SB 587 adds parallel personal (Section 17053.90) and corporate (Section 23623) income tax credits for taxable years beginning January 1, 2026 through December 31, 2030. The credit equals the amount of sales tax reimbursement or use tax actually paid by a taxpayer on purchases of tangible personal property that would have been exempt under existing Section 6377.1 if not for the application of local sales and transactions taxes (subdivision (d) of that section).
Administratively the bill lets the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) share specified taxpayer information with the Franchise Tax Board (FTB) to administer the credit (subject to California privacy protections), requires the Department of Finance to estimate foregone revenue annually, and conditions allowance of the credits on the Legislature appropriating funds in the Budget Act for their administration. The credit reduces related deductions, can be carried forward up to eight years, is claimable only on an original timely return, and contains reporting and repeal dates that end the program between late 2031 and early 2034.
At a Glance
What It Does
SB 587 creates an income and corporation tax credit equal to local sales or use taxes paid on manufacturing- and R&D-related tangible property that would otherwise be exempt under Section 6377.1 but for local tax application. The credits apply for purchases made in taxable years beginning 2026 through 2030 and include carryforward and deduction-reduction rules.
Who It Affects
Manufacturers, recyclers, and businesses purchasing qualifying equipment and R&D property; the Franchise Tax Board and CDTFA for administration and data sharing; and local governments that will continue to collect the local sales/transactions taxes but face effective state-funded reimbursement.
Why It Matters
The bill attempts to neutralize the local-tax barrier to a state exemption by shifting the relief mechanism to the state income tax system. That creates administrative complexity, requires interagency data exchange, and moves potential revenue impacts onto the state General Fund subject to annual budget decisions.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB 587 addresses a specific mismatch in California tax law: Section 6377.1 provides a partial sales and use tax exemption for certain purchases used in manufacturing, recycling, and R&D, but subdivision (d) of that section leaves those purchases subject to local sales and transactions taxes. Instead of changing local tax rules, this bill creates an income-tax credit—one for personal income taxpayers and one for corporate taxpayers—that reimburses the taxpayer for the local sales or use tax they actually paid on qualifying purchases.
The credit applies to taxable years starting January 1, 2026 and before January 1, 2031.
The bill defines what counts as a qualifying tax payment (sales tax reimbursement paid to a retailer or use taxes paid pursuant to state and authorized local ordinances) and ties qualification to whether the purchase would have been exempt under Section 6377.1 but for the application of subdivision (d). Practical limits follow: taxpayers must claim the credit on a timely filed original return, any related income tax deduction must be reduced by the credit amount, and if the property is moved out of state within one year certain recapture and amended-return rules apply.
The statute also forbids credits for property explicitly excluded by Section 6377.1(e)(1)(B).On the administration side, SB 587 authorizes CDTFA to provide FTB with necessary information despite general restrictions under Section 7056, while still subjecting that data to the confidentiality rules in Section 7056.5. FTB gets broad rulemaking authority (including an exemption from the Administrative Procedure Act for certain guidance), and the Department of Finance must estimate annually the revenue the state would forgo if credits are allowed.
Crucially, the credits are conditioned on the Legislature appropriating money in the Budget Act for their administration; without that appropriation the credits are not allowed even if taxpayers meet substantive requirements.The bill adds performance metrics and a legislatively directed reporting requirement: the Legislature declares goals and indicators for evaluating whether the credits spur manufacturing and R&D investment, and FTB must submit a disclosure report by April 1, 2033 showing total credits claimed and number of taxpayers. The statutory language also sets operational and repeal dates and includes a provision that no state reimbursement to local agencies is required under Article XIII B because the act creates or modifies a crime or infraction (a technical constitutional trigger).
The Five Things You Need to Know
The credit equals the sales tax reimbursement or use tax actually paid on qualifying purchases that would have been exempt under Section 6377.1 but for subdivision (d), and applies only to taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2026 and before January 1, 2031.
A taxpayer must claim the credit on a timely filed original return; amended returns cannot be used to claim it, and if qualifying property is moved out of state within one year the taxpayer must amend the return and address recapture.
The credit reduces any otherwise allowable deduction for the same amount and any excess credit may be carried forward for up to eight taxable years.
CDTFA may share taxpayer information with FTB for administration notwithstanding Section 7056, but that information remains subject to the confidentiality rules of Section 7056.5.
The credits will be allowed only for taxable years for which the Legislature has appropriated money in the Budget Act for their administration, and the Department of Finance must annually estimate foregone revenue by May 14.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Creates the personal income tax credit and defines eligible tax payments
This section establishes the credit against a taxpayer's ‘net tax’ for qualifying sales tax reimbursements and use taxes paid on purchases that would have been exempt under Section 6377.1 but for subdivision (d). It sets the operative window (tax years beginning 2026 through 2030) and provides statutory definitions for ‘tax payment’ and ‘qualified tax payment,’ anchoring eligibility to the specific interaction with Section 6377.1 rather than to a broader class of purchases.
Limitation mechanics: deduction adjustments, carryovers, original-return rule, and recapture
The section requires taxpayers to reduce any income tax deduction by the amount of the credit, preventing double tax benefit. If the credit exceeds tax liability, taxpayers can carry it forward for up to eight years. The credit can only be claimed on a timely filed original return, and there are express rules disallowing credits for property listed in Section 6377.1(e)(1)(B). If property subject to the credit is moved out of state (or otherwise becomes ineligible) within one year of purchase, the taxpayer must file an amended return to correct the credit.
Interagency data sharing and FTB rulemaking authority
FTB may request information from CDTFA and CDTFA may provide it despite the general prohibition in Section 7056, but any shared taxpayer data remains governed by the confidentiality protections of Section 7056.5. The FTB can issue rules, guidelines, and regulations to administer the credit and the bill exempts certain FTB guidance from the Administrative Procedure Act, speeding implementation but narrowing public notice and comment for some administrative materials.
Budget and reporting conditions
The Department of Finance must provide annual estimates to legislative budget committees (due May 14) showing revenue not realized if the credits are allowed. The statute makes the credits contingent on the Legislature appropriating funds in the Budget Act for their administration. For evaluation, the Legislature sets specific goals and performance indicators and requires FTB to report aggregated credit totals and taxpayer counts by April 1, 2033 for the personal credit; disclosures get a limited exception from other public disclosure rules.
Parallel corporate credit with the same substantive limits
Section 23623 mirrors the personal income credit rules for corporations (definitions, deduction reduction, carryover, original return requirement, ineligibility and amendment triggers, interagency data sharing, and budget-appropriation condition). It is operative for the same taxable year window and contains the same administrative and confidentiality mechanics, keeping parity between individual and corporate taxpayers.
Temporary program with phased repeal and reporting deadlines
The statutory language sets operational and repeal dates: the credits apply to taxable years beginning before January 1, 2031, the provisions remain operative only until December 1, 2031 for corporate credit and December 1, 2031 with later repeal language for the personal credit (including an odd repeal date of January 1, 2034 for one subsection), and the FTB reporting deadline for program evaluation is April 1, 2033. Those staggered dates create an extended statutory tail for reporting and recordkeeping even after new credits stop being claimed.
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
- Manufacturers and R&D-intensive businesses purchasing qualifying tangible personal property — they receive an income- or corporate-tax credit that effectively offsets local sales and use taxes that would otherwise erode the state exemption, lowering after-tax cost of equipment and R&D inputs.
- Taxpayers who pay local sales or use taxes on eligible purchases but have low tax liabilities in the claim year — the carryforward and deduction-adjustment rules let them preserve value from the credit across up to eight future years.
- Businesses that can document purchases and retain records — firms with stronger tax and accounting systems will be better positioned to claim the credit and manage the original-return and amendment rules, creating a competitive advantage for larger or better-resourced firms.
Who Bears the Cost
- Local governments and special districts — although they continue collecting local sales and transactions taxes, the credit neutralizes the state-level incentive to change local rules and may pressure the state budget to reimburse equivalent value via state appropriations, leaving local revenue streams effectively reduced relative to state policy goals.
- State General Fund and taxpayers at large — the Department of Finance must estimate foregone revenue and the credits can only be implemented when the Legislature funds administration, shifting net fiscal cost to the state and competing with other budget priorities.
- FTB and CDTFA operational units — both agencies must exchange data, set up claim-processing, anti-fraud controls, and new reporting streams, creating administrative workload and likely one-time and ongoing costs that the Budget Act must fund.
- Smaller manufacturers and startups with weak tax compliance capacity — the original return requirement, documentation and amendment rules, and deduction adjustments impose compliance burdens that disproportionately hurt smaller firms.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is whether to pursue narrowly targeted economic stimulus through the income tax code—neutralizing local sales taxes that thwart a state exemption—or to preserve local fiscal autonomy and a simpler, more administrable tax system; the bill opts for targeted relief but trades off state budget risk, administrative complexity, and potential distributional and evaluation weaknesses.
The bill tries to square a circle: it preserves local tax collection while using the state income tax code to offset the local tax’s effect on the state’s partial exemption. That approach avoids a direct change to local tax structures, but it creates several practical and policy complications.
First, conditioning the credit on Budget Act appropriations means the relief is not automatic; taxpayers may meet substantive tests but receive no effective benefit if the Legislature withholds administrative funding, which complicates taxpayer planning and undermines predictability.
Second, the data-sharing carve-out for CDTFA to provide information to FTB narrows legal barriers but raises privacy and implementation questions. Section 7056.5 confidentiality applies, but operationalizing secure transfers of transaction-level local tax reimbursement data for income-tax credit adjudication will require significant IT and procedural work at both agencies.
Third, the program’s original-return-only rule and the recapture requirement if property is moved within a year create clawback and timing risks for taxpayers and increase audit complexity for FTB. Those design elements reduce opportunistic claims but also increase the risk that eligible taxpayers miss relief due to filing timing or recordkeeping failures.
Finally, the bill’s monitoring and evaluation apparatus is slender. It sets performance indicators (total dollars credited and number of recipients) and requires an FTB report by 2033, but those metrics do not capture whether investment, employment, or real manufacturing capacity in California increased as a result.
That raises the prospect of paying for a loosely targeted transfer without a rigorous mechanism to measure economic outcomes or to phase the credit based on evidence.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.