Gillette v Franchise Tax Board

News & Analysis as of

Did You Make the Multistate Tax Compact Apportionment Election in California? Watch Out for Penalties

On December 31, 2015, the California Supreme Court ruled against the taxpayer in The Gillette Company v. Franchise Tax Board. The United States Supreme Court denied review of Gillette on October 11, 2016. Thus, Gillette is...more

Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court Denies Review of Gillette

On October 11, 2016, the United States Supreme Court denied review of the California Supreme Court’s decision in The Gillette Company & Subs. v. California Franchise Tax Board. The issue was whether Gillette was required to...more

California Supreme Court holds against Gillette in significant tax case

In a unanimous decision in Gillette Co. v. Franchise Tax Board, the California Supreme Court on December 31 held that the Multistate Tax Compact is not a binding reciprocal agreement among its members. Therefore, the...more

State & Local Tax Advisory: Gillette Overturned: One Test, Two Decisions in California

On Thursday, December 31, 2015, the Supreme Court of California issued its decision in Gillette Co. v. Franchise Tax Board. The court reversed the California Court of Appeal and held that the Multistate Tax Compact is not a...more

California Supreme Court Holds Multistate Tax Compact is Not Binding

On December 31, 2015, the California Supreme Court closed the book on California’s Multistate Tax Compact election saga, unanimously holding that the Compact is not a binding contract among its members and the State was not...more

California Supreme Court Unanimously Holds Against Gillette

Concluding that the California Legislature (1) is not bound by the Multistate Tax Compact (the “Compact”), (2) had unilateral authority to eliminate the apportionment formula election provision, and (3) clearly intended to do...more

Breaking News: California Supreme Court Hears Long-Awaited Gillette Oral Argument

On October 6, 2015, counsel for the taxpayer and the Franchise Tax Board (“FTB”) argued before the California Supreme Court in The Gillette Company & Subs. v. California Franchise Tax Board. This case has been watched closely...more

California Tax Developments - A Reed Smith Quarterly Update (2nd Quarter 2015)

Case Updates - BREAKING NEWS: Gillette Oral Arguments Scheduled - The California Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments in the Gillette Multistate Tax Compact case. This comes three years after the California...more

California Taxpayers: Gillette Still an Option for the 2013 Return

What’s the Option? - We’re all still waiting for a final decision in Gillette. In the meantime, taxpayers have an option for the returns due this fall. They may compute their apportionment using one of the following...more

California’s Proposition 39: Not-so-Mandatory Single Sales Factor

On November 6, California voters passed Proposition 39, which changes the state’s default apportionment to a single sales factor method. Additionally, Proposition 39 adopted a mandatory market-sourcing method for sourcing...more

California Tax Refund Opportunity Based on Gillette

Taxpayers should review their apportionment methodology for prior taxable years to determine whether they should file refund claims based on the Multistate Tax Compact's evenly weighted three-factor apportionment formula....more

Gillette Reinstated. If Compact is Elected, LCUP Penalty Shouldn't Apply

The First Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal has once again held that California taxpayers may avail themselves of the Multistate Tax Compact (the Compact) election, which allows for taxpayers to file...more

A Close Shave: California Court of Appeal Rules on Multistate Compact Election

On October 2, 2012, the California Court of Appeal issued an opinion on rehearing in The Gillette Company et al. v. Franchise Tax Board, reversing in full the trial court’s decision in favor of the Franchise Tax Board (FTB)....more

CA’s 20% LCUP Penalty Shouldn’t Apply to Compact Elections Under Gillette

Friday, Reed Smith partner and former FTB Chief Counsel Brian Toman submitted a written request for consideration at the FTB's meeting yesterday for the FTB to interpret the 20 percent Large Corporate Understatement Penalty...more

Gillette Ruling Could Impact Alabama and Other MTC Member States

On July 24, 2012, the California Court of Appeal reversed the trial court decision and granted the taxpayers’ requested refund claims that utilized an equally weighted three-factor apportionment formula. This despite the fact...more

Gillette Wins. You Win. Taxpayers Should Hurry to File California Refund Claims Before the Fall Deadline

Executive summary and action item Today, a California Court of Appeal held that taxpayers have the option of electing to single-weight (as opposed to double-weight) their sales factor to compute their California...more

Gillette wins California Multistate Compact Case in Court of Appeal

In 1966, the California Legislature adopted the Uniform Division of Income for Tax Purposes Act (“UDITPA”), a model law which had been promulgated in 1957 by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Law....more

17 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×