Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
On July 7, 2020, the California Office of Tax Appeals (OTA) held that a foreign LLC was subject to the state’s $800 LLC tax because it held a 0.7830849% ownership interest in an LLC that owned property in San Diego. In addition to a more traditional nexus test based on an entity’s business activities in the state, California has a bright-line nexus test tied to threshold sales, property, and payroll amounts. In particular, a corporate entity is doing business in California if its real and tangible personal property in California exceeds the lesser of $50,000 – adjusted for inflation – or 25% of its total real and tangible personal property. In making this determination, California takes into account the entity’s pro rata share of California property owned by pass-through entities in which it held an interest. The OTA concluded that because the foreign LLC’s pro rata share of the California LLC’s property – valued at over $60 million – exceeded this threshold, the foreign LLC had nexus for purposes of the $800 LLC tax.
The OTA rejected the taxpayer’s comparison to Swart Enterprises, Inc. v. Franchise Tax Board (2017) 7 Cal.App.5th 497, in which the California Court of Appeal held that an out-of-state corporation was not doing business in California despite its passive holding of a 0.2% ownership interest in a manager-managed LLC that did business in the state. The OTA concluded that Swart was inapplicable because that case was decided under California’s historical “doing business” test, and not the bright-line factor presence test. The OTA also determined that the bright-line tests do not distinguish between active versus passive ownership interests, or general versus limited partnerships.
In the Matter of the Appeal of Aroya Inv. I, LLC, 2020-OTA-255P (Cal. Office of Tax Appeals Jul. 7, 2020) (pending precedential).