Legal Opinion
McClain v. Sav-On Drugs
California Supreme Court
Decided March 4, 2019No. S241471PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtOpinion of the Court by Liu, J.
**426 *140 *954 California retailers are generally required to pay the state a sales tax on the retail sale of any "tangible personal property." ( Rev. & Tax. Code, § 6051.) Retailers submit payment to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA or Department) as a percentage of their gross receipts under a rebuttable presumption that all gross receipts are subject to the sales tax. ( Id. , §§ 6051, 6091.) Retailers may charge customers a "sales tax reimbursement to the sales price" for sales subject to the tax, or they may absorb the tax and opt to build it into the price charged…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- McKesson Corp. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, Fla. Dept. of Business RegulationSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Loeffler v. Target CorporationCalifornia Supreme Court · 2014
- Morning Star Co. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Javor v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- City of Pomona v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Bekkerman v. Cal. Dept. of Tax and Fee Admin.California Court of Appeal · 2024
- Cal. Dept. of Tax and Fee Administration v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2020
- County Inmate Telephone Service CasesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
- Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. Coachella Valley Water Dist.California Court of Appeal · 2025
- Lichtenberger v. Hunt, Ortmann, Palffy etc. CA2/2California Court of Appeal · 2020
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.