Legal Opinion
Borchers v. Franchise Tax Board
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 31, 1984No. Civ. 68191PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SAETA, J. *
Appellants Robert H. and Josephine Borchers (taxpayers) timely appeal from a judgment in favor of respondents Franchise Tax Board and State Board of Equalization (collectively Board). Taxpayers had sued for a refund of income taxes for the year 1971 on the basis that annuity payments received by them should not have been included in their income.
The crux of the case is the proper interpretation of Revenue and Taxation Code section 17596 (section 17596). While this section has been construed by administrative boards, it has not been the subject of appellate consideration…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Spring City Foundry Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Select Base Materials, Inc. v. Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
- South Coast Co. v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
3Cited by4 opinions
- Mole-Richardson Co. v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- Paine v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Daks v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Opinion No. (2006), California Attorney General Reports2006