Laws, Regulations and Annotations
Business Taxes Law Guide – Revision 2022
Uniform Local Sales And Use Tax Law
Revenue and Taxation Code
Division 2. Other Taxes
Part 1.5. Uniform Local Sales and Use Taxes
Chapter 1. General Provisions
7209. Limitations; redistributions. The board may redistribute tax, penalty and interest distributed to a county or city other than the county or city entitled thereto but such redistribution shall not be made as to amounts originally distributed earlier than two quarterly periods prior to the quarterly period in which the board obtains knowledge of the improper distribution.
History—Added by Stats. 1959, p. 4268, in effect September 18, 1959.
Note.—Section 3 of Chapter 1785, Statutes of 1959, provides that the time limitation established by this section shall not apply to redistributions where the board obtains knowledge of the improper distribution prior to September 18, 1959.
Writ of Mandate Denied.—Petitioner City of Culver City sought a writ of mandate directing the Board of Equalization to transmit to it all local sales and use taxes collected by the Board from 1956 through 1969 and erroneously distributed to the City of Los Angeles as a result of the misidentification by the Board of a taxpayer located in Culver City. Upon being notified of its error the Board redistributed a portion of the tax but, pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7209, the Board made no redistribution as to amounts originally distributed earlier than two quarterly periods prior to the period in which the Board obtained knowledge of its error. During the pendency of a legal action against Los Angeles for the additional distributions, Culver City instituted a mandamus proceeding. The court, in holding that the writ should not issue, found, in accordance with the general rule, that mandamus was not an appropriate remedy for enforcing the contractual obligation of the Board, and was also inappropriate since the action did not call for the performance of necessary ministerial duties by the Board and since petitioner had an adequate legal remedy in its pending action against the City of Los Angeles. The court found further that the trial court had abused its discretion in issuing the alternative writ in not allowing the Board and the city the statutorily prescribed five-day period within which to reply to petitioner's application. City of Culver City v. State Board of Equalization (1972) 29 Cal.App.3d 404.
Decision reallocating local sales tax revenue final in absence of timely administrative appeal.—The City of Fillmore's failure to file timely an administrative appeal caused BOE's decision reallocating local sales tax revenues to become final. Absent a timely administrative appeal, BOE had a ministerial duty to reallocate the revenues. The court further held that the exhaustion of remedies doctrine did not preclude the petitioning cities (Industry and Livermore) from seeking mandate relief by way of intervention, because BOE's jurisdiction to consider an administrative appeal was disputed. City of Fillmore v. Board of Equalization (2011) 194 Cal.App.4th 716.