HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09091997 - C152 4
E
C. 152
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on September 9, 1997 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Uilkema, Gerber, Canciamilla, and DeSaulnier
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
SUBJECT: Correspondence
C.152 Claims, dated August 8, 1997, received from KPMG Peat Marwick LLP, 750 B Street,
San Diego, CA 92101, on behalf of Great Western Bank, Union Bank of California, and
Home Savings for refund of property taxes levied for Fiscal Year 1993-94.
*****REFERRED TO TREASURER TAX-COLLECTOR, COUNTY COUNSEL, AND
ASSESSOR
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the above
recommendations as noted (*****) are APPROVED.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND
CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND
ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. �j�/
ATTESTED � / 7, // / Z
Phil Batchel r,Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors and County Administrator
By �� Deputy
c.c. Correspondents (1)
Treasurer Tax-Collector
County Counsel
Assessor
Peat Marwick LLP 18971997
750 B Street Telephone 619 233 8000 Telefax 619 696 0121
San Diego, CA 92101
August 8, 1997 RECEIVE?
Clerk, Board of Supervisors AUG 11997
County of Contra Costa CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
651 Pine Street, Room 106 CONTRA COSTA CO.
Martinez, CA 94553
RE: Great Western Bank, Claim for Refund of Excess Taxes Paid
Gentlemen:
The undersigned,agent for Great Western Bank,the claimant herein,hereby makes this claim for refund
of property taxes on behalf of the claimant pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code §5097 and asks that
the Board of Supervisors make its order directing the County Tax Collector to refund to claimant the sum
of$2,000 in property taxes levied for fiscal year 1993-94. Additionally, we seek interest on the refund at
the statutory rate.
In support of this refund claim,the Board is asked to take note of the following facts:
1. Claimant is,and at all times herein mentioned was, a California corporation doing business in
Contra,Costa County, California.
2. Claimant is the owner and user of ATM machines located in the above-mentioned County. For
the fiscal year 1993-94, claimant reported the actual cost of these ATM machines to the Assessor
of said county,and the Assessor initially assessed these ATMs at their trended actual cost to
claimant, less depreciation.
3. All property taxes levied on these ATM machines have been paid in full by claimant.
4. The ATM machines have been misclassified by the Assessor as trade fixtures. The ATM
machines should have been properly classified as business personal property.
5. Business personal property is not assessable to banks and financial institutions pursuant to
Revenue and Taxation Code §23182.
6. The Assessor has illegally assessed personal property owned by claimant.
7. No refund of said taxes, or any part thereof, has been made previously. . .
.8. I declare, under penalty of perjury,that the foregoing is true and correct; executed in San Diego,
California by Jim Winningham,Agent, KPMG Peat Marwick LLP.
Very truly yours,
KPMG Peat Marwick LLP..
Jim Winningham
Senior Manager
JW:ma dat\c1i\grwst\atmr97.doc
Member Frm of
` ' KPMG International
KII�G� Peat Marwick LLP 1897.1997
750 B Street Telephone 619 233 8000 Telefax 619 696 0121
San Diego, CA 92101
August 8, 1997
RECEIVED
Clerk, Board of Supervisors urs%/W
ti
County of Contra Costa AUG 1 1 1997
651 Pine Street, Room 106
Martinez, CA 94553
CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTA CO.
RE: Union Bank of California, Claim for Refund of Excess Taxes Paid
Gentlemen:
The undersigned, agent for Union Bank of California,the claimant herein,hereby makes this claim for
refund of property taxes on behalf of the claimant pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code §5097 and
asks that the Board of Supervisors make its order directing the County Tax Collector to refund to
claimant the sum of$1,200 in property taxes levied for fiscal year 1993-94. Additionally,we seek
interest on the refund at the statutory rate.
in support'of this refund claim,the Board is asked to take note of the following facts:
1. Claimant is, and at all times herein mentioned was, a California corporation doing business in
Contra Costa County, California.
2. ' Claimant is the owner and user of ATM machines located in the above-mentioned County. For
the fiscal year 1993-94, claimant reported the actual cost of these ATM machines to the Assessor
of said county, and the Assessor initially assessed these ATMs at their trended actual cost to
claimant, less depreciation.
3. All property taxes levied on these ATM machines have been paid in full by claimant. -
4. The ATM machines have been misclassified by the Assessor as trade fixtures. The ATM
machines should have been properly classified as business personal property.
-5. Business personal property is not assessable to banks and financial institutions pursuant to
Revenue and Taxation Code §23182.
6. The Assessor has illegally assessed personal property owned by claimant.
7. No refund of said taxes,or any part thereof,has been made previously.
8. I declare, under penalty of perjury,that the foregoing is true and correct; executed in San Diego,
California by Jim Winningham,Agent, KPMG Peat Marwick LLP.
Very truly yours;
KPMG Pear Marwick LLP
d z
Jim Winningham
Senior Manager
JW:ma dat\cIiunion\atmr97.doc
[TPF1 Member Firm o
KPMG International
V
1400
KP-MG� Peat Marwick LLP 1897.1997
750 B Street Telephone 619 233 8000 Telefax 619 696 0121
San Diego, CA 92101
August 8, 1997
TCLERK
ECEIVED
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
County of Contra Costa
651 Pine Street, Room 106 AUG f 1 1997 k
Martinez, CA 94553 RD OF SUPERI�TRA COSTA CC).iSORS
RE: Home Savings, Claim for Refund of Excess Taxes Paid
Gentlemen:
The undersigned, agent for Home Savings,the claimant herein,hereby makes this claim for refund of
property taxes on behalf of the claimant pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code §5097 and asks that the
Board of Supervisors make its order directing the County Tax Collector to refund to claimant the sum of
$1,831 in property taxes levied for fiscal year 1993-94. Additionally, we seek interest on the refund at
the statutory rate.
In support of this refund claim,the Board is asked to take note of the following facts:
'Clairiant is, and at all times herein mentioned was, a California corporation doing business in
Contra Costa County, California.
2. Claimant is the owner and user of ATM machines located in the above-mentioned County. For
the fiscal year 1993-94,claimant reported the actual cost of these ATM machines to the Assessor
of said county, and the Assessor initially assessed these ATMs at their trended actual cost to
claimant, less depreciation.
3. All property taxes levied on these ATM machines have been paid in full by claimant.
4. The ATM machines have been misclassified by the Assessor as trade fixtures. The ATM
machines should have been properly classified as business personal property.
5. Business personal property is not assessable to banks and financial institutions pursuant to
Revenue and Taxation Code §23182.
6. -The Assessor has illegally assessed personal property owned by claimant.
7. No refund of said taxes, or any part thereof,has been made previously.
8. I declare,under penalty of perjury,that the foregoing is true and correct; executed in San Diego,
California by Jim Winningham,Agent, KPMG Peat Marwick LLP.
Very truly yours,
KPMG Peat Marwick LLP `
Jim Wuiningharii
Senior Manager
JW:ma dat\cli\home\atmr97.doc
Member Firm ofIINNI -
*`" KPMG International _