^[PDF] 1966 Budget Analysis: General Administration

The space now occupied by this agency is in a building now housing the Franchise Tax Board and is needed for expansion of that agency. The new space proposed will be in a warehouse type structure more suited to the needs of this operation. 61 Department of General Services-Continued (19) Director's Office and Administrative Staff Services Increase Budget Organizational unit
https://lao.ca.gov/analysis/1966/05_general_admin_1966.pdf

^[PDF] 1974 Budget Analysis: Debt Service

These loans were repaid in April, upon receipt of the personal income tax payments. The implementation of monthly'withholding of state personal income tax in January 1972 resulted in a more even cash flow for the General Fund, reducing substantially the need for borrowing from the other funds under normal economic and budgetary conditions.
https://lao.ca.gov/analysis/1974/07_debt_service_1974.pdf

^[PDF] The 1982-83 Budget: Perspectives and Issues

WindfallProfits Tax. The state's existingBank and Corporation Tax Law allows firm.sto deduct certain taxes (such as sales and property taxes) but not others (such as federal income taxes) in determining their taxable B-4 income.
https://lao.ca.gov/analysis/1982/pandi_82_Part2.pdf

^[PDF] The 1989-90 Budget: Perspectives and Issues

Proposition 99 imposes an additional excise tax of 25 cents per pack of cigarettes (prior to the passage of Proposition 99,' the excise tax on a pack of cigarettes was .10 cents). In addition, it illlposesa newexcise tax onother types of tobacco products.
https://lao.ca.gov/analysis/1989/pandi_89_part2.pdf

^[PDF] A portion of an inmate's wages could be withheld to reimburse

A portion of an inmate's wages could be withheld to reimburse the state for the cost of the inmate's room and board, as well as for taxes, victim restitution, family support, and savings for the inmate.
https://lao.ca.gov/analysis/1991/09_corrections_1991.pdf

^[PDF] The 2011-12 Budget: California Community College Fees

Figure 1 summarizes the features of the federal American Opportunity tax credit (AOTC), Lifetime Learning Credit, and tuition and fee tax deduction. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act replaced the Hope tax credit with the AOTC in the 2009 and 2010 tax years.
https://lao.ca.gov/analysis/2011/highered/ccc_fees_012711.pdf

^[PDF] LAO Letter

LAO Criticism #3: Assumes Other Local Agencies’ Use of Property Tax Revenues Would Not Yield Economic Benefits. Our report notes that CRA’s assertion that redevelopment was responsible for creating 304,000 jobs overlooks the economic and employment benefits that would have been generated by other local agencies’ use of these property tax revenues (had the funds not been redirected from them to redevelopment agencies).
https://lao.ca.gov/analysis/2011/realignment/redev_letter_021611.pdf

^[PDF] LAO 1994 Budget Perspectives and Issues: AN OVERVIEW OF STATE EXPENDITURES

This consists of a General Fund increase of $1.9 billion, offset by a reduction of $640 million in local property tax revenues. The property tax revenue reduc- tion is the net effect of a proposal to shift $1.1 billion in property tax revenues from schools to other local governments partially offset by baseline growth of $460 million in local property tax revenues.
https://lao.ca.gov/analysis_1994/1994_pandi/pi94part4.pdf

^[PDF] LAO 1995 Budget Analysis: Business & Labor Chapter

The Franchise Tax Board, which has stronger revenue collecting tools and authorities, has been collecting the TIPP assess- ments, pursuant to an inter-agency agreement, since June 1, 1994. It is not apparent whether the FTB will be more successful than the DIR in collecting assessments.
https://lao.ca.gov/analysis_1995/Business_Labor_anl95.pdf

^[PDF] LAO 1995 Budget Analysis: Higher Education Chapter

Sharing by the state was justified on the basis that state tax dollars paid for much of the UC's physical plant and person- nel (especially faculty salaries); consequently, the state should share in the income derived from such an investment.
https://lao.ca.gov/analysis_1995/Higher_Education_anl95.pdf