The Gillette Company, Plaintiffs and Appellants v. Franchise Tax Board, Defendant and Respondent. [and Five…

Summary

The court held that California could replace the Multistate Tax Compact's equal-weighted apportionment formula and eliminate the taxpayer election between that formula and California's statutory formula. The Compact did not create binding reciprocal obligations that constrained the Legislature, and the later statute expressly superseded the election provision. The court also held that the amendment complied with California's reenactment rule because it expressly referenced the Compact and gave adequate notice of the change.