AB 330 continues California’s Local Prepaid Mobile Telephony Services Collection Act by extending its operation to January 1, 2031. The statute keeps in place the statewide mechanism that fixes how local charges on prepaid mobile telephony are applied and requires those charges to be collected at the point of sale.
The bill matters because it preserves a centralized remittance system administered by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), protects an established flow of local revenues into a dedicated fund, and extends criminal-exposure rules tied to the collection and rebuttal procedures. For local governments, sellers, and compliance officers, AB 330 locks in a decade-long continuation of the collection regime that shapes who collects taxes, how they are remitted, and what documentation consumers may be required to provide.
At a Glance
What It Does
Reauthorizes the state-administered collection regime for local charges on prepaid mobile telephony through Jan 1, 2031, keeping the current structure that channels local levies into a named fund and assigns collection duties at retail sale. It leaves in place procedural rules for remittance, recordkeeping, and disputes.
Who It Affects
Retailers and other sellers of prepaid mobile telephony services who must collect local charges at point of sale; the CDTFA, which continues to receive and transmit funds; and California cities and counties that receive those local charges as part of general revenue streams tied to communications services.
Why It Matters
The extension preserves uniform statewide collection rather than returning remittance responsibilities to dozens of local jurisdictions, which affects compliance complexity for sellers and revenue predictability for local governments. It also keeps in place statutory procedures that carry criminal penalties for certain violations tied to collection and sworn location declarations.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 330 keeps alive a temporary scheme California put in place for prepaid mobile telephony taxes and charges and makes that scheme operative through January 1, 2031. Under that scheme, local authorities cannot separately reconfigure how those particular prepaid charges are applied; instead, the law sets the applicable approach and rates (as reflected in local ordinances during the earlier statutory window) and routes collection through a single administrative channel.
Practically, the law requires sellers to collect applicable local charges from consumers at the time of the prepaid sale. Collected amounts are reported and paid to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration under the Fee Collection Procedures Law.
The CDTFA deposits the receipts into the Local Charges for Prepaid Mobile Telephony Services Fund and then transmits the monies to the relevant city, county, or city and county according to the statutory distribution rules.The statute also preserves a consumer-facing procedural feature: when the state presumes the location of a retail transaction for purposes of allocating the local charge, the consumer may file a claim and a declaration under penalty of perjury to rebut that presumption. Because the bill extends the application of the Fee Collection Procedures Law and the declaration mechanism, it also extends related criminal exposure — filing a false declaration can trigger perjury consequences and violations of the Fee Collection Procedures Law can be criminally prosecutable.Finally, the bill addresses fiscal mechanics: it designates where the collected funds are held and transmitted and specifies that the extension creates a state-mandated local program but declares that no reimbursement is required under the California Constitution for the costs imposed, relying on existing statutory exceptions.
The Five Things You Need to Know
AB 330 extends the Local Prepaid Mobile Telephony Services Collection Act’s operation from January 1, 2026 to January 1, 2031.
The bill requires sellers to collect local charges on prepaid mobile telephony from the consumer at the time of sale and remit them through CDTFA procedures.
Collected sums are deposited into the Local Charges for Prepaid Mobile Telephony Services Fund before CDTFA transmits them to the appropriate city, county, or city and county.
Consumers may rebut the statutory presumptions about the transaction’s location by filing a sworn claim and declaration, and a false declaration can expose the filer to perjury charges.
The bill extends the Fee Collection Procedures Law’s application to these charges (violations carry criminal penalties) and states no state reimbursement is required for the local program it mandates.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Extend operative period for the prepaid collection regime
This amendment pushes the act’s expiration date out to January 1, 2031. That simple date change keeps the rest of the statute intact so the centralized framework for applying and collecting local prepaid mobile telephony charges remains the binding process for another five years.
Seller collection at point of sale and remittance to CDTFA
The statute continues to place the collection obligation squarely on sellers: they calculate the applicable local charge at retail sale and remit it to CDTFA under the Fee Collection Procedures Law. That concentrates compliance obligations with sellers and routes cash flows through CDTFA instead of multiple local agencies.
Directed deposit into Local Charges for Prepaid Mobile Telephony Services Fund
Collected funds are deposited into a specifically named state fund and then transmitted to the local governments entitled to the revenue. This mechanism creates an administrative pipeline for local receipts and contains the accounting rules that determine when and how distributions happen.
Consumer rebuttal of presumed transaction location via declaration
Where law presumes a transaction location for allocating local charges, the consumer can rebut that presumption by filing a claim and a declaration under penalty of perjury. That procedure places evidentiary and criminal standards on consumers who seek to shift where tax proceeds are credited.
Extension of Fee Collection Procedures Law and mandate language
By keeping the Fee Collection Procedures Law in play for these collections, the bill extends criminal penalties tied to failures in collection and remittance. The bill also labels the extension a state-mandated local program but asserts that no state reimbursement is required for the costs imposed on local agencies.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Finance across all five countries.
Explore Finance in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Cities and counties that receive local charges — the bill preserves an ongoing revenue stream and predictable distribution mechanism without reverting to fragmented local remittance processes.
- CDTFA — the agency retains centralized oversight and control over remittance, reporting, and distribution of these specific local charges, consolidating administration.
- Retail chains and large sellers — they benefit from a single statewide remittance process rather than navigating dozens of local collection rules and filings.
Who Bears the Cost
- Retailers and small sellers of prepaid mobile services — they must collect and remit the charges at point of sale and comply with CDTFA reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
- Prepaid consumers — the tax is collected at sale and is likely passed through to consumers, who also face potential criminal risk if they submit false location declarations.
- Local and state administrative units — while the bill centralizes remittance, CDTFA and local finance offices bear the operational workload of accounting, auditing, and transmitting funds; local agencies may also incur compliance administration even if no reimbursement is provided.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
AB 330 forces a trade-off between statewide uniformity and local control: it simplifies collection and revenue predictability by centralizing remittance through CDTFA, but in doing so it freezes local discretion over prepaid charge structures and places collection, compliance, and criminal-exposure burdens on sellers and consumers without parallel relief for smaller actors.
The policy trade-offs in AB 330 are practical as much as legal. Centralizing collection under CDTFA reduces the compliance complexity of multijurisdictional remittance for many sellers, but it also concentrates administrative responsibility at the state level and entrenches a uniform approach that limits local autonomy over how prepaid charges are structured.
For small retailers that sell prepaid products infrequently, point-of-sale collection and the accompanying recordkeeping can be an operational burden that the bill does not accompany with targeted administrative relief.
The extension preserves a consumer rebuttal process that relies on sworn declarations. That mechanism gives consumers a route to correct allocation mistakes, but it raises two tensions: it imports criminal perjury exposure into what is essentially an administrative dispute, and it shifts evidentiary burdens onto individuals — many of whom may lack documentation to prove their claimed transaction location.
Finally, the bill claims no state reimbursement is required for the mandated local program, which leaves unanswered whether smaller jurisdictions will shoulder uncompensated administrative costs associated with continued participation in the collection and distribution pipeline.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.