educational

California Tax Law Update

In an effort to raise revenue, the California state government made a few legislation changes this year that will likely affect every entity doing business in California:

  • Suspending the NOL deduction and limiting the use of business credits to 50 percent of a taxpayer's tax liability for tax years 2008 and 2009, except for taxpayers with net business incomes of less than $500,000 in either year;
  • Limiting business tax credits and allowing corporate taxpayers to assign eligible credits to affiliated corporations that are members of the same combined reporting group;
  • Reinstating and making permanent the 12-month presumption period for application of the use tax to vehicles, vessels and aircraft purchased outside California and subsequently brought into the state; and
  • Requiring taxpayers to make estimated payment of the Limited Liability Company fee by June 15 of the current taxable year.

NOL Suspension
NOL deductions are disallowed for the 2008 and 2009 tax years, except for taxpayers with net business incomes of less than $500,000 in either year. For taxpayers with NOLs incurred before 2008, the 10-year period is tolled between 2008 and 2010.

NOLs incurred in prior years can generally be used to offset taxable income in future years (e.g., when a company becomes profitable). The ability to offset prior year losses against future income effectively reduces the future California tax liability of corporations with carry-forward NOLs. For corporations that rely on the NOL deduction, a suspension of the NOLs will have a significant cash flow impact — an unwelcome surprise to corporations that are not used to paying tax in California and likely pay no federal income tax.

Furthermore, the California tax law change allows for NOLs incurred on or after Jan. 1, 2008, to be carried forward up to 20 years, and NOLs incurred on or after Jan. 1, 2011, to be carried back up to two years. The carry-back provisions will be gradually phased in. Fifty percent of 2011 NOLs may be carried back to a taxable year, and 75 percent of 2012 NOLs may likewise be carried back. The full amount of NOLs attributable to a taxable year beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2013, may be carried back to a taxable year.

To reduce California tax liabilities during the NOL suspension period, taxpayers should consider strategies to defer income such as with accounting method changes and qualifying for research and development credit, employee hiring credits, and the various enterprise zone credits.

However, these planning techniques to reduce a business's California tax liability are subject to new limitations. See the next section for more detail.

Business Tax Credits
For tax years 2008 and 2009, taxpayers may not use business tax credits (including the Research and Development credit, the Enterprise Zone credit, and the Low-Income Housing credit) to reduce their tax liability below 50 percent of their net tax, before application of any other credits. This limitation does not apply to taxpayers with net business incomes of less than $500,000 in either year.

Beginning July 1, 2008, corporate taxpayers may assign "eligible credits" to affiliated corporations that are members of the same combined reporting group. Assignees may apply such credits against their tax liability for taxable years beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2010.

Increase in Corporate Underpayment Penalties
To further raise revenue, the legislative changes have also increased the corporate underpayment penalties. A penalty of 20 percent (of the amount of any corporate franchise tax underpayment in excess of $1 million) will be assessed in addition to the current 10 percent annual interest applied to these late payments.

This penalty applies to each taxable year beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2003, which remains open under the statute of limitations. Once the penalty is assessed there are no protest rights. Arguably, taxpayers included in a combined report can avoid this penalty by filing separate returns if their individual liability is under $1 million.

There is no reasonable cause exception (unlike the substantial understatement penalty under California Revenue and Tax Code Section 19164). The only way to protect against the penalty will be to have predicted what the underpayments would be, filed amended returns, and have paid the tax by May 31 of this year.

Taxpayers may avoid this underpayment penalty by placing greater importance on seeking professional tax services to ensure properly filing and paying the appropriate amount of California corporate franchise tax.

Please contact us if you have any questions on how these California tax law changes will affect your business.

Montage Services Inc. provides international and domestic tax consulting and advisory services, primarily for corporations. To inquire about a particular tax issue or seek consulting services, contact Scott Wentz, managing director, at (415) 963-4016 or scott@montage-services.com.

Related:  

Copyright © 2026 Adnet Media. All Rights Reserved. XBIZ is a trademark of Adnet Media.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.

More Articles

opinion

How Adult Businesses Can Navigate Global Compliance Demands

The internet has made the world feel small. Case in point: Adult websites based in the U.S. are now getting letters from regulators demanding compliance with foreign laws, even if they don’t operate in those countries. Meanwhile, some U.S. website operators dealing with the patchwork of state-level age verification laws have considered incorporating offshore in the hopes of avoiding these new obligations — but even operators with no physical presence in the U.S. have been sued or threatened with claims for not following state AV laws.

Larry Walters ·
opinion

Top Tips for Bulletproof Creator Management Contracts

The creator management business is booming. Every week, it seems, a new agency emerges, promising to turn creators into stars, automate their fan interactions or triple their revenue through “secret” social strategies. The reality? Many of these agencies are operating with contracts that wouldn’t survive a single serious dispute — if they even have contracts at all.

Corey D. Silverstein ·
opinion

Building Sustainable Revenue Without Opt-Out Cross-Sales

Over the past year, we’ve seen growing pushback from acquirers on merchants using opt-out cross-sales — also known as negative option offers. This has been especially noticeable in the U.S. In fact, one of our acquirers now declines new merchants during onboarding if an opt-out flow is detected. Existing merchants submitting new URLs with opt-out cross-sales are being asked to remove them.

Cathy Beardsley ·
trends

How to Handle Payment Disputes Without Sacrificing Trust

You can run the best-managed and most compliant website out there, but that still doesn’t completely shield you from the risks tied to payment disputes. Buyer’s remorse, an unclear billing description or even a simple misunderstanding can lead a customer to dispute a transaction. Accumulate enough disputes, and both your reputation and revenue could be at risk.

Jonathan Corona ·
profile

Sienna Day Talks Creator Life, Longevity and Loving the Work

When Sienna Day heard her name called onstage at the Euro XMAs in Amsterdam, the newly crowned 2025 MILF Creator of the Year froze — then floated.

Jackie Backman ·
trends

WIA Profile: Taylor Moore

With a 70-person team and a growing slate of tools for content creators, the Teasy Agency has developed a reputation for putting talent first. That commitment owes a lot to co-founder Taylor Moore’s own experiences as a cam model.

Jackie Backman ·
profile

WIA Profile: Cathy Turns Creator Platform Experience Into a Model-First Playbook

As both a model and industry executive, Cathy lives in two worlds at once. “Since I do both things, I can act as the liaison between the model community and the rest of the SextPanther team,” she tells XBIZ.

Jackie Backman ·
opinion

From Compliance to Confidence: The Future of Safety in Adult Platforms

In numerous countries and U.S. states, laws now require platforms to prevent minors from accessing age-inappropriate material. But the need for safeguarding doesn’t end with age verification. Today’s online landscape also places adult companies at uniquely high risk for inadvertently facilitating exploitation, abuse or reputational harm, or of being accused of doing so.

Andy Lulham ·
opinion

What Adult Businesses Need to Know About Florida's Age Verification Law

The rise and proliferation of age verification laws has changed the landscape for the online adult industry. A recent and compelling example is the state of Florida, where Attorney General James Uthmeier has filed multiple complaints against major platforms as well as affiliates accused of violating the state’s AV law.

Corey D. Silverstein ·
opinion

Maintaining Brand Trust in the Face of Negative Press

Over the last year, several of our merchants have found themselves caught up in litigation over compliance with state age verification laws. Recently, Segpay itself was pulled into the spotlight, facing scrutiny over Florida’s AV statute, HB 3. These stories inevitably get picked up by both industry and mainstream news outlets.

Cathy Beardsley ·
Show More