Gonzalez

Gonzalez v. City of Norwalk

Good Law
17 Cal. App. 5th 1295·226 Cal. Rptr. 3d 483
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 4, 2017B276871California7,142 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Edmon, J.

*1297 In 2003, Norwalk voters approved a 5.5 percent user tax on all municipal utilities, including telephone service. As adopted, the telephone user tax applied to most telephone service, but expressly excluded services "exempt from or not subject to ... the tax imposed under Section 4251 of the Internal Revenue Code." (Norwalk Municipal Code, § 3.36.060, subd. (D).)

*1298 When the voters approved the telephone user tax in 2003, the Internal Revenue Service interpreted Internal Revenue Code section 4251 to apply to nearly all telephone service, excepting the telephone service provided some very limited categories of telephone users (such as service members in combat zones and certain nonprofit organizations). ( 26 U.S.C. § 4253 .) By 2006, however, the federal courts and the Internal Revenue Service had interpreted section 4251 to exclude many cell phone and landline plans from the federal tax. Accordingly, in 2007, the Norwalk City Council (City Council) adopted Ordinance No. 07-1586 (the 2007 ordinance), which deleted the reference to Internal Revenue Code section 4251 from the Norwalk Municipal Code in order "to impose the utility user tax on telephone communication services…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.