Ceridian Corp. v. Franchise Tax Bd. (2001)

Annotate this Case
[No. A084298. First Dist., Div. Three. Jan. 18, 2001.]

[Modification of Opinion (85 Cal.App.4th 875) on denial of petition for rehearing.]

CERIDIAN CORPORATION, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. FRANCHISE TAX BOARD, Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT.-

The petition for rehearing is denied. It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on December 21, 2000, be modified in the following particular:

On page 15 [85 Cal. App. 4th 890 , advance report], the disposition paragraph (Part III, Conclusion and Disposition) should read:

"We hold that Revenue and Taxation Code section 24410 is an unconstitutional enactment in that it violates the commerce clause both by allowing a deduction for insurance subsidiary dividends only to corporations domiciled in California, and in limiting the amount of the deduction according to a formula based on the subsidiary's gross receipts, payroll and property within the state. The trial court's judgment invalidating the statute and awarding Ceridian the stipulated amount of tax refund is affirmed."

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.