What’s the difference between a trailer bill and a policy bill? A surplus and an operating surplus? Special funds and the General Fund? And what exactly is a “Budget Bill Jr.”? Understanding these and other key budget-related terms is critical to navigating the California state budget process and effectively engaging decision-makers in order to advocate for fair and just policy choices for communities across the state.
The administration refers to the agencies, departments, and other entities that make up California’s executive branch. Sometimes called the “governor’s administration.”
A Pages
California budget analysts and policymakers sometimes use the term A Pages to refer to the content of the governor’s budget summary (GBS). Up to the late 1970s, the content of what eventually became the GBS was included in the “A” section of a larger state budget publication. The pages of this A section were numbered A-1, A-2, A-3, etc. As a result, this budget content became known as the A Pages — a term that has remained in use decades after the GBS was established as a separate publication and the A Pages were phased out.
Appropriation
An appropriation authorizes California agencies, departments, and other entities to spend money or create obligations from a specific fund for a specific purpose. Under the California state budget process, only budget bills may contain more than a single item of appropriation.
Assembly Budget Committee
The Assembly Budget Committee reviews the governor’s budget proposals and develops the Assembly’s version of the California state budget. Most of the committee’s work is done through subcommittees that focus on specific policy areas.
Augmentation
California’s balanced-budget requirement is a constitutional mandate for estimated revenues to equal or exceed estimated spending. It applies both to the governor’s proposed budget and to the budget bill as passed by the Legislature.
Balanced-Budget Requirement
A state constitutional mandate for estimated revenues to equal or exceed estimated spending. It applies both to the governor’s proposed budget and to the budget bill as passed by the Legislature.
Baseline Budget
See Workload Budget.
Baseline Change
Baseline changes are adjustments to spending or revenue that occur automatically under current California law or policy and therefore do not require legislative action to take effect.
Big Three (decision makers)
The “Big Three” refers to the top elected California officials who negotiate and make final decisions on the statebudget package: the governor, the Assembly Speaker, and the Senate President pro Tempore.
Big Three (revenue sources)
The “Big Three” refers to California’s top sources of state revenue: the personal income tax (largest), the sales & use tax (second-largest), and the corporation tax (third-largest).
Bond Bill
A bond bill is a California legislative bill authorizing the sale of general obligation bonds.
Bond Funds
Bond funds are California state funds that account for the receipt and disbursement of proceeds from general obligation bonds.
Budget Act
The Budget Act is the initial budget bill passed by the California Legislature and signed into law by the governor, after any line-item vetoes. The Budget Act can be referred to by the year in which it becomes law (“Budget Act of 2025”) or by the fiscal year to which it applies (“2025-26 Budget Act”).
Budget Ask
A budget ask is a request for a budget expenditure from an advocacy organization or a member of the California Legislature. A budget ask is usually directed to the Assembly Budget Committee or the Senate Budget & Fiscal Review Committee. Budget asks can also be directed to the governor’s administration, in which case the ask would typically come from an advocacy organization.
Budget Agreement
See Budget Package.
Budget Bill
A budget bill is a California legislative bill that provides authority to spend money (appropriations) across an array of public services and systems for a single fiscal year. Each year’s budget package typically contains multiple budget bills, including the Budget Act and at least one Budget Bill Jr. Budget bills move through the California Legislature’s budget committees rather than through the Legislature’s policy bill process. The Legislature can pass budget bills with a simple majority vote of each house.
Budget Bill Jr.
Budget Bill Jr. is the informal term for any budget bill that amends California’sBudget Act. Multiple Budget Bill Jrs. are sometimes described using Roman numerals (Budget Bill Jr. I, Budget Bill Jr. II, etc.).
Budget Bill Provisional Language
Budget bill provisional language explains how appropriations in the Budget Act must be administered, such as by specifying constraints on expenditures or providing additional or exceptional authority. Provisional language is inserted after an appropriation, or a set of appropriations, and is distinct from the control sections in California’s Budget Act.
Budget Change Proposal (BCP)
A budget change proposal is a recommendation by a California agency, department, or other entity to revise a currently authorized level of service, create a program, or eliminate a program. BCPs that are approved by the governor and submitted to the California Legislature for consideration are posted to the Department of Finance website.
Budget Conference Committee
A budget conference committee is a small group of legislators from both houses who work to reconcile differences between the Assembly and Senate versions of the California budget. Members are appointed by the leadership of each house, typically in late May or early June, with the majority party controlling most of the allotted seats. Lawmakers do not have to form a conference committee to create a unified legislative budget. Instead, they may reconcile differences through private negotiations, which may or may not include the participation of the minority party.
Budget Package
The budget package is the combined set of budget bills and trailer bills — potentially numbering into the dozens — that make up the California budget for a fiscal year. The Legislature typically sends the initial set of bills in the budget package to the governor in late June and sometimes early July. Additional budget-related legislation is enacted at other times during the fiscal year, thus increasing the size and scope of the initial California budget package. From time to time, bills that move independently of the Budget Act — and therefore are not trailer bills — may be considered part of the budget package. This could include, for example, legislation to place a constitutional amendment before the voters.
Budget Problem/Shortfall
See Deficit.
Budget Stabilization Account (BSA)
The Budget Stabilization Account is California’s main state budget reserve. Deposits into and withdrawals from the BSA are governed by rules added to the state Constitution by Proposition 2 (2014). The BSA is commonly referred to as the state’s “rainy day fund.”
Budget Window
The budget window refers to the three-year period that California policymakers focus on when developing the state budget; specifically, the prior fiscal year, the current fiscal year, and the upcoming fiscal year (the budget year). See also Multiyear Window.
Budget Year
The budget year is California’s upcoming state fiscal year, which begins on July 1. See also Current Year.
Capital Outlay
Capital outlay expenditures in California include state spending used to acquire land; construct, modify, or expand buildings; and/or purchase construction-related equipment. Certain types of capital outlay expenditures — including for housing-related projects — are excluded from appropriations that are subject to California’s state spending cap (Gann Limit).
Constitutional Amendment
A constitutional amendment is a resolution to change the language of the California Constitution. Such resolutions require a two-thirds vote of each house of the California Legislature and must be approved by voters in a statewide election (simple majority vote). Constitutional amendments also can be placed on a statewide ballot through the initiative process, thus bypassing the Legislature. On rare occasions, legislative proposals to amend the state Constitution may be integral to the state budget framework, and in these cases would typically be recognized as part of the overall budget package.
Continuing Appropriation
A continuing appropriation is an appropriation for a specific amount in the Californiabudget that is available for more than a single year. Not to be confused with continuous appropriation.
Continuous Appropriation
A continuous appropriation is an expenditure that is authorized by the California Constitution or by state law that is renewed each year without additional action by the Legislature. Not to be confused with continuing appropriation.
Control Sections
Control sections are the individual sections of the CaliforniaBudget Act, beginning with 1.00. Control sections define the terms used in the budget, identify restrictions on appropriations, and provide other instructions and information related to the budget.
Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA)
A cost-of-living adjustment revises spending (usually upward) to reflect the change in California’s cost of living. The Legislature and the governor may provide “discretionary” COLAs through the annual state budget process. In contrast, “statutory” COLAs are required by state law. However, the Legislature may suspend a statutory COLA for a fiscal year by a simple majority vote of each house.
Cost Shift
A cost shift is a budget solution that generates savings in the near term, but creates a binding obligation or higher costs for California in the longer term. Cost shifts can be similar to borrowing but often are not explicitly structured as borrowing. Examples include 1) taking out loans from special funds to temporarily pay for services typically supported with General Fund dollars and 2) deferring one month of state employee payroll to the following fiscal year in order to generate temporary state budget savings. Compare to Fund Shift.
Want to Better Understand the State Budget?
The Budget Center’s essential resources for understanding and navigating the California state budget — all in one place.
Explore tools, videos, and expert insights designed to strengthen your advocacy and guide informed decision-making.
The current year refers to California’s present fiscal year, which ends on June 30. See also Budget Year.
Deficit
A deficit occurs when California’s state budget expenditures exceed resources under current law and policy. In contrast to an operating deficit, which applies to a single fiscal year, the term “deficit” is generally used in assessments of California’s fiscal condition over multiple fiscal years.
Delay
A delay is a budget solution that moves previously appropriated funding to a future fiscal year. This approach is often used to close a California budget deficit because it results in a temporary spending reduction. However, delayed amounts are subject to future legislative decisions, and there is no guarantee that the funding will actually be provided.
Department of Finance (DOF)
The California Department of Finance leads the development of the governor’s budget proposals, prepares the governor’s budget documents, testifies on behalf of the governor at budget committee hearings, develops economic and demographic forecasts, and performs several other functions. The DOF’s director (Director of Finance) is the governor’s chief fiscal advisor.
Early Action
Early action refers to budget decisions that are made before June, when the Californiabudget package is typically finalized. For example, early action on the budget can occur during the winter or spring prior to the start of the new fiscal year (July 1).
Enacted Budget
The enacted budget is the initial set of bills in the Californiabudget package as passed by the Legislature and approved by the governor. The Legislature typically sends these bills to the governor in late June and sometimes early July.
Enactment
Enactment occurs when a bill is passed by both houses of the California Legislature and signed by the governor — or allowed to become law without the governor’s signature. In other words, these bills are “enacted into law.”
Encumbrance
An encumbrance reflects the obligation of a Californiaappropriation, in whole or in part.Examples include an unfulfilled purchase order or an outstanding contract. Outstanding encumbrances recognize commitments that will be recorded as spending when goods or services are received. The purpose of an encumbrance is to prevent an appropriation from being overspent.
Finance Letters
Finance Letters are proposals from the Department of Finance to revise the governor’s proposed budgetsubmitted to the Legislature in January. These requested changes are outlined in letters from the Director of Finance to the chairpersons of the Assembly Budget Committee and the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee. Finance Letters are due to the Legislature by April 1, May 1, or May 14, depending on the subject matter.
Fiscal Year
California’s fiscal year is the 12-month period (July 1 to June 30) during which the state budget is in effect.
Fund Shift
A fund shift is a California budget solution that moves costs usually paid with General Fund dollars to other fund sources, such as a special fund. This action displaces spending that the other fund source would have otherwise supported, and therefore results in lower overall state spending. Examples include 1) shifting spending for certain programs from the General Fund to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and 2) using revenue from a special tax on managed care organizations to reduce General Fund spending on Medi-Cal health care services. Compare to Cost Shift.
Gann Limit
The Gann Limit, also known as the State Appropriations Limit, is a constitutional spending cap established in 1979 through voter approval of Proposition 4. It restricts the growth of certain appropriations from tax proceeds in California. At the state level, the Gann Limit is based on 1978-79 spending and is adjusted annually for changes in population and per capita personal income. (The limit works differently for local governments.) If the state limit is exceeded over two consecutive years, half of the revenue above the limit goes to taxpayers and the other half goes to K-12 schools and community colleges.
General Fund
The General Fund is California’s major operating fund, which accounts for revenues that are not designated for a specific purpose. The three major sources of General Fund revenues are the state personal income tax, the state sales and use tax, and the state corporation tax. Most General Fund expenditures go toward K-12 and higher education, health and human services programs, and the state prison system.
General Obligation (GO) Bonds
General obligation bonds are funds borrowed from investors generally to finance infrastructure projects in California. Repayment of GO bonds typically comes from the state’s General Fund and, in all cases, is guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the state. GO bonds require a two-thirds vote of each house of the California Legislature and must be approved by voters in a statewide election (simple majority vote). GO bonds may also be placed on the ballot through the initiative process, thus bypassing the Legislature. See also Lease-Revenue Bonds.
Governor’s Budget Summary
The governor’s budget summary provides the governor’s economic and revenue outlook, highlights major policy initiatives in the governor’s proposed budget, and summarizes proposed expenditures through the California budget. The governor’s budget summary is released — along with the proposed budget — on or before January 10.
Governor’s Proposed Budget
The governor’s proposed budget provides the governor’s recommended spending for California’s upcoming fiscal year, estimated expenditures for the current fiscal year, and actual expenditures for the prior fiscal year. The proposed budget is released — along with the governor’s budget summary — on or before January 10.
Jailbreak
In the context of the California state budget process, a jailbreak occurs when a legislator whose policy bill has been rejected or held by a legislative committee tries to have the bill — or key parts of the bill — included in the state budget package. This practice is generally discouraged by the Legislature’s budget committees.
January 10
January 10 is California’s constitutional deadline for the governor to propose a budget for the upcoming fiscal year. The budget bill, as prepared by the Department of Finance, reflects the governor’s proposal and is introduced immediately into each house of the Legislature by the chairpersons of the Assembly Budget Committee and the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee.
June 15
June 15 is California’s constitutional deadline for the Legislature to pass the initial budget bill for the upcoming fiscal year. If lawmakers miss this deadline, they permanently forfeit both their pay and their reimbursement for travel and living expenses (“per diem”) for each day after June 15 that the budget is not passed and sent to the governor. Budget-related trailer bills do not have to be passed by June 15.
Lease-Revenue Bonds
Lease-revenue bonds are funds borrowed from investors generally to finance infrastructure projects. They are repaid with lease payments — typically General Fund dollars — made by California agencies that use the facilities they finance. These facilities include prisons, courthouses, and university buildings. Lease-revenue bonds are not guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the state. They require a simple majority vote of each house of the California Legislature, but do not need voter approval. See also General Obligation Bonds.
Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO)
The Legislative Analyst’s Office is an independent, nonpartisan office that conducts research and analysis on California state budget issues, analyzes statewide ballot measures, and provides fiscal and policy advice to the Legislature. The LAO is overseen by the Legislature’s bipartisan Joint Legislative Budget Committee.
Line-Item Veto
The line-item veto is the California governor’s power to reduce or eliminate specific items of appropriation while approving other portions of a bill. The governor must offer reasons for any items that are reduced or eliminated. The Legislature may override a line-item veto with a two-thirds vote of each house. See also Veto.
Local Assistance
Local assistance refers to California budget expenditures that support local governments or other locally operated activities.
May 14
May 14 is the deadline for the governor to release a revised California budget plan, which is known as the May Revision.
May Revision
The May Revision, released on or before May 14, updates the governor’s economic and revenue outlook for California; adjusts the governor’s proposed expenditures to reflect revised estimates and assumptions; revises, supplements, or withdraws policy initiatives that were included in the governor’s proposed budget in January; and outlines adjustments to the minimum funding guarantee for K-14 education required by Proposition 98 (1988).
Multiyear Projection (“the Multiyear”)
The multiyear projection — often called “the multiyear” — is an analysis of California’sGeneral Fund condition, focusing on the current fiscal year, the budget year, and the three fiscal years that follow (the multiyear window). The Department of Finance is constitutionally required to produce the multiyear projection three times per year — first with the governor’s proposed budget, then with the May Revision, and finally following the enactment of the annual budget package. Commonly called “the multiyear” by Capitol insiders.
Multiyear Window
The multiyear window is the three-year period that follows California’sbudget year. For example, if 2026-27 is the budget year, then the multiyear window consists of 2027-28, 2028-29, and 2029-30. State budget projections often focus on the multiyear window. For example, the Legislative Analyst’s Office highlights the multiyear window in their annual assessment of the state’s fiscal condition (the “Fiscal Outlook”). In addition, the Department of Finance focuses on the multiyear window in their multiyear projection. Compare to Budget Window.
Related Content
See our report Dollars and Democracy: A Guide to the California State Budget Process to learn more about the state budget and budget process.
A NASCAR letter features dozens of logos representing the advocacy organizations who signed the letter. In the context of the California state budget process, a NASCAR letter urges support for or opposition to specific policy and/or funding proposals. These letters are typically sent to the governor and to influential legislators, such as the chairs of key budget subcommittees.
One-Time Cost
A one-time cost is a proposed or actual expenditure in California that is non-recurring — usually reflected only in a single annual budget — and is not permanently included in the baseline budget.
Operating Deficit
An operating deficit occurs when expenditures for a fiscal year exceed revenues for that same fiscal year under current California law and policy. “Revenues” excludes any balance, positive or negative, carried in from the prior fiscal year.
Operating Surplus
An operating surplus occurs when revenues for a fiscal year exceed expenditures for that same fiscal year under current California law and policy. “Revenues” excludes any balance, positive or negative, carried in from the prior fiscal year. An operating surplus provides policymakers with discretionary revenues to allocate through the state budget process. However, the existence of an operating surplus does not indicate that Californians’ needs have been fully met or that additional state investments are unnecessary. In fact, an operating surplus may result — at least in part — from maintaining spending cuts that were made in prior fiscal years, which leaves spending lower than it otherwise would be and thus contributes to the operating surplus.
Policy Bill
A policy bill is a proposed change to California law that is reviewed by the Legislature’s policy committees and, if required, by appropriations committees to estimate the cost of the proposal. In general, policy bills need only a simple majority vote of each house and take effect on the following January 1 if signed by the governor or allowed to become law without a signature. A policy bill may take effect immediately if it receives a two-thirds vote of each house (“urgency statute”). On rare occasions, policy bills may be integral to the state budget framework, and in these cases would typically be recognized as part of the overall budget package.
Projected Surplus Temporary Holding Account
The Projected Surplus Temporary Holding Account is a California state reserve that is intended to temporarily hold a projected state budget surplus for use in future fiscal years. The Legislature and governor created this reserve in 2024. State leaders have significant flexibility in determining whether to deposit funds into the reserve and how to use those funds.
Proposition 2 (2014)
Proposition 2 governs deposits into and withdrawals from California’sBudget Stabilization Accountas well as the Public School System Stabilization Account. Prop. 2 also requires the state to pay down certain debts. Funding for these two reserves and for the debt payments comes from state General Fund revenue based on formulas in the California Constitution.
Proposition 25 (2010)
Proposition 25 allows the California Legislature to pass budget bills and certain trailer bills by a simple majority vote of each house. Bills passed under the rules of Prop. 25 take effect immediately upon being signed by the governor or on a date specified in the legislation. To qualify as a Prop. 25 trailer bill, the bill must be identified in the budget bill and contain an appropriation of any amount. Bills that require a supermajority vote of the Legislature — such as a bill to increase a tax — cannot be passed as Prop. 25 majority-vote trailer bills, although they still may move through budget committees along with other trailer bills.
Proposition 26 (2010)
Proposition 26 requires a two-thirds vote of each house of the California Legislature to increase any tax. Prop. 26 also expanded the definition of a tax to include some charges that were previously considered “fees” and could be passed by a simple majority vote of each house. These redefined “taxes” require a two-thirds vote of each house.
Proposition 54 (2016)
Proposition 54 requires bills to be distributed to legislators and published on the internet, in their final form, at least 72 hours before being passed by the California Legislature. This rule applies to all bills, including bills that are part of the budget package.
Proposition 98 (1988)
Proposition 98 guarantees a minimum annual level of funding for California’s K-12 schools and community colleges. The amount of the guarantee is calculated each year using one of three tests that apply under varying fiscal and economic conditions. Two of these tests include adjustments for changes in statewide K-12 attendance. Prop. 98 funding comes from the state General Fund as well as from local property tax dollars.
Public School System Stabilization Account (PSSSA)
The Public School System Stabilization Account is a state budget reserve for California’s K-12 schools and community colleges. Deposits into and withdrawals from the PSSSA are based on rules added to the state Constitution by Proposition 2 (2014).
Rainy Day Fund
See Budget Stabilization Account (BSA).
Reduction
A reduction is an action to spend less money than what has been established under current California law or policy. Also known as a spending cut.
Resources
Resources are the funding available to support state programs and services, typically from the General Fund. In assessments of the state’s fiscal condition, resources consist of three major components: 1) revenue projected to be generated in a specific fiscal year; 2) the balance, positive or negative, projected to be carried in from the prior fiscal year; and 3) transfers to or from the state’s constitutional rainy day fund (the Budget Stabilization Account) that are required by current California law or policy.
Revenue
Revenue consists of funds received by California, generally derived from taxes, licenses, fees, or investment earnings. Revenues are deposited into specific funds and are not available for expenditure until appropriated.
Reversion
A reversion is the return of the unused portion of an appropriation to the fund from which the appropriation was made. This return typically occurs two years after the last day of an appropriation’s availability period (or four years in the case of federal funds). Funds may be reverted more quickly with legislative action. In addition, the Department of Finance may order a reversion. See also Sweep.
Safety Net Reserve
The Safety Net Reserve is aGeneral Fund reserve created in 2018 to help pay for higher state costs in the CalWORKs and Medi-Cal programs during recessions.
Score
The term score has several closely related meanings, including “to account for,” “to count,” and “to estimate.” Examples:
“The new refundable tax credit is scored as a revenue reduction.”
“The May Revision scores $200 million in savings from closing a prison.”
“The costs are scored to the 2026-27 fiscal year.”
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee
The California Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee reviews the governor’s budget proposals for the upcoming fiscal year and develops the Senate’s version of California’s state budget. Most of the committee’s work is done through subcommittees that focus on specific policy areas.
Solution
A solution is a proposal or action to close a California state budget deficit. Solutions include, but are not limited to, revenue increases, spending reductions, spending delays, cost shifts, fund shifts, and reversions.
Special Funds
Special funds are California state funds that account for taxes, fees, and licenses that are designated for a specific purpose. The state has more than 500 special funds.
Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties (SFEU)
The Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties is California’s discretionary General Fund budget reserve. The SFEU serves as a buffer against unanticipated revenue shortfalls or spending increases. The reserve level is equal to the difference between General Fund resources and General Fund expenditures in a fiscal year. Due to California’s constitutional balanced-budget requirement, the projected SFEU balance cannot be less than zero at the time the budget is adopted. If revenues come in lower than projected or spending unexpectedly rises, the SFEU balance will decline and can become negative if spending exceeds revenues.
State Appropriations Limit
See Gann Limit.
State Operations
State operations spending supports key functions of California’s state government. For example, state support for the California State University and the University of California as well as for the state prison system primarily consists of state operations funding.
Statute
A statute is a law that has been formally approved and recorded; an enacted bill. See also Enactment.
Subventions
A subventiontypically refers to money that is spent as local assistance and allocated based on a formula, rather than being provided selectively as grants.
Surplus
A surplus occurs when California’s statebudgetresources exceed expenditures under current law and policy. In contrast to an operating surplus, which applies to a single fiscal year, the term “surplus” is generally used in assessments of the state’s fiscal condition over multiple fiscal years. A surplus provides policymakers with discretionary revenues to allocate through the California state budget process. However, the existence of a surplus does not indicate that Californians’ needs have been fully met or that additional state investments are unnecessary. In fact, a surplus may result — at least in part — from maintaining spending cuts that were made in prior fiscal years, which leaves spending lower than it otherwise would be and thus contributes to the surplus.
Sweep
Sweep refers to the act of pulling back an appropriation that was previously provided to a California agency, department, or other state entity; essentially, a less formal way of referring to a reversion. Example: “The budget package sweeps unspent child care funding to help close the deficit.”
Tax Expenditure
A tax expenditure is an exception to “normal tax law” that reduces the revenue that governments would otherwise collect. Tax expenditures include, but are not limited to, exemptions, deductions, exclusions, tax credits, deferrals, elections, and preferential tax rates. Tax expenditures are commonly referred to as tax breaks, tax loopholes, or tax preferences.
Federal Policy
The federal government plays a major role in shaping California’s budget, economy, and the well-being of its people.
Learn how federal policies shape California’s budget, economy, and vital programs — and how state leaders can respond to protect and support Californians.
A trailer bill generally makes changes to state law needed to implement the policies assumed in the Budget Act. For example, if the Budget Act includes funding for a new program, the details of the program would be outlined in a trailer bill. Trailer bills move through the California State Assembly and Senate budget committees, with each bill addressing a specific policy area, such as health, housing, higher education, or transportation. The Department of Finance is required to post trailer bill language that is needed to implement the governor’s proposed budget by February 1.
Under rules established by Proposition 25 (2010), California trailer bills generally can be passed by a simple majority vote of each house of the Legislature and take effect immediately upon being signed by the governor. The only requirements for Prop. 25 trailer bills are that they (1) be listed in the Budget Act and (2) contain an appropriation of any amount. Still, even with Prop. 25, some types of trailer bills require a supermajority — generally two-thirds — vote of each house. This includes, for example, trailer bills that would raise taxes or amend a state law that was approved by voters through a ballot initiative. However, most trailer bills in a budget package will need only a simple majority vote to pass.
Trigger
A trigger is aCalifornia state budget mechanism that is typically used to reduce certain expenditures automatically if revenues fail to reach a predetermined target. A trigger also can be used to automatically increase certain expenditures if revenues exceed a set level.
Unanticipated Revenue
Unanticipated revenue occurs when California state revenue collections are expected to exceed prior projections, such as the revenue forecast included in the enacted budget. Not to be confused with surplus.
Veto
A veto is the governor’s power to reject a bill by returning it with any objections to the house of origin. The California Legislature may override a veto by passing the bill with a two-thirds vote of each house. See also Line-Item Veto.
Workload Budget
The workload budget estimates how much California’scurrently authorized services will cost in the upcoming fiscal year. To determine the workload budget, current-year costs are adjusted to reflect changes in student enrollment, program caseloads, and the prison population; statutory cost-of-living adjustments; recently enacted legislation; expenditures required by court orders or by the federal government; one-time expenditures; and several other factors. A workload budget is also known as a baseline budget.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
Join the Dollars & Democracy budget training to strengthen your understanding of the state budget process and prepare for 2026.
Register here!
About this event
Tune in to Dollars & Democracy, the Budget Center’s premier state budget training, followed by a panel discussion that will help you understand and effectively engage in the California state budget process.
This training is designed for advocates who are new to the field or want to refresh their understanding of the state budget process. We’ll break down California’s budget process, highlighting key deadlines and the essential role the governor, Legislature, and advocates play in advancing community investments.
After the training, stay for a panel discussion with state budget experts who will share practical advocacy strategies and insights into what’s ahead for 2026.
Budget Trainer
Dollars and Democracy training
Nishi Nair, Research Associate, California Budget & Policy Center
Discussion Panel
Looking ahead and what to expect in 2026
Sasha Feldstein, Strategy & Impact Director, California Budget & Policy Center
Tiyesha Watts, Associate Director of Policy Advocacy, California Housing Partnership
Edgar Ortiz, Supervisory Policy Manager, Economic Justice, California Immigrant Policy Center
About the California Budget & Policy Center
The California Budget & Policy Center (Budget Center) is a nonpartisan research and analysis nonprofit advancing public policies that expand opportunities and promote well-being for all Californians.
Want to Better Understand the State Budget?
The Budget Center’s essential resources for understanding and navigating the California state budget — all in one place.
Explore tools, videos, and expert insights designed to strengthen your advocacy and guide informed decision-making.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
Watch to learn more
Some decisions in California’s Legislature require more than a simple majority — they need a supermajority, or two-thirds vote. But what does that really mean, and why does it matter for Californians?
In this short explainer, we break down how Proposition 26 changed the rules around taxes and fees, what kinds of actions require a supermajority vote, and how this impacts the ability of lawmakers to make policy decisions that affect everyday people.
Want to Better Understand the State Budget?
The Budget Center’s essential resources for understanding and navigating the California state budget — all in one place.
Explore tools, videos, and expert insights designed to strengthen your advocacy and guide informed decision-making.
El proceso legislativo, también conocido como el proceso de proyectos de ley, proporciona una vía clave para que los californianos que desean cambiar la ley estatal puedan hacerlo a través de la legislatura del estado.
Cada año, los miembros de la asamblea legislativa y el senado presentan conjuntamente miles de proyectos de ley que avanzan a través del proceso legislativo parcial o totalmente. Estos proyectos proponen cambios a uno o más de los casi 30 códigos estatales de California y estos cambios entran en vigencia solo si el proyecto de ley es aprobado por ambas cámaras y firmado por el gobernador.
Las propuestas de modificar la Constitución del estado también pasan por el proceso legislativo. Aunque las modificaciones constitucionales de la asamblea legislativa y el senado no requieren la firma del gobernador, sí necesitan la aprobación de los votantes para poder entrar en vigencia.
El proceso legislativo funciona de acuerdo a normas delineadas en la Constitución del estado, las leyes estatales y los acuerdos de ambas cámaras (“normas conjuntas”) adoptados por la asamblea legislativa y el senado al inicio de cada sesión legislativa de dos años.
Las normas escritas y no escritas exclusivas de cada cámara, así como de diversos comités dentro de cada cámara y que cambian de un año a otro, también moldean el proceso legislativo y las participaciones de participación del público.
Es importante resaltar que el proceso del presupuesto estatal ofrece una vía separada para cambiar la ley estatal a través de la legislatura (usando proyectos de ley “tráiler”). Comparado con el proceso legislativo, el proceso de presupuesto estatal tiene normas, plazos y, en algunos casos, encargados de tomar decisiones distintos. Quienes abogan por el cambio legislativo usan tanto el proceso de presupuesto estatal como el legislativo para impulsar sus metas políticas. Sin embargo, el resto de esta guía se concentra exclusivamente en el proceso legislativo.
Oportunidades para la participación del público en el proceso legislativo
El público tiene muchas oportunidades de interactuar con los legisladores estatales durante el proceso legislativo. Por ejemplo, las personas pueden:
Sugerir ideas de proyectos de ley a los miembros de la legislatura.
Desarrollar / renovar relaciones con los legisladores y su personal para desarrollar familiaridad y confianza, elementos cruciales para obtener autores de proyectos de ley e impulsar la legislación.
Conocer a los legisladores y a su personal, así como miembros del gobierno del gobernador para defender legislación y abordar cualquier inquietud.
Escribir cartas a los comités y a legisladores individuales para compartir opiniones sobre los proyectos de ley que se han presentado.
Asistir a audiencias de comités legislativos para compartir opiniones sobre los proyectos de ley durante los períodos de comentario público.
Instar al gobernador a que firme o vete una ley.
Comités de política
Los miembros de comités de políticas de la asamblea de legisladores y el senado consideran las consecuencias políticas de un proyecto de ley. El liderazgo de cada cámara asigna los proyectos de ley a comités de política según el tema de los proyectos y otros factores. Los proyectos de ley pueden ser revisados por un solo comité de política en cada cámara o por varios comités de política.
El senado estatal tiene más de 20 comités de política actuales, y la asamblea tiene más de 30. El Comité de Educación de la asamblea legislativa (Assembly Education Committee) y el Comité de Ingresos e Impuestos del senado son algunos ejemplos. Los proyectos de ley que se aprueban en esta etapa, potencialmente con modificaciones, se transfieren al comité de apropiaciones para revisarse en más profundidad.
Los comités de asignaciones y el “archivo de asuntos pendientes”
Los comités de asignaciones calculan el costo de los proyectos de ley. Si el costo alcanza o supera ciertos umbrales, en general el proyecto se coloca en el archivo de asuntos pendientes del comité, que esencialmente es una “sala de espera” para los proyectos que se examinan en mayor profundidad. Los umbrales de costo son relativamente bajos en ambas cámaras. En el senado, el umbral varía entre $50,000 y $150,000, depende del fondo estatal del que se tomará el dinero. El umbral en la asamblea legislativa es $150,000, sin importar cuál sea el fondo.
Dos veces por año, los comités de apropiaciones organizan audiencias donde anuncian rápidamente el destino de cientos de proyectos de ley que se encuentran en su archivo de asuntos pendientes. Los proyectos que se sacan del archivo de asuntos pendientes mediante un voto, frecuentemente con enmiendas, pasan a la asamblea legislativa o el senado. Los proyectos de ley que continúan “en suspenso” en el comité de apropiaciones quedan inactivas por el resto del año.
Los proyectos de ley pueden quedar en suspenso por una variedad de razones, inclusive preocupaciones por su costo. Sin embargo, típicamente los directores de los comités no explican públicamente por qué algunos proyectos pasan a la asamblea legislativa o el senado y otros se mantienen en suspenso.
Votos formales de toda la legislatura: Mayoría simple o súper mayoría
Una vez que un proyecto de ley es aprobado por el comité final en su “cámara de origen”, se programa para debatirse y votar en el pleno de la cámara. La mayoría de los proyectos de ley solo necesitan una mayoría simple para ser aprobados: 41 votos en la asamblea legislativa de 80 miembros y 21 votos en el senado de 40 miembros.
Sin embargo, se requieren dos tercios (una súper mayoría) de los votos en cada cámara si el proyecto de ley:
Genera un impuesto nuevo o aumenta un impuesto existente.
Contiene una cláusula de “urgencia” que le permite entrar en vigencia de inmediato en lugar de esperar hasta el 1 de enero (la fecha típica).
Propone enmendar la Constitución del estado, un cambio que en última instancia debe ser aprobado por una mayoría de los votantes en una elección estatal.
Enjuagar y repetir: El proceso se traslada al senado estatal
Si un proyecto de ley es aprobado en la primera cámara, pasa a la cámara alta, donde se repite el proceso: comités de política, comité de apropiaciones, voto de la cámara en pleno. Típicamente los proyectos de ley son modificados una vez más en esta etapa. Si se aprueban con enmiendas, el proyecto vuelve a la cámara baja para una votación de “conformidad”. Los proyectos de ley aprobados con un voto de conformidad pasan al gobernador para su consideración final.
Aprobación o veto: Los proyectos de ley aprobados se envían al gobernador.
Una vez que un proyecto de ley recibe la aprobación legislativa final, se le envía al gobernador, quien puede:
Firmar el proyecto de ley para que se convierta en ley.
Permitir que el proyecto de ley se convierta en ley sin una firma.
Vetar, rechazar, el proyecto de ley. La legislatura puede anular un veto con dos tercios de los votos en cada cámara. Sin embargo, la anulación de vetos es extremadamente infrecuente.
Típicamente, los proyectos de ley aprobados por mayoría simple entran en vigencia el 1 de enero del año calendario siguiente. Los estatutos urgentes, aumentos de impuestos y otros proyectos de ley específicos entran en vigencia en cuanto se convierten en ley.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
Californians typically pay more in federal taxes than the state receives in federal spending each year, making California a “donor state.”1All years in this fact sheet represent federal fiscal years (FFYs), which begin every October 1 and end the following September 30. The data presented in this fact sheet differs from the data included in an earlier Budget Center fact sheet — published in February 2025 — for a few reasons. First, this fact sheet analyzes data for nine fiscal years (FFYs 2015 to 2023), whereas the earlier fact sheet displayed these data for only a single fiscal year (FFY 2022). Second, this fact sheet displays federal spending data in two ways — with and without federal COVID funds — whereas the earlier fact sheet displayed spending data only with COVID funds. Finally, the data for FFY 2022 differ across the two fact sheets because the Rockefeller Institute of Government recently revised the FFY 2022 data. Between federal fiscal years (FFYs) 2015 and 2023, federal taxes paid by California residents and businesses exceeded federal spending in every year except 2020, 2021, and 2023.2FFY 2023 is the most recent year for which the Rockefeller Institute of Government’s 50-state analysis is available. In other words, California was a donor state in six out of the nine fiscal years for which data are available.
California likely would have been a donor state in additional years during this period if not for federal COVID funding. Since 2020, federal expenditures have included the substantial — but temporary — support provided to states, businesses, and individuals to address the COVID pandemic. These one-time COVID funds caused federal expenditures in California to jump significantly, which in turn has understated California’s role as a donor state.3In the four years leading up to the start of the pandemic in FFY 2020, annual federal spending in California hovered between $400 billion and $450 billion. That number jumped to over $750 billion in FFY 2020 as the pandemic took hold and federal COVID spending ramped up. Federal spending in California remained above $600 billion as recently as FFY 2023.
Excluding temporary COVID funds from the analysis provides a more accurate picture of the long-term underlying fiscal trends and California’s true position as a donor state. Using this alternative analysis, between FFYs 2015 and 2023, Californians paid more in federal taxes than the state received in federal spending in eight out of these nine years (2020 is the exception). For example, Californians’ federal taxes exceeded federal spending — excluding COVID spending — by $55 billion in 2021, $101 billion in 2022, and $17 billion in 2023.
Why Is California a Donor State?
Why do Californians typically contribute more to the federal treasury than the state gets back in federal funding? The explanation touches on both the spending and revenue sides of the equation.
On the spending side:
States with higher poverty rates, a large population of older adults, major federal facilities (such as military bases), a large volume of federal contracts, and/or a substantial federal employee presence are likely to receive a disproportionate share of federal funds. These factors contribute to relatively higher federal spending in many other states (on a per capita basis) compared to California.
On the revenue side:
States with more wealthy residents and high per capita incomes — like California — account for a disproportionate share of federal tax revenue due to the progressive federal tax system.
H.R. 1 and the Federal Budget
H.R. 1, the harmful Republican mega bill passed in July 2025, will deeply harm Californians by cutting funding for essential programs like health care, food assistance, and education.
See how California leaders can respond and protect vital supports.
With Trump-Era Federal Budget Cuts, the Gap Between California’s Federal Tax Contributions and Federal Spending in the State Will Increase
In July 2025, President Trump signed into law a budget bill (H.R. 1) that will deeply harm Californians by cutting spending for essential programs like health care, food assistance, and education in order to help fund massive tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations, and increased immigration enforcement. The spending cuts included in H.R. 1 will disproportionately impact families with low incomes, immigrants, and communities of color, pushing more people into poverty and widening racial and economic inequities across the state.
State policymakers can mitigate the harm of H.R. 1., however, the massive federal funding cuts are too large to be entirely backfilled with state dollars. As a result, essential services like Medi-Cal health coverage and CalFresh food assistance are in jeopardy as state leaders assess how to address the impact of harmful federal reductions.
Moreover, as the provisions of H.R. 1 are implemented through 2028, the gap between what Californians pay in federal taxes and federal spending in the state will grow larger.
This is because Californians will continue to disproportionately contribute to federal revenues whereas California will get back even less of those dollars as deep cuts to health care, food assistance, and other vital services take effect.
Federal Tax Dollars Should Be Used to Strengthen Essential Services
California contributes much to the nation thanks to the creativity, vitality, and hard work of the nearly 40 million people of diverse backgrounds who call the Golden State their home.
Federal tax dollars — including Californians’ very generous contributions to the federal treasury — should be used to strengthen vital public services and help all people make ends meet, rather than helping corporations and the wealthy avoid paying their fair share of federal taxes.
Update: This fact sheet was revised in August 2025 to include newly released federal tax and spending data from the Rockefeller Institute of Government (federal fiscal years 2015–2023), with revised figures and updated charts.
Want to Better Understand the State Budget?
The Budget Center’s essential resources for understanding and navigating the California state budget — all in one place.
Explore tools, videos, and expert insights designed to strengthen your advocacy and guide informed decision-making.
All years in this fact sheet represent federal fiscal years (FFYs), which begin every October 1 and end the following September 30. The data presented in this fact sheet differs from the data included in an earlier Budget Center fact sheet — published in February 2025 — for a few reasons. First, this fact sheet analyzes data for nine fiscal years (FFYs 2015 to 2023), whereas the earlier fact sheet displayed these data for only a single fiscal year (FFY 2022). Second, this fact sheet displays federal spending data in two ways — with and without federal COVID funds — whereas the earlier fact sheet displayed spending data only with COVID funds. Finally, the data for FFY 2022 differ across the two fact sheets because the Rockefeller Institute of Government recently revised the FFY 2022 data.
In the four years leading up to the start of the pandemic in FFY 2020, annual federal spending in California hovered between $400 billion and $450 billion. That number jumped to over $750 billion in FFY 2020 as the pandemic took hold and federal COVID spending ramped up. Federal spending in California remained above $600 billion as recently as FFY 2023.
You may also be interested in the following resources:
SACRAMENTO, CA — The California Budget & Policy Center (Budget Center), in collaboration with the California Immigrant Policy Center (CIPC), released a new report today: How Federal and State Budget Cuts Threaten Latinx Californians. The report details how harmful recent federal and state budget cuts are slashing access to health care, food assistance, child care, … Continued
California policymakers should ensure that profitable corporations pay their fair share in state corporate taxes — which represent a tiny share of their expenses — to support the public services that Californians need. This is especially urgent to help mitigate the harms of the harmful federal cuts to health care, food assistance, and other basic needs programs.
State leaders should end the state’s most costly corporate tax break — the water’s edge loophole, which allows corporations to avoid around $3 billion in California taxes each year and deprives the state of needed resources to address the most pressing concerns facing Californians.
As state leaders look to blunt the harm of the federal budget on Californians with low incomes and the state’s finances, it’s clear that California’s corporate tax structure is in need of repair. While large, profitable corporations benefit from new federal tax breaks, California policymakers must ensure these businesses pay their fair share in state taxes. There is no one-size-fits-all solution: different options can all complement each other. For example, limiting corporate tax credit usage will raise revenues by itself but will also prevent erosion of the revenue potential from ending the water’s edge loophole.
MORE IN THIS SERIES
To learn more about the water’s edge election, net operating losses, tax credits, corporate tax rates, and options for common-sense reform, see the other fact sheets in this series:
The Problem: Multinational Corporations Avoid Billions in State Taxes by Shifting US Profits Offshore
Large corporations that have affiliated companies outside of the US can use a variety of mechanisms to artificially shift hundreds of billions in US profits to foreign jurisdictions with low tax rates — known as tax havens — to reduce their federal and state taxes. In fact, corporations report to federal tax authorities that their profits in some well-known tax havens are multiple times larger than the entire economies of these places, indicating that most if not all of those profits are only there on paper.
As one example of how a corporation might accomplish this, a US corporation can transfer ownership of intellectual property like patents or trademarks to a foreign affiliate and pay the affiliate for the right to use them, effectively moving income off the books of the US corporation while keeping it within the larger corporate group. This is a tactic that industries such as tech and pharmaceuticals can easily employ, but corporations across the board have options to engage in offshore profit shifting and tax avoidance.
Corporations Can Greatly Reduce Profits Subject to Taxation — and Their Taxes — by Shifting Profits Abroad and Using the Water’s Edge Election
CORPORATE GROUP TOTAL PROFITS
If the example corporation above uses the default Worldwide Combined Reporting method, all worldwide profits are included: $5B + $500M + $200M + $4B + $2B = $11.7 Billion.
If the corporation chooses to use Water’s Edge Election, only domestic profits are included (yellow oval): $5B + $500M + $200M = $5.7 Billion.
Note: This is a simplified example.
California’s “water’s edge election” allows corporations to choose whether or not to include the profits of their foreign affiliates when they report their total profits that can be divided up among, or “apportioned” to, the states where they are subject to tax.1Additionally, while some groups of related corporations may elect to file a group tax return in California, each corporation may file separate returns but are still required to combine profits at the corporate group level first, before apportioning profits between taxing jurisdictions and individual corporate entities.Generally, profits are apportioned to states by multiplying the total profits by the “sales factor”, which is determined by dividing the corporation’s sales into the state by its total sales. For filers electing the water’s edge method, the denominator is only domestic sales.
The water’s edge election creates several issues:
Smaller, domestic businesses likely pay higher shares of their income in taxes than large multinational corporations because they are unable to shift profits overseas.
Giving corporations the option of two filing methods means they will always choose the one that lowers their tax bill. For corporations with significant offshore profits, the water’s edge method will likely result in lower taxes. If corporations have domestic profits and foreign losses, using the “worldwide combined reporting” method — where all worldwide profits and losses are combined — would result in a lower tax bill.
Allowing corporations to ignore foreign profits can encourage them to shift profits to foreign tax havens and avoid state taxes by using the water’s edge election.
Maintaining the water’s edge election will cost the state an estimated $3.1 billion in 2024-25, increasing to $3.5 billion by 2026-27, according to the Department of Finance.
The Solution: Close the Water’s Edge Loophole and Require Worldwide Combined Reporting
Requiring large multinational corporations to use the worldwide combined reporting method would eliminate the state tax benefit of shifting profits abroad and close this loophole, resulting in additional revenue for California. Under this method, corporations are required to include the income of all their domestic and foreign affiliates in their total profits before determining what share is taxable by each state. This is already the default tax filing method for corporations subject to tax in California that don’t elect the water’s edge method, so some corporations currently use this method when it is beneficial for them.
In tandem with requiring worldwide combined reporting, policymakers could take steps to prevent corporations from underreporting their sales into California, driving down the “sales factor” used to determine the share of their profits that can be taxed in California, and ultimately reducing their state taxes. For example, policymakers can clarify state law to ensure corporations report the final destination of their sales — not the location of intermediaries — for the purpose of the sales factor, and require more robust reporting on the locations of sales to allow tax authorities to better identify cases when a corporation may be underreporting. This is a reform that should generate additional revenue on its own, but would also help prevent the erosion of revenues that could be gained from requiring worldwide combined reporting, as requiring corporations to report their global profits may lead them to find other ways to reduce their California tax bill, like underreporting sales into the state.
Ending the water’s edge loophole for large corporations and requiring worldwide combined reporting is a common-sense reform to ensure corporations contribute a fair share of their profits in California taxes to support the state services and infrastructure that allow companies, their workers, and their consumers to thrive.
Want to Better Understand the State Budget?
The Budget Center’s essential resources for understanding and navigating the California state budget — all in one place.
Explore tools, videos, and expert insights designed to strengthen your advocacy and guide informed decision-making.
Additionally, while some groups of related corporations may elect to file a group tax return in California, each corporation may file separate returns but are still required to combine profits at the corporate group level first, before apportioning profits between taxing jurisdictions and individual corporate entities.
You may also be interested in the following resources:
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
In California, workers’ wages have stagnated and families struggle to keep up with the rising costs of living, while corporate profits have skyrocketed. Yet many profitable corporations in California pay zero or very little in state taxes year after year.
California policymakers should ensure that profitable corporations pay their fair share in state corporate taxes — which represent a tiny share of their expenses — to support the public services that Californians need and help mitigate the harms of federal cuts to health care, food assistance, and other basic needs programs.
State leaders can prevent profitable corporations from completely wiping out their tax bills with amassed tax credits by instituting permanent annual caps on business credits and deductions. In practice, this would ensure that corporations contribute to the state services and infrastructure they rely on to operate their business, just like all Californians do.
As state leaders look to blunt the harm of the federal budget on Californians with low incomes and the state’s finances, it’s clear that California’s corporate tax structure is in need of repair. While large, profitable corporations benefit from new federal tax breaks, California policymakers must ensure these businesses pay their fair share in state taxes. There is no one-size-fits-all solution: different options can all complement each other. For example, limits on business tax credits and net operating loss (NOL) deductions are key to preventing the erosion of the potential revenues that could be generated from eliminating the water’s edge tax loophole and increasing the tax rate on highly profitable corporations.
MORE IN THIS SERIES
To learn more about the water’s edge election, net operating losses, tax credits, corporate tax rates, and options for common-sense reform, see the other fact sheets in this series:
Highly Profitable Corporations Can Largely Avoid State Taxes With Tax Credits and Net Operating Loss Deductions
A large share of corporations in California pay nothing above the meager $800 minimum franchise tax that most businesses that are incorporated, registered, or doing business in California are required to pay. Nearly half of all profitable corporations filing tax in California in 2023 — more than 300,000 corporations — paid nothing more than the $800 minimum tax, even though they collectively had $11.7 billion in state profits, according to preliminary data from the state’s Franchise Tax Board. This means they were able to eliminate their regular tax liability by either zeroing out their taxable income with net operating loss deductions, zeroing out their tax bill with tax credits, or some combination of the two. This number does not include corporations that were able to greatly reduce their tax bills but still paid some amount above the minimum tax. Unfortunately, there is no public data available indicating the number of corporations that pay minuscule shares of their profits in state taxes, or which corporations they are. However, public data show that many profitable corporations are able to avoid paying taxes at the federal level. While there are some differences in tax avoidance opportunities for corporations between federal and state law, some corporations paying low or no federal taxes may also be able to reduce or zero out their state taxes using similar state-level tax breaks.
How can corporations pay next to nothing in state taxes when they are profitable?
While business tax calculations can be very complicated, in general a corporation1This is a simplified example that does not include all the complexities of corporate tax calculations.:
Determines its final tax bill by subtracting any tax credits it has available.
Determines its total profits by subtracting business expenses from its total revenues/sales. For corporations that are part of a group of affiliated corporations, this calculation includes the profits of the entire combined group. However, multinational corporations can choose to use the “water’s edge election” and exclude the profits of their foreign subsidiaries, which can reduce their profits subject to state taxes and therefore their tax bill.
Determines the share of these total profits that is attributable to Californiaand to each member of the corporate group by multiplying profits by a “sales” factor — the ratio of the corporations’ California sales to total sales.
Determines its taxable income for state tax purposes by deducting any net operating losses (NOLs) it has available.
Determines its taxes due before applying tax credits by multiplying its taxable income by the applicable tax rate.2 While the state does have an “alternative minimum tax” for C corporations that utilize certain tax preferences, this does not prevent corporations from wiping out their taxes with credits, and impacts very few corporations. In 2022 and 2023,only around 1% of C corporation filers paid the alternative minimum tax, generating $100 million or less in state revenues (data is preliminary for 2023).
A net operating loss occurs when a business experienced losses in prior years, meaning its expenses exceeded its revenues. Those losses can be carried forward and used to reduce its taxable income in future years, and thus its tax bill.3NOLs can be carried forward for up to 20 years after the loss occurred, at which time any unused NOLs expire. In total, corporations reduced their taxable income by around $30 billion in 2023 and had more than $1.3 trillion in unused NOLs that can be carried forward and deducted from profits in future years, according to preliminary Franchise Tax Board data. NOLs, if large enough, could reduce taxable income to zero, in which case the business would pay no more than the state’s $800 minimum franchise tax.
If a business still has taxable income after subtracting NOLs, the applicable tax rate — 8.84% for C corporations and 1.5% for S corporations — is then applied to determine its tax liability. But many businesses can then reduce their tax liability on a dollar-for-dollar basis if they have research and development (R&D) credits, film production credits, or other types of business credits. Some may even reduce their regular tax bill down to zero and would only pay the $800 minimum tax.
Like NOLs, business tax credits can also be carried forward to future years if their credits exceed the taxes they owe in the current year. According to data last reported by the Franchise Tax Board for the 2020 tax year, corporations had more than $40 billion in unused R&D credits that could be used to offset their future tax bills.4 This information is no longer reported by the Franchise Tax Board.
The R&D credit is by far the state’s largest business tax credit. The credit cost California more than $2.5 billion in 2023 and was claimed by over 4,600 corporations across various industrial sectors, according to preliminary Franchise Tax Board data. While research has generally found state R&D tax credits to increase the amount of R&D taking place in a state, the evidence is mixed on the size of the impact and their overall economic effects. Additionally, California’s credit has never been rigorously studied. The California State Auditor noted nearly ten years ago that, because there is no regular oversight or evaluation of the credit, the auditor’s office could not determine whether the credit was fulfilling its purpose or benefitting the state’s economy. Thus, it is unclear whether the billions of dollars the state spends on the credit each year are an effective use of public funds — especially given that those dollars are not available to spend on other public services that could potentially provide greater economic benefits.
While the Franchise Tax Board does not report tax credit data for individual corporations, some of these corporations do report in their public financial filings the amount of California credits — particularly R&D credits — they have available to offset future tax liability. For example, Alphabet (Google’s parent company) and Apple report that they have $6.4 billion and $3.5 billion, respectively, in California R&D credits that they can use to reduce their California taxes in the future. This means that even if companies like this with large stockpiles of credits were subject to a higher tax rate in the future, some of them could largely avoid paying more in tax as long as they still have sufficient credits available for use.
Profitable Corporations Shouldn’t Be Able to Wipe Their Entire Tax Burden: State Policymakers Should Place Annual Limits on Net Operating Loss Deductions and Tax Credits
California policymakers can make sure profitable corporations pay their fair share in state taxes by enacting permanent annual limits on NOL deductions and tax credits.
State leaders have temporarily limited NOLs and tax credits multiple times in response to budget shortfalls. In 2020, in response to the COVID-19 economic crisis, state leaders enacted a $5 million limit on tax credits that businesses could use in a given year and a pause on the use of NOL deductions for businesses with state profits above $1 million. Those limitations were in effect for tax years 2020 and 2021. However, even with those limitations in place, a large share of profitable corporations still paid nothing more than the $800 minimum tax in those years, as shown in the first chart above.
The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimated in 2022 that the $5 million tax credit limit likely impacted fewer than 100 corporations, since most businesses claim tax credits below that amount. The credit limit is estimated to increase state revenues by $2 billion or more annually in years when it’s in effect.
Faced with another shortfall in 2024, policymakers still re-enacted these limits for tax years 2024, 2025, and 2026.
BAD BUDGETING
Breaking from tradition — and likely to appease corporate opponents to these limits — policymakers also included a provision in the 2024-25 budget that will allow businesses impacted by the temporary tax credit limitation to claim refunds after 2026 for the credits that they were prohibited from taking during the limitation period. In other words, they can receive cash back if their delayed credits exceed the taxes they owe in those years. Historically, refundable tax credits have only been available for low-income families and individuals in California as a way to boost their incomes. Allowing corporations to claim refunds for these credits will cost the state more than $1 billion annually for several years beginning in 2027, as the corporations electing to receive refunds must spread the refund out over several years. Policymakers could avoid these costs in the out years by repealing this refundability provision.
Policymakers have several options to limit business tax credits to a reasonable amount on an ongoing basis. They could opt to make the current temporary $5 million limit permanent instead of letting it expire in 2027. They could also reduce that limit in the near term to generate additional revenues immediately. Another option is to limit the total credits that a business can use in any year to a percentage of the taxes it would otherwise owe that year. In the longer term, rigorous analyses on the efficacy and the cost-effectiveness of specific business tax credits — such as the R&D credit and the film tax credit — are warranted, which would inform future policy reforms such as eliminating or restructuring credits determined to be ineffective or where the costs exceed the benefits.
Similar to limiting tax credits, state leaders could limit the amount of NOL deductions that can be taken in a given year as a percentage of the business’ state profits. While there are legitimate reasons to allow businesses to use NOL deductions to “smooth out” their income over multiple years, since income may be volatile for some businesses, there is also an argument to be made that businesses should not be able to pay nothing or next to nothing in years when they are generating significant profits. So it is reasonable to impose annual limits to prevent corporations from entirely wiping out their taxable income and in turn, their tax bill. At the federal level, NOL deductions are limited to 80% of a corporation’s taxable income. California could adopt that limit or enact a tighter limit to raise additional revenue and ensure corporations are paying taxes on more than 20% of their profits.
Placing reasonable caps on business credits and deductions — particularly in combination with the other corporate tax reforms such as eliminating the water’s edge loophole and increasing the tax rate on the most profitable corporations — will ensure corporations contribute a fair share of their profits in California taxes to support the state services and infrastructure that allow companies, their workers, and their consumers to thrive.
This is a simplified example that does not include all the complexities of corporate tax calculations.
2
While the state does have an “alternative minimum tax” for C corporations that utilize certain tax preferences, this does not prevent corporations from wiping out their taxes with credits, and impacts very few corporations. In 2022 and 2023,only around 1% of C corporation filers paid the alternative minimum tax, generating $100 million or less in state revenues (data is preliminary for 2023).
3
NOLs can be carried forward for up to 20 years after the loss occurred, at which time any unused NOLs expire. In total, corporations reduced their taxable income by around $30 billion in 2023 and had more than $1.3 trillion in unused NOLs that can be carried forward and deducted from profits in future years, according to preliminary Franchise Tax Board data.
4
This information is no longer reported by the Franchise Tax Board.
You may also be interested in the following resources:
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
This website uses cookies to analyze site traffic and to allow users to complete forms on the site. The California Budget & Policy Center does not share, trade, sell, or otherwise disclose personal information. By using our website you agree to our Privacy Policy.
California Budget & Policy Center
Webinar: Understanding the State Budget Process and What’s to Come in 2026