The bill that attempts to force US companies with headquarters located offshore to still pay taxes in California, which was rejected by a narrow margin in a State Assembly vote there last week, did not get another hearing yesterday as originally scheduled.

And while government and private sector stakeholders related to Bermuda?s international business sector are keeping an eye on this development, they are not apparently losing sleep over this latest skirmish in the corporate inversion battle.

Jeff Conyers, immediate past chairman of the Bermuda International Business Association (BIBA) said: ?The arguments that we made about this situation months ago still apply; inversions are not in any way a significant aspect of business for Bermuda, and that has always been the case. ?It?s not business that we?ve chased, in fact the companies have basically selected us because of the quality of our jurisdiction. This remains an issue for the US Government to sort out internally, whether on a federal or a state level; it?s about the state of the US tax code.?

Michael Scott, acting Minister of Finance expressed similar sentiments, saying that he had noted the recent debate on the proposed bill as part of the Bermuda Government?s active ?monitoring (of) potential international legislative initiatives, so as to assess their impact and protect Bermuda?s national economic interests.?

The Minister added: ?The posture of the (Bermuda) Government remains as previously stated on this subject, namely that Bermuda has not changed its more than 100 year old consumption based tax regime. We respect the USA tax regime is a matter for the USA Federal Government.

The California bill ? AB2584 ? required at least a two-thirds majority of 54 votes to move up to the Senate. After it fell six votes short of approval on a roll-call vote last Thursday, a motion to reconsider the bill in the Assembly session slated for 26 August was passed.

However, the schedule of daily business for the California legislators yesterday did not include the proposed measure, which has encountered opposition from the California Chamber of Commerce and local Republicans.

The opposing groups argue that implementing the bill would make California less attractive for new business development, and some regard it as a potential corporate tax increase in disguise.

A total of 18 US companies are at this time known to have conducted corporate inversions offshore, an act that supporters of the bill in California, most notably Phil Angelides the State treasurer, continue to characterise as ?tax treason?.

Supporters argue that the corporations in question are enjoying savings of an estimated $10 million a year in California taxes alone. The bill?s author, Democratic Assemblywoman Judy Chu proposes that it would close a so-called ?tax loophole? that would save the State an estimated $132 million over the next ten years.