Legal Opinion

Daks v. Franchise Tax Board

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 24, 1999No. B119670PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

VOGEL (Miriam A.), J.

The question in this case is whether pension income earned while a taxpayer is a resident of another state but distributed after the taxpayer becomes a resident of California is taxable personal income in California. We hold that it is.

Facts

From 1948 to 1982, Joseph Daks resided in New York, where he was employed by United Merchants and Manufacturers, Inc. or one of its subsidiaries. During his employment, he participated in a noncontributory, qualified defined-benefit pension plan within the meaning of section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code. In January 1982,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Spring City Foundry Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. Wilson v. Board of RetirementCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  3. Borchers v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Paine v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
  2. Opinion No. (2006), California Attorney General Reports2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API