right to exercise privilege in California

2020(See Ingels v. Riley (1936) 5 Cal.2d 154, 159 [property tax does not impose any condition or place any restriction on the use of property taxed; privilege tax imposed on the right to exercise a privilege]; City of Huntington Beach v. Superior Court (1978) 78 Cal.App.3d 333, 341 [privilege tax does not become a property tax simply because it is proportioned in amount to the value of the property used in connection with the privilege which is taxed]; § 3.56.030, subd.

1978A privilege tax “does not become a property tax simply because it is proportioned in amount to the value of the property used in connection with the privilege which is taxed.” (Ingels v. Riley, supra, 5 Cal.2d 154, 160 .) Plaintiffs rely upon the statement in Ingels v. Riley, supra, 5 Cal.2d 154, 159 , that a “privilege tax ... is imposed upon the right to exercise a privilege, and its payment is invariably made a condition precedent to the exercise of the privilege involved.” It is urged that since the city ordinance did not make actual payment of the tax a “condition precedent” for effectuat

2020(See Ingels v. Riley (1936) 5 Cal.2d 154, 159 [property tax does not impose any condition or place any restriction on the use of property taxed; privilege tax imposed on the right to exercise a privilege]; City of Huntington Beach v. Superior Court (1978) 78 Cal.App.3d 333, 341 [privilege tax does not become a property tax simply because it is proportioned in amount to the value of the property used in connection with the privilege which is taxed]; § 3.56.030, subd.

1993(See City of Oakland v. Digre (1988) 205 Cal.App.3d 99, 106 [ 252 Cal.Rptr. 99 ].) “[A]n excise tax is ‘a tax on the exercise of one of the incidences of property ownership,’ such as the ability to transfer or devise property or the ability to use, store, or consume it.” (Ibid.) It is “ ‘. . . imposed upon the right to exercise a privilege, and its payment is invariably made a condition precedent to the exercise of the privilege involved.’ ” (City of Huntington Beach v. Superior Court (1978) 78 Cal.App.3d 333, 341 [ 144 Cal.Rptr. 236 ].) The excise tax here has all of the characteristics of a

2000Stated another way, the excise tax is a tax on the privilege of exercising the taxed incident of ownership. [Citation.]" ( City of Oakland v. Digre, supra, 205 Cal.App.3d at p. 106 , 252 Cal.Rptr. 99 .) Because it is imposed upon the right to exercise a privilege, the payment of an excise tax invariably is a condition precedent to the exercise of the privilege involved. ( Centex Real Estate Corp. v. City of Vallejo (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 1358, 1364 , 24 Cal.Rptr.2d 48 .) Consequently, a property tax is one the imposition of which is triggered merely by property ownership, while an excise tax is

2000Stated another way, the excise tax is a tax on the privilege of exercising the taxed incident of ownership. [Citation.]" ( City of Oakland v. Digre, supra, 205 Cal.App.3d at p. 106 , 252 Cal.Rptr. 99 .) Because it is imposed upon the right to exercise a privilege, the payment of an excise tax invariably is a condition precedent to the exercise of the privilege involved. ( Centex Real Estate Corp. v. City of Vallejo (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 1358, 1364 , 24 Cal.Rptr.2d 48 .) Consequently, a property tax is one the imposition of which is triggered merely by property ownership, while an excise tax is

1997Section 2(b) defines the “essential governmental services,” contended to be the rationale of its tax, as those which “must be provided by any municipal government as a matter of necessity and not individual choice.” This simply concedes that payment of the parcel tax is not a condition precedent to the landowner’s exercise of any privilege of use of the City’s services. “ ‘A privilege tax . . . is imposed upon the right to exercise a privilege, and its payment is invariably made a condition precedent to the exercise of the privilege involved.’ ” (Douglas, supra, 13 Cal.2d at p. 550 .) 6 Simila

1963It is imposed on certain of the privileges of ownership, but not on all of them." (Douglas Aircraft Co., Inc. v. Johnson (1939) 13 Cal.2d 545, 551 [ 90 P.2d 572 ]; italics added.) The use tax frames an excise tax upon the privilege of utilizing property within this state in a certain manner. [9] "A privilege tax ... is imposed upon the right to exercise a privilege, and its payment is invariably made a condition precedent to the exercise of the privilege involved." (Ingels v. Riley (1936) 5 Cal.2d 154, 159 [ 53 P.2d 939 , 103 A.L.R. 1 ].) The sales and use taxes encompass apposite privileges.

1997Section 2(b) defines the “essential governmental services,” contended to be the rationale of its tax, as those which “must be provided by any municipal government as a matter of necessity and not individual choice.” This simply concedes that payment of the parcel tax is not a condition precedent to the landowner’s exercise of any privilege of use of the City’s services. “ ‘A privilege tax . . . is imposed upon the right to exercise a privilege, and its payment is invariably made a condition precedent to the exercise of the privilege involved.’ ” (Douglas, supra, 13 Cal.2d at p. 550 .) 6 Simila

1997Section 2(b) defines the “essential governmental services,” contended to be the rationale of its tax, as those which “must be provided by any municipal government as a matter of necessity and not individual choice.” This simply concedes that payment of the parcel tax is not a condition precedent to the landowner’s exercise of any privilege of use of the City’s services. “ ‘A privilege tax . . . is imposed upon the right to exercise a privilege, and its payment is invariably made a condition precedent to the exercise of the privilege involved.’ ” (Douglas, supra, 13 Cal.2d at p. 550 .) 6 Simila