLC fees (above the $800 per year minimum franchise tax) paid to the California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) for tax years prior to January 1, 2007, for LLCs that had operations in multiple states. This is related to several lawsuits contending the LLC fee is unconstutional, two of which have been resolved, in favor of the limited liability company-taxpayers (Ventas Finance I, LLC v. Franchise Tax Board and Northwest Energetic Services, LLC v. Franchise Tax Board). In Ventas, the court found that Revenue & Taxation Code Section 17942 was unconstitutional as applied to an LLC which derived revenues from inside and outside of California, without apportioning the fee to account for in-state versus out-of-state source revenues. In Northwest, the court of appeals found unconstitutional California's LLC fee as applied to an LLC that registered with the state but never did any business in California (preumably, it had intended to, but circumstances changes, or it hadn't yet got around to doing business here).

The third case, Bakersfield Mall, LLC v. Franchise Tax Board, challenges the right of the FTB to levy the LLC fee on LLC's that do business entirely in California. Those with potential claims should review this notice and speak with their accountant about filing an appropriate and timely claim, or filing a protective claim:

FTB Notice 2009-04 dated 5/22/2009

Employee versus Independent Contractor

California's Employment Development Department (EDD), in conjunction with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), is offering a seminar on employment status issues; that is, whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor. The seminar is available live from time to time, but also online as a webinar or on CD, free. The seminar offers an overview of California law in this area, as well as debunking some common employer misconceptions.

CA EDD Payroll Tax Seminars

New 2008 California Notary Block

Effective today, January 1, 2008, all legal documents to be notarized in California must use the following notary block:

State of California
County of ___________

On ______________________ before me, (here insert name and title of the officer), personally appeared __________________ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature ____________________________ (Seal)

Reference: California Civil Code Section 1189
California notary block PDF format; California Secretary of State

California power of attorneys also now require a thumb print upon execution.