Rimokh
Rimokh v. California Franchise Tax Board CA2/4
Opinion
Opinion
INTRODUCTION
Jack Rimokh and Joelle Rimokh (collectively, the Rimokhs) sued the California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) seeking a refund of monies allegedly overpaid for the 2008 and 2009 tax years. In support of their claim, they alleged FTB failed to timely mail a notice of proposed deficiency assessment (NPA), which they contend was required by Revenue and Taxation Code1 section 19059, subdivision (a). Consequently, they alleged, FTB was prohibited from assessing or collecting any additional taxes based on their amended 2008 and 2009 state income tax returns. The Rimokhs filed those amended returns after the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) audited their 2008 and 2009 federal tax returns and increased their federal income tax liability for each year. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of FTB, concluding FTB did not have to issue NPAs to the Rimokhs for the 2008 or 2009 tax years because it did not assess a deficiency for either year. Thus, the trial court concluded the limitations periods set forth in section 19059 did not apply and rejected the Rimokhs’ assertion that they were entitled to a refund based on FTB’s noncompliance with that statute. We…