California Announces Intent to Tax eCommerce

Charles Maniace
December 12, 2018

In a news release published on December 11, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration formally announced their intent to join 30+ other U.S. states in the taxation of remote commerce. While formal rules have yet to be issued, California has been contemplating action since the Supreme Court issued their ruling in South Dakota v. Wayfair on June 21, 2018, and conducted a public hearing on the matter back on October 24.

What we know today:

  1. The requirement will take effect on April 1, 2019.
  2. California will impose this requirement on businesses with more than $100,000 of sales into California or who engage in 200+ separate transactions with California customers. This standard is identical to what is being enacted in most states. However, it’s worth noting that California is the largest U.S. state by population, consequently, its likely that many more sellers will meet these California thresholds and will meet them relatively quickly.
  3. Like most other states, the rule will only apply to prospective transactions and not retroactively.
  4. Remote sellers will be required to collect state tax as well as the statewide county tax and local tax (for a total combined rate of 7.25%). Additionally, remote sellers will also be required to collect district tax, the amount of which varies by location, in some instances. As the law stands today for sellers with physical presence, the requirement to collect district tax is determined on a district by district basis. Based on the Notice, California plans on requiring the same of remote sellers. That is, the obligation to collect district tax will likewise be determined on a District by District basis based upon whether the seller exceeds the $100,000 in sales/200 transactions threshold for that specific district.
  5. The requirement to independently determine economic nexus on a local basis is unique to California and will undoubtedly present challenges to sellers. Other states faced with similar local challenges have opted for rules which apply a specialized rate for remote sellers (e.g. Alabama and Louisiana) or have enacted a requirement indicating that meeting the thresholds at the state level also requires local collection (e.g. Colorado). California plans to issue clarifying rules in 2019 and we suspect that those rules will address this District taxation requirement in some detail.

    Today, California provides an open Application Program Interface (API) and other tools that provide taxpayers with assistance in knowing the particular state and local rates that apply to a given address. While certainly helpful, adopting these tools will not address challenges associated with determining correct product taxability and does not necessarily provide a path forward towards comprehensively addressing economic nexus requirements on a nationwide basis.

    Of course, action by the California legislature could change things significantly. The possibility exists that when the legislature reconvenes in the new year they could enact a law which, while still requiring remote sellers to collect, applies a higher sales and/or transactional threshold. It will also be interesting to see whether, through legislation, California follows the lead of states like Washington and Pennsylvania in requiring marketplace sellers to collect on behalf of their clients.

    California was one of a handful of states that had yet to formally announce their plans to tax remote commerce. As we move into the new year, it will be interesting to see how requirements in the remaining states, including Arizona, New York, and Florida, evolve.

    Take Action

    Be a sales tax hero by safeguarding your business with the world’s most complete sales & use tax filing solution. Request a Sovos Sales and Use Tax Filing demo today and solve sales tax filing for good.

Sign up for Email Updates

Stay up to date with the latest tax and compliance updates that may impact your business.

Author

Charles Maniace

Charles Maniace is the Director of Regulatory Analysis at Sovos. An attorney by trade, Chuck leads a team of attorneys responsible for all the tax and regulatory content that keeps Sovos clients continually compliant. Over his 14 year career in tax and regulatory automation, he has given talks and presentations on a variety of topics including The Taxation of High Tech Transactions, The Taxation of Remote Commerce, The Regulatory Implications of Brexit, The Rise of E-Audits, Form 1042-S Best Practices and Penalty Abatement Practices for Information Returns. Chuck is a member of the Massachusetts Bar and holds a B.S. in Business Economics from Bentley College, a J.D. from Boston University School of Law, and an LL.M in Taxation from Boston University School of Law.
Share This Post

Tax Information Reporting United States
2019-03-22
How to Respond to the Growing Challenges of 1099-R Reporting

The demographics don’t lie: Reporting for form 1099-R is only going to grow more difficult as baby boomers retire. The form used to report distributions from IRA, pensions, annuities and other similar retirement accounts is poised to explode in volume. As such, financial institutions (FIs) and insurance companies can’t afford to mishandle 1099-R reporting. The […]

E-Invoicing Compliance EMEA
2019-03-21
Portugal Issues New E-Invoicing Rules: A Flavour of Clearance but Not Quite There

On 15 February 2019, Portugal published Decree-Law 28/2019 regarding the processing, archiving and dematerialization of invoices and other tax related documents including: The mandatory use of certified invoicing software General requirements for paper and electronic invoices Dematerialization of tax documentation Archiving of tax documentation (including ledgers, etc) Adjacent tax rules and obligations The decree aims […]

EMEA LATAM VAT & Fiscal Reporting
2019-03-18
Are We in the Golden Age of VAT Recovery?

The value-added tax (“VAT”) was described in the EU as a “”money machine” over 20 years ago. Yet according to a 2015 study by the European Commission by the Centre for Social and Economic Research (CASE), the “VAT gap” was approximately 168 billion EUR. This represents 15 percent of the theoretical VAT that would be […]

Tax Information Reporting United States
2019-03-15
As Legal Sports Gambling Grows, So Does Growth in W-2G Reporting

With the NCAA basketball tournament approaching, the US is gearing up for its biggest gambling weeks of the year. And while most “March Madness” pools might technically be illegal, legitimate sports betting is sweeping the US following last year’s landmark Supreme Court decision allowing states to legalize sports gambling in casinos.   As legal sports […]

E-Invoicing Compliance EMEA Italy
2019-03-14
Italy E-invoicing: Esterometro Reporting Requirements for Cross-border Transactions Updated

What is Esterometro? The Italian government’s e-invoicing mandate became effective on 1 January 2019.  While cross-border invoices are exempt, all domestic B2B and B2C invoices must be cleared through the SDI platform. This means that the Italian government and tax authority now have real-time access to the data of all B2B and B2C VAT transactions […]