A Local Ordinance Is Not A Statute Within The Meaning Of Government Code section 810.

The Internal Revenue Service, following several adverse court decisions, announced in 2006 that it would cease collecting the federal excise tax on long distance and bundled services and allow federal taxpayers to obtain a refund by checking a box on their federal tax returns. In August 2006, plaintiff served a demand on the City and its officers to refund the money he asserted that the City had improperly collected on certain telephone services “during the prior two years.” The City Council amended its local ordinance concerning telephone taxes by removing reference to a federal excise tax, and did so without seeking the approval of voters under article XIII C of the California Constitution, commonly known as Proposition 218. Plaintiff, a city resident brought a class action on behalf of himself and others challenging the city’s telephone user’s tax and seeking a refund of the taxes paid. The trial court dismissed his action, and the appellate court reversed. The California Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeal, finding a local ordinance is not a statute within the meaning of the Government Claims Act [Government Code section 810]. The court stated:  “The issue here is not whether class actions for tax refunds should be permitted, but which level of government—the state or the local public entity—should define the procedures governing an action for refund of a local tax. We hold that except as to ‘[c]laims under the Revenue and Taxation Code or other statute prescribing procedures for the refund . . . of any tax,’ the Legislature has determined that the Government Claims Act applies. (§ 905.)” McWilliams v. City of Long Beach  (Cal. Sup. Ct.; April 25, 2013) 56 Cal.4th 613.