Did a parent cooperative nursery school qualify as an organization equivalent to a PTA under section 6370?

Plain-English summary

On March 15, 1986, a redacted requester asked California to classify a redacted parent-cooperative nursery-school organization as equivalent to a PTA under section 6370. An April 30 Board response declined. Unlike a PTA functioning apart from its school, parent members had the primary responsibility to fulfill the cooperative's hourly day-care and education requirements and therefore participated directly in daily school operations. Neither earlier letter is in the published PDF.

The May 9 supplemental letter added that the cooperative was affiliated with a redacted union high school district. The district required it to maintain average daily attendance. The school paid part of its teachers' salaries, while the district paid the major part. The requester asked whether these facts made the cooperative separate and distinct from the district's adult education.

Tax Counsel Robert J. Stipe said those additional facts did not change the result. The parents remained active participants in actual school operations and did not function as an entity separate from daily operation of the school itself, so the parent involvement did not qualify as a PTA-equivalent organization.

The requester also asserted knowledge of other California parent-cooperative schools classified as PTA equivalents. Counsel could not answer adequately without specific details about them. He said only that schools operated in the same manner as this cooperative also would not qualify.

The opinion decides organizational equivalency only. It cites section 6370 but does not quote its terms or address any property, fundraiser, sale, statutory-consumer treatment, tax measure, reporting, or payment.

Source and live-annotation limits

The official PDF does not include the March 15 or May 9 letters, April 30 response, governing or cooperative documents, nursery or adult-education program records, parent membership or hourly-work records, day-care or education records, district affiliation agreement, average-daily-attendance records, teacher contracts or salary records, comparator-school identities or details, school authorization, property, fundraisers, sales or uses, returns, exemption documentation, tax calculations or payments, audit, assessment, claim, appeal, or later outcome. The requester, cooperative, nursery school, district, adult-education program, parents, members, teachers, children, comparator schools, transactions, quantities, salary amounts, prices, and tax amounts are redacted, unidentified, or undocumented.

The source prints This in response, Nursery Scholl, and teachers salaries; the original-text section preserves those published forms rather than silently correcting them.

The live annotation preserves the parent cooperative, nursery school, hourly day-care and education requirements, active-operation versus separate-entity distinction, date, and nonqualification result. It omits all three correspondence dates and prior-decision history, requester and counsel, section 6370, union-high-school-district affiliation, average-daily-attendance requirement, teacher-salary sharing, adult-education comparison, other-school assertion and evidentiary limit, no-tax-consequence scope, missing records, redactions and source quirks, and absent outcome.

What this means for you

Parent cooperatives, nursery schools, districts, and tax professionals

Preserve governing documents, parent membership and work requirements, daily operating responsibilities, day-care and education records, school and adult-education structure, district agreements, attendance reporting, teacher contracts and salary funding, school authorization, comparable-organization evidence, every fundraiser and sale, returns, exemption documents, tax calculations, and payments. District affiliation alone does not make operational parent involvement a separate PTA-like entity.

Common questions

Did school-district affiliation make the cooperative PTA-equivalent?

No.

What fact controlled the result?

Parents fulfilled required day-care and education hours and therefore participated in operating the school.

Did California decide the status of other parent cooperative schools?

No. It lacked detailed facts about them, but said schools operated the same way would receive the same result.

What additional district facts were supplied?

The cooperative maintained average daily attendance and paid part of teacher salaries, while the district paid the major portion.

Did those facts make the cooperative separate from district adult education?

No, because parent members still actively operated the nursery school.

Did the published source include the initial request or April response?

No.

Did the opinion decide the tax treatment of a sale?

No. It addressed PTA-equivalent status only.

Citations and references

• California Revenue and Taxation Code § 6370
• March 15 and May 9 requester letters; April 30 Board response; cooperative, nursery-school, district, attendance, salary, adult-education, comparator-school, sales, and tax records; and outcome — described or implicated but not documented

Verbatim support

From the official Tax Counsel opinion:

However, notwithstanding the additional described facts, we remain of the opinion that the parent involvement in REDACTED TEXT does not qualify as a P.T.A. equivalent since the parents are actively involved in the actual operation of the REDACTED TEXT School and they do not function as an entity separate and apart from the daily operation of the REDACTED TEXT School itself.

Without specific detailed information concerning these schools, all I can write is that if, in fact, these schools are operated in the same manner as REDACTED TEXT then we would be of the opinion that these schools also do not qualify as P.T.A. equivalents.

Source

• Annotated Legal Opinions collection: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-and-fees/annotations-menu.htm
• Annotation page: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/lawguides/vol2/suta/390-0000-all.html
• Original supporting opinion: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/lawguides/annotations/390-0095-900.pdf

Original ruling text

390.0095.900

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
916-322-3684

June 26, 1986

REDACTED TEXT

Dear REDACTED TEXT
This in response to your May 9, 1986 letter which provides us with some additional details concerning the parent-teacher involvement in the REDACTED TEXT Nursery School. On March 15, 1986, you requested that the REDACTED TEXT School organization be classified as an equivalent to the P.T.A. pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code section 6370. On April 30, 1986, we responded that unlike a P.T.A. organization that functions apart from the operation of the school itself, the parent-teacher involvement in the REDACTED TEXT school was directly involved in the daily operation of the school since a primary responsibility of the parent/members is to fulfill the co-op hourly day care and education requirements of the nursery. Therefore, we concluded the REDACTED TEXT Nursery School was not a P.T.A. equivalent organization pursuant to section 6370 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. In your May 9, 1986 letter you wrote that you left out of your March 15, 1986 letter the fact that REDACTED TEXT is affiliated with the REDACTED TEXT Union High School District. The District requires REDACTED TEXT to keep an average daily attendance and pay a portion of REDACTED TEXT’s teachers salaries while the District pays the major portion of the teachers salaries. You inquire whether these additional facts would make REDACTED TEXT separate and distinct from REDACTED TEXT School District Adult Education. As I understand your two letters, you wish to have the parent involvement in the REDACTED TEXT Nursery Scholl declared a P.T.A. equivalent organization. However, notwithstanding the additional described facts, we remain of the opinion that the parent involvement in REDACTED TEXT does not qualify as a P.T.A. equivalent since the parents are actively involved in the actual operation of the REDACTED TEXT School and they do not function as an entity separate and apart from the daily operation of the REDACTED TEXT School itself.

Finally, I am afraid that I’m unable to adequately respond to your comment that to your knowledge there are other parent co-operative schools in California that are classified as P.T.A. equivalents. Without specific detailed information concerning these schools, all I can write is that if, in fact, these schools are operated in the same manner as REDACTED TEXT then we would be of the opinion that these schools also do not qualify as P.T.A. equivalents. I hope this information is helpful. Again, if I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to write. Very truly yours, Robert J. Stipe Tax Counsel RJS:sr