Volume 18 Number 4 December 2011 CALIFORNIA: SINGLE SALES FACTOR AND MARKET-BASED SOURCING
|
|
- Branden Carr
- 7 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Volume 18 Number 4 December 2011 CALIFORNIA: SINGLE SALES FACTOR AND MARKET-BASED SOURCING Roburt Waldow Irvine rwaldow@jonesday.com Jessica L. Brown Dallas jlbrown@jonesday.com On December 1, 2011, the California Franchise Tax Board approved Proposed Regulation , which provides detailed market-based sourcing rules for sales of other than tangible property. The proposed regulation is currently under review by the Office of Administrative Law and, when approved, will become a final regulation. Under current California law, market-based sourcing is required only where taxpayers make an annual election to apportion income using a single sales factor ( SSF ) formula. However, efforts are underway to make the use of an SSF mandatory, which some proponents argue will generate upwards of $1 billion in tax revenue for California. It is possible, then, that the market-based sourcing rules in Proposed Regulation will ultimately apply to all California taxpayers who apportion their income. Given California s high profile in tax-policy trends, the state s approach to market-based sourcing could have sweeping effects if other states look to the proposed regulation when fashioning their own market-based sourcing rules. Elective Single Sales Apportionment Factor For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2011, many California taxpayers are permitted to make an irrevocable annual election to apportion income using a single sales factor formula rather than California s standard three-factor apportionment formula (payroll, property, and sales), which double-weights the sales factor. 1 The election does not apply to taxpayers who derive more than 50 percent of their gross business receipts from conducting agricultural business activity, extractive business activity, savings and loan activity, or banking or financial business activity. 2 1 Rev. and Tax. Code Rev. and Tax. Code
2 While use of an SSF is elective, there are current efforts to make it mandatory. 3 On November 21, 2011, Californians for Clean Energy and Jobs introduced a ballot initiative that would make SSF apportionment mandatory, and last month the Think Long Committee on California, a bipartisan think-tank, also indicated that it will offer an initiative containing mandatory SSF apportionment for the November 2012 ballot. 4 Earlier in 2011, and with the strong support of Governor Jerry Brown, a bill was introduced to make the use of an SSF mandatory for many taxpayers. 5 Although the bill was defeated September 9, 2011, on the Senate floor, there is every indication that it will remain a hot political issue, especially with the governor describing current state tax policy as outrageous and perverse and advocating for a move to the SSF. 6 More than simply eliminating the elective nature of the current apportionment regime, a shift to a mandatory SSF would also mark a complete shift from cost of performance to marketbased sourcing for receipts from sales of other than tangible property. Market-Based Sourcing Rules and Proposed Regulation Under current law, taxpayers who make the SSF election must source receipts from the sales of services and intangibles, using market-based sourcing, rather than cost-of-performance sourcing. 7 Statutory authority provides that: (1) sales from services are in California to the extent the purchaser of the service received the benefit of the service in California; (2) sales from intangible property are in California to the extent the property is used in California; (3) sales from the sale, lease, rental, or licensing of real property are in California if the real property is located in California; and (4) sales from the rental, lease, or licensing of tangible personal property are in California if the property is located in California. 8 The statute authorizes the Franchise Tax Board to prescribe regulations as necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of the statute, and under this authority, the Board has adopted a proposed regulation that provides needed guidance regarding the practical operation of market-based sourcing in California. 3 Proposition 24, placed on the November 2, 2010, ballot by the California Teachers Association, would have mandated the SSF for all California taxpayers, but it was defeated by 58 percent of the vote. California 2010 Election Results, San Francisco Chronicle, available at (web sites herein last visited Dec. 14, 2011). 4 Nathan Gardels and Nicolas Berggruen, A Blueprint to Renew California, Huffington Post, Nov. 20, 2011, available at 5 California S.B. 116 (de Léon), introduced on Jan. 19, Michael B. Marois and James Nash, Brown Seeks California Sales-Tax Cut on Manufacturing Gear to Spur Jobs, Bloomberg, Aug. 25, 2011, available at 7 Rev. and Tax. Code Id.
3 Proposed Regulation is intended to provide taxpayers with additional guidance on how to determine where the benefit of a service is received and where intangibles are used by the purchaser of the taxpayer s services or intangibles. The Franchise Tax Board held three interested-party meetings to discuss the proposed regulation. At the initial meeting on February 20, 2010, the staff presented a 50-state analysis of other states provisions for sourcing of sales of services and intangible property and received considerable public input. Subsequent meetings were held on July 19, 2010, and November 8, The main concerns raised at the interested-party meetings related to how taxpayers could document their transactions to determine where the benefit of a service is received or where intangibles are used. Additionally, taxpayers raised concerns about how sales could be appropriately sourced in the event there was no documentation available to the taxpayer. In response to public comments, the draft regulation was revised numerous times. On December 1, 2011, the proposed regulation was approved by the Franchise Tax Board. Before becoming final, it must be approved by the Office of Administrative Law. The national trend is to market-based sourcing of services and intangibles. Currently eight states have adopted market-based sourcing rules, five of those becoming effective in the last three years. 9 As California is a tax-policy bellwether state, the proposed regulation, when formally adopted, may become the national model for applying market-based sourcing rules. Thus, taxpayers in other states would be well served to become familiar with California s proposed regulation. Proposed Regulation Sales From Services Assignment of sales from services is based on the extent that the benefit of the service is received in California by the taxpayer s customer. The regulation creates cascading assignment rules to direct sourcing of the benefit of the service. The term service is defined as activities engaged in by one for another for consideration. As defined by the proposed regulation, benefit of a service is received is the location where the taxpayer s customer has either directly or indirectly received value from the delivery of a service. The definition excludes activities outside the taxpayer s regular course of business as well as activities undertaken for other members of the taxpayer s unitary business. The definition of extent makes clear that a receipt is to be divided proportionately between states when it relates to activities in more than one state according to the portion of the benefit of the services received in California. 9 California (effective in 2011), Oklahoma (effective in 2010), lllinois (effective in 2009), Utah (effective in 2009), Wisconsin (effective in 2009 for intangible receipts and 2005 for service receipts), Maine (effective in 2007), Ohio (effective in 2004), and Minnesota (effective in 1987).
4 Individual Customers Where the taxpayer s customer is an individual, the primary rule for assigning sales of services is based on the billing address of the customer. This is a safe-harbor rule, so that if the taxpayer uses the individual customer s billing address as the mechanism for assignment of the sales, the Franchise Tax Board must accept the assignment as presumptively correct. When the taxpayer establishes by a preponderance of evidence that the sales contract between the taxpayer and its customer and/or the taxpayer s books and records kept in the regular course of its business indicate the extent to which the benefit of the service was received in California, assignment may be made on this basis. However, the Franchise Tax Board has the right to audit the alternative method to determine whether or not the taxpayer has overcome the presumption that the benefit of the service was received at the customer s billing address and that the taxpayer s method reasonably reflects where the benefit of the service was received by the taxpayer s customers. If the assignment cannot be determined under the alternatives discussed above, the determination of the location must be reasonably approximated. Importantly, once a taxpayer has used a particular reasonable-approximation method under any provision of the regulation, the taxpayer must continue to use that method in subsequent taxable years. To use a different method, the taxpayer must seek permission of the Franchise Tax Board. Sales to Businesses The first rule of assignment for sales of services to corporations or other business entities presumes that assignment is based on the contract between the taxpayer and the taxpayer s customer or on the taxpayer s books and records, notwithstanding the billing address of the taxpayer s customer. This presumption may be overcome if either the taxpayer or the Franchise Tax Board proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the contract and the books and records do not indicate the actual location of where the benefit of the service was received. The second rule of assignment is based on a reasonable approximation of the location where the benefit of service is received, by reference to the activities of the taxpayer s customer. The second rule applies only if the presumption in the first assignment rule is overcome. If the first two rules cannot be used to source the benefits of service, the location from which the taxpayer s customer placed the order for the service is the third-priority sourcing rule. This final-priority rule of assignment is based on the taxpayer s customer s billing address. The rule is a catch-all that applies only if none of the other rules can establish the location where the benefit of the services was received. Sales From Intangible Property As a general rule, sales of intangible property are assigned to California to the extent the intangible property is used in the state. Intangible is defined by a list of 22 specific terms and ends with the catch-all other similar intangible assets. The phrase intangible personal property is used is defined as the location where the intangible property is employed by the taxpayer s customer or licensee. The definition of to the extent makes clear that a receipt is to
5 be divided proportionately between states when it relates to activities in more than one state according to the portion of the benefit of use of the intangibles in California. Complete Transfer Where a complete transfer of all property rights for a jurisdiction or jurisdictions has been made, assignment will be first based on the contract of sale or the taxpayer s books and records kept in the normal course of business, if the locations where the purchaser will use intangible property are described in the contract or records. If the contract of sale or the taxpayer s books and records do not provide information needed to assign the sales, then the location of the use of the intangible property must be reasonably approximated by reference to the activities of the purchaser limited to the jurisdictions where the purchaser will use the intangible at the time of the purchase, to the extent this information is available to the taxpayer. This rule assumes that the purchaser will use the intangible where it is doing business at the time of purchase. This rule also contains a limitation that the taxpayer cannot assign the use of the intangible to places where the purchaser does not conduct its business at the time of purchase. If assignment cannot be made under any of the above methods, the billing address of the purchaser will be used as a catch-all rule of assignment. Where the sale of intangible property is the sale of shares of stock in a corporation or the sale of an ownership interest in a pass-through entity, other than sales of marketable securities, special rules apply. 10 In the event that fifty (50) % or more of the amount of the assets of the corporation or pass-through entity sold, determined on the date of sale and using the original cost basis of those assets, consist of real and/or tangible personal property, the sale of the stock or ownership interest will be assigned by averaging the payroll and property factors of the corporation or pass-through entity in this state for the most recent twelve (12) month taxable year prior to the time of the sale to the extent indicated by the taxpayer s books and records kept in the normal course of business. If, however, the sale occurs more than six (6) months into the current taxable year, then the average of the current taxable year s payroll and property factors shall be used. In the event that more than fifty (50) % of the amount of the assets of the corporation or pass-through entity sold, determined on the date of the sale and using the original cost basis of those assets, consist of intangible property, the sale of the stock or ownership interest will be assigned by using the sales factor of the corporation 10 Draft Reg (d)(1)(A)1.
6 or pass-through entity in this state for the most recent twelve (12) month taxable year prior to the time of the sale to the extent indicated by the taxpayer s books and records. If, however, the sale occurs more than six (6) months into the current taxable year, then the current taxable year s sales factor shall be used. Thus, unlike the standard market-based sourcing rules for other types of intangibles, which default to a review of sales contracts or the taxpayer s books and records, the special rules for stock look instead to cost basis and apportionment detail of the corporation or pass-through entities whose stock is being sold. While this souring rule may be administratively feasible for majority owners who have access to cost basis and apportionment detail for the entities being sold, it is very likely that minority interest owners will not have access to this type of information and will not be able to appropriately source the receipts from sales of stock. The proposed regulation does not have a fallback or catch-all provision for sourcing stock sales, making it virtually impossible for many taxpayers to comply. This issue has been raised with the Franchise Tax Board. While no action is expected to address this gap before the proposed regulation is finalized, the Franchise Tax Board has indicated that it will seek approval to amend the regulation once it has become final. In the meantime, interim guidance on this issue is sorely needed for 2011 tax returns. Licensing, Leasing, Rental, or Other Use of Intangible Property Marketing Intangibles The proposed regulation creates specific sourcing rules for the sourcing of so-called marketing intangibles. As defined by the proposed regulation, marketing intangibles are sales where a license is granted to use intangible property in connection with the marketing of goods, services, or other items to customers in this state. Marketing intangibles are assigned to the location of the retail customers who purchased the goods. Under the first rule of assignment for marketing intangibles, the contract between the taxpayer and the licensee, or the taxpayer s books and records, will establish the extent to which the goods are purchased by retail customers in California. If the contract does not provide the information required for assignment, the location of the use of the intangible may be reasonably approximated by reference to the activities of the licensee. In determining the licensee s use of intangible property in connection with marketing intangibles, factors to be considered include the number of licensed sites in each state; the volume of property manufactured, produced, or sold in each state; or other data, including population. Where a licensee does not sell directly at retail, the taxpayer may use the percentage of California s population to the total population of the geographic area in which the licensee markets its goods. This allows sourcing of licenses where neither the taxpayer nor the licensee would be able to determine where retail sales occur.
7 Non-Marketing Intangibles The proposed regulation also creates specific sourcing rules for the sourcing of nonmarketing and manufacturing intangibles. Non-marketing intangibles is defined as intangible property used in a manufacturing process or for another non-marketing purpose. Non-marketing intangibles are assigned to the location where the intangible property is used, i.e., the manufacturing plant or other place of use, rather than the location of the ultimate consumer who purchases the manufactured product. The first rule of assignment looks to the contract between the taxpayer and its licensee, or the taxpayer s books and records, to source sales of non-marketing intangibles. Both the taxpayer and the Franchise Tax Board can overcome the presumption that the contracts or books and records reflect the extent of the use of the intangible property in California. The second rule of assignment requires that the location of use be reasonably approximated by reference to the activities of the licensee to the extent this information is available to the taxpayer. If this cannot be done, a third-priority rule of assignment uses the licensee s billing address to source the use of the intangible. Mixed Intangibles In the case of mixed intangibles, where a license is granted for the right to use intangible property in both a marketing and manufacturing or other non-marketing purpose, separately stated fees will be accepted if they are reasonable; in such case, the rules described above with respect to each type of intangibles apply. Where the fees are not separately stated, then it is presumed that the fees are paid entirely for the intangible property in connection with the marketing of goods, services, or other items, and assignment will be determined accordingly. California Large Corporate Understatement Penalty and Reasonable Approximation The proposed regulation creates considerable flexibility for taxpayers applying the market-based sourcing rules. Flexibility exists where taxpayers interpret contracts and books and records in order to source sales, or where taxpayers must attempt to reasonably approximate the location of benefit of service or the location of use of intangibles. However, it is important to note that taxpayer positions can be audited and the Franchise Tax Board can disagree. California imposes a 20 percent penalty on underpayments of tax liability when the underpayments exceed the greater of $1 million or 20 percent of the tax shown on the original return. 11 While the flexibility of the market-based sourcing regulation is generally seen as a positive for taxpayers making complicated sourcing determinations, taxpayers could ultimately be penalized where this flexibility intersects with the strict-liability large corporate understatement penalty. Under SSF apportionment, a change to market-based sourcing determinations, alone or coupled with other miscalculations by the taxpayer, could easily result in the imposition of the large corporate understatement penalty. 11 Rev. and Tax. Code
8 Conclusion The market-based sourcing rules approved by the Franchise Tax Board on December 1, 2011 provide California taxpayers much-needed guidance on the new market-based sourcing rules that apply to 2011 returns. The rules afford flexibility by allowing taxpayers who elect to use the SSF apportionment to apply the market-based sourcing scheme to their specific businesses and circumstances. With a potential move to mandatory SSF in California and the trend towards market-based sourcing in other states, California s proposed Regulation is likely to have far-reaching effects in the coming years. But note, the rules leave open questions, such as the proper sourcing of sales of stock. Taxpayers should consider the large corporate understatement penalty when taking advantage of the flexibility of the market sourcing rules. This article is reprinted from the State Tax Return, a Jones Day monthly newsletter reporting on recent developments in state and local tax. Requests for a subscription to the State Tax Return or permission to reproduce this publication, in whole or in part, or comments and suggestions should be sent to Christa Smith ( ) in Jones Day s Dallas Office, 2727 N. Harwood, Dallas, Texas or StateTaxReturn@jonesday.com. Jones Day All Rights Reserved. No portion of the article may be reproduced or used without express permission. Because of its generality, the information contained herein should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts and circumstances. The contents are intended for general information purposes only.
S T A T E M A R K E T S O U R C I N G R U L E S
S T A T E M A R K E T S O U R C I N G R U L E S U P D ATED AS OF OCTOB E R 1, 2 O14 Note that the statutory and regulatory sections below omit (to the extent possible) rules that pertain solely to financial
More informationCalifornia - Voters approve San Francisco business tax reform
No. 2012-513 November 13, 2012 California - Voters approve San Francisco business tax reform November 13: San Francisco voters on November 6, 2012, approved by 70% a local ballot measure Proposition E
More informationFriends With Benefits Received? A Comparison of Market Sourcing Rules
Friends With Benefits Received? A Comparison of Market Sourcing Rules by Jeffrey A. Friedman and Michele L. Pielsticker often look to where the benefit of the service was received. Determining the receipt
More informationNevada enacts Commerce Tax effective July 1, 2015
from State and Local Tax Services Nevada enacts Commerce Tax effective July 1, 2015 June 10, 2015 In brief Signed on June 10, 2015, and effective July 1, 2015, S.B. 483 imposes an annual commerce tax on
More informationState & Local Tax Alert Breaking state and local tax developments from Grant Thornton LLP
State & Local Tax Alert Breaking state and local tax developments from Grant Thornton LLP Release date May 16, 2011 States California California Enacts Voluntary Compliance Initiative, Expands Tax Shelter
More informationThe nuances of market-based sourcing of service revenue: Not all markets look the same
The nuances of market-based sourcing of service revenue: Not all markets look the same Giles Sutton, Jamie Yesnowitz, Chuck Jones and Terry F. Conley * The nuances of market-based sourcing of service revenue
More informationCopyright 2015 Deloitte Development LLC. All rights reserved. Member of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited
March/April 2015 Discussion of common tax audit issues affecting California corporate taxpayers by E. Scott Ewing, Benjamin Elliott, and Natasha Ng, Deloitte Tax LLP Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte
More informationSOURCING OF SALES APPORTIONMENT FACTOR OF THE NH BUSINESS PROFITS TAX
SOURCING OF SALES APPORTIONMENT FACTOR OF THE NH BUSINESS PROFITS TAX Income from Services and Intangibles New Hampshire Department of Revenue Administration Presentation to the House Ways & Means Committee
More informationmystatetaxoffice A Washington National Tax Services (WNTS) Publication
www.pwc.com/salt mystatetaxoffice A Washington National Tax Services (WNTS) Publication November 30, 2012 New San Francisco gross receipts tax Authored by: Matthew Mandel, Eran Liron, Rakhal Bhalla, and
More informationState & Local Tax Alert
State & Local Tax Alert Breaking state and local tax developments from Grant Thornton LLP Nevada Enacts Budget Bill Including New Commerce Tax On June 9, 2015, Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval signed legislation
More informationState Tax Return. Josie Lowman Atlanta (404) 581-8703
October 2007 Volume 14 Number 10 State Tax Return Trick or Treat? The New Michigan Business Tax Rachel Wilson Dallas (214) 969-5050 Josie Lowman Atlanta (404) 581-8703 In July 2007, the Michigan Governor
More informationJune 2010 State Tax Return
June 2010 State Tax Return Volume 17 Number 2 Colorado Leads the Charge: Adopts Affiliate Nexus and New Notice and Reporting Requirements for Sales Tax and Economic Nexus Rules for Income Tax Laura A.
More informationSan Francisco Voters Pass New Gross Receipts Tax; Current Payroll Expense Tax To Be Phased Out January 22, 2013
Multistate Tax EXTERNAL ALERT San Francisco Voters Pass New Gross Receipts Tax; Current Payroll Expense Tax To Be Phased Out January 22, 2013 Overview The voters of San Francisco (the City ) recently approved
More informationTENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE LETTER RULING # 97-19
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE LETTER RULING # 97-19 WARNING Letter rulings are binding on the Department only with respect to the individual taxpayer being addressed in the ruling. This presentation
More informationSAN FRANCISCO S NEW GROSS RECEIPTS TAX AND BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEES
SAN FRANCISCO S NEW GROSS RECEIPTS TAX AND BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEES This summary provides basic information regarding San Francisco Business and Tax Regulations Code ( Code ), Article 12-A-1, Gross Receipts
More informationState Tax Return. Georgia Court Ruling Spotlights Significant Complexities of 338(h)(10) Elections for State Income Tax Purposes
June 2009 State Tax Return Volume 16 Number 2 Georgia Court Ruling Spotlights Significant Complexities of 338(h)(10) Elections for State Income Tax Purposes Kirk Kringelis Atlanta (404) 581-8565 In most
More informationState taxation in a global environment factor presence nexus considerations for foreign companies. by Charlie Fischer, Deloitte Tax LLP
State taxation in a global environment factor presence nexus considerations for foreign companies by Charlie Fischer, Deloitte Tax LLP Spring 2015 FEATURED ARTICLES ISSUE 121 MARCH 5, 2015 State Taxation
More informationIncome/Franchise: California: San Francisco Controller Announces Payroll Expense Tax Rate for 2015
Multistate Tax State Tax Matters October 9, 2015 In this issue: Income/Franchise: California: San Francisco Controller Announces Payroll Expense Tax Rate for 2015... 1 Income/Franchise: Texas: Proposed
More informationState & Local Tax Alert Breaking state and local tax developments from Grant Thornton LLP
State & Local Tax Alert Breaking state and local tax developments from Grant Thornton LLP San Francisco Voters Approve New Gross Receipts Tax On November 6, San Francisco voters approved Measure E, which
More informationState Apportionment Update Market Based Sourcing John Iannotti. September 25, 2015
State Apportionment Update Market Based Sourcing John Iannotti September 25, 2015 1 Sales Factor Market Based Sourcing for Services (2008) No Tax IPA/COP Service Performed in State (%) Market Other 2 Sales
More information1 HB49 2 171080-1. 3 By Representative Scott. 4 RFD: Ways and Means Education. 5 First Read: 04-AUG-15. Page 0
1 HB49 2 171080-1 3 By Representative Scott 4 RFD: Ways and Means Education 5 First Read: 04-AUG-15 Page 0 1 171080-1:n:08/03/2015:KMS*/th LRS2015-2575 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 SYNOPSIS: This bill would establish
More informationAdjusted Factor-Based Nexus Thresholds Announced, Other Matters Discussed
January 2013 California FTB Contacting Nonfilers The California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) is contacting more than 1 million people who did not file a 2011 state income tax return. The deadline to file
More informationGROSS RECEIPTS TAX AND BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEES ORDINANCE 2014
GROSS RECEIPTS TAX AND BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEES ORDINANCE 2014 CHANGE IS COMING! If there are three things you take away from this presentation 1Registration Fees for All Businesses are Increasing in
More informationGuidelines for Computing the Sales Factor Based on Market- Based Sourcing
Guidelines for Computing the Sales Factor Based on Market- Based Sourcing INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY On October 1, 2015, Governor Pat McCrory signed into law House Bill 259 (S.L. 2015-268). Provisions in
More information(1) Purpose; General Rule; Relationship to Other Rules; Outline.
830 CMR: DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 830 CMR 63.00: TAXATION OF CORPORATIONS 830 CMR 63.32B.2: Combined Reporting (1) Purpose; General Rule; Relationship to Other Rules; Outline. (a) Purpose. The purpose of
More informationMTC APPORTIONMENT AND ALLOCATION RULES FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
MTC APPORTIONMENT AND ALLOCATION RULES FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS On the July 8, 2008 definitions working group conference call, states were asked to submit written comments outlining the issues that each
More informationQUESTIONS. 1. Which of the entities are considered to be financial institutions as defined in T.C.A. 67-4-2004(8) 2?
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE REVENUE RULING #00-23 WARNING Revenue rulings are not binding on the Department. This presentation of the ruling in a redacted form is information only. Rulings are made
More informationState Tax Return. Tax Amnesty Update
June 2009 State Tax Return Volume 16 Number 2 Tax Amnesty Update Karen H. Currie Dallas (214) 969-5285 We return to this space to update you on the ever-changing world of tax amnesty. The economic challenges
More informationInstructions for 2013 Form 4A-1: Wisconsin Apportionment Data for Single Factor Formulas
Instructions for 2013 Form 4A-1: Wisconsin Apportionment Data for Single Factor Formulas Purpose of Form 4A-1 Corporations, partnerships, tax-option (S) corporations and nonresident estates, trusts, and
More informationTENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE LETTER RULING #95-39
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE LETTER RULING #95-39 WARNING Letter rulings are binding on the Department only with respect to the individual taxpayer being addressed in the ruling. This presentation of
More informationState & Local Tax Alert Breaking state and local tax developments from Grant Thornton LLP
State & Local Tax Alert Breaking state and local tax developments from Grant Thornton LLP Major Nexus Developments of 2010 Examined; States Follow Trend of Adopting Bright-Line Nexus Standards During 2010,
More informationLegislative Fiscal Bureau One East Main, Suite 301 Madison, WI 53703 (608) 266-3847 Fax: (608) 267-6873
Legislative Fiscal Bureau One East Main, Suite 301 Madison, WI 53703 (608) 266-3847 Fax: (608) 267-6873 June 5, 2001 Joint Committee on Finance Paper #104 Corporate Income and Franchise Tax -- Tax Treatment
More informationOREGON Multistate Taxation and E-Commerce. John H. Gadon
OREGON Multistate Taxation and E-Commerce John H. Gadon Lane Powell Spears Lubersky LLP 601 S.W. Second Avenue, Suite 2100 Portland, Oregon 97204-3158 (503) 778-2100 www.lanepowell.com I. Oregon and the
More information2015 SENATE BILL 503
0 0 LEGISLATURE 0 SENATE BILL 0 January, 0 Introduced by Senators MARKLEIN, GUDEX, OLSEN and ROTH, cosponsored by Representatives MACCO, KOOYENGA, KATSMA, JARCHOW, NOVAK, TAUCHEN, DUCHOW, KNODL, E. BROOKS,
More information2014 Ohio IT 1140. Pass-Through Entity and Trust Withholding Tax Return Instructions. hio. Department of Taxation. For taxable year beginning in
For taxable year beginning in 2014 Ohio IT 1140 Pass-Through Entity and Trust Withholding Tax Return Instructions hio tax. hio.gov Department of Taxation 2014 Ohio Form IT 1140 General Instructions Note:
More informationTENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE REVENUE RULING # 96-34
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE REVENUE RULING # 96-34 WARNING Revenue rulings are not binding on the Department. This presentation of the ruling in a redacted form is information only. Rulings are made
More informationSecond Regular Session Seventieth General Assembly STATE OF COLORADO INTRODUCED HOUSE SPONSORSHIP SENATE SPONSORSHIP
Second Regular Session Seventieth General Assembly STATE OF COLORADO INTRODUCED LLS NO. 1-01.01 Esther van Mourik x1 HOUSE BILL 1-1 Foote and Pettersen, HOUSE SPONSORSHIP Jones and Donovan, SENATE SPONSORSHIP
More informationA JOINT RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS. Section 5, Article VII, Texas Constitution, is amended to read as follows:
By: H.J.R. No. A JOINT RESOLUTION proposing a constitutional amendment relating to establishing the Texas Great Classroom Fund as a sequestered fund, funded by an Education Flat Tax, a Reformed Franchise
More information2015 Texas Franchise Tax Report Information and Instructions
2015 Texas Franchise Tax Report Information and Instructions Form 05-902 (Rev.1-15/2) Topics covered in this booklet: Amended Reports... 10 Annual Reports... 4 Annualized Total Revenue... 3 Change in Accounting
More informationURL: http://globaledge.msu.edu/resourcedesk/_tradelaw.asp
Prepared by a member firm of Lexwork International, this document is part of a series on trade law reports. This document is part of a collaboration between Lexwork International law firms and globaledge.
More informationState Income Tax Issues for Professional Service Firms. by Gerald A. Shanker
State Income Tax Issues for Professional Service Firms by Gerald A. Shanker State Income Tax Issues for Professional Service Firms by Gerald A. Shanker Facing continuing budget deficits, state governments
More informationTo: Uniformity Committee, Income and Franchise Tax Subcommittee. From: Lennie Collins, Chair, MTC Financial Institutions Work Group
MULTISTATE TAX COMMISSION Working Together Since 1967 to Preserve Federalism and Tax Fairness To: Uniformity Committee, Income and Franchise Tax Subcommittee From: Lennie Collins, Chair, MTC Financial
More informationFYI For Your Information
TAXPAYER SERVICE DIVISION FYI For Your Information Combined and Consolidated Corporation Returns There are four possible filing alternatives for an affiliated group of corporations in Colorado. The alternatives
More information2014 Texas Franchise Tax Report Information and Instructions
2014 Texas Franchise Tax Report Information and Instructions Form 05-900 (Rev.12-13/2) Topics covered in this booklet: Amended Reports... 10 Annual Reports... 5 Annualized Total Revenue... 4 Change in
More informationState & Local Tax Alert
State & Local Tax Alert Breaking state and local tax developments from Grant Thornton LLP Maryland Tax Court Holds Intangible Holding Company Had Corporate Income Tax Nexus The Maryland Tax Court has held
More informationTax Rates. For personal income tax purposes, for tax years beginning after 2014, the tax rates are as follows:
October 2014 District of Columbia Reduced Tax Rates, Single Sales Factor, Other Changes Adopted Permanent District of Columbia budget legislation makes numerous significant changes to the corporation franchise
More information2016 Texas Franchise Tax Report Information and Instructions Form 05-903 (11-15)
2016 Texas Franchise Tax Report Information and Instructions Form 05-903 (11-15) Topics covered in this booklet: Amended Reports... 10 Annual Reports... 4 Annualized Total Revenue... 3 Change in Accounting
More informationRecommended Formula for the Apportionment and Allocation Of Net Income of Financial Institutions
Recommended Formula for the Apportionment and Allocation Of Net Income of Financial Institutions Adopted November 17, 1994 Section 1. Apportionment and Allocation. (a) Except as otherwise specifically
More informationState SUTA Dumping Proposals Many bills falling short at protecting state trust funds, workers and employers by National Employment Law Project
Revised March 31, 2005 State SUTA Dumping Proposals Many bills falling short at protecting state trust funds, workers and employers by National Employment Law Project Most states have proposed anti-suta
More informationThe State of State and Local Taxation and How it Impacts Your Law Firm
The State of State and Local Taxation and How it Impacts Your Law Firm Presentation to the Association of Legal Administrators February 20, 2014 Steven D. Lando, CPA Tax Partner Anchin, Block & Anchin
More informationUNIFORM DIVISION OF INCOME FOR TAX PURPOSES ACT. Drafted by the NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS.
UNIFORM DIVISION OF INCOME FOR TAX PURPOSES ACT Drafted by the NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS and by it APPROVED AND RECOMMENDED FOR ENACTMENT IN ALL THE STATES at its ANNUAL
More informationCOMMENTARY. California Construction Law: Important Changes Ahead. Retention and Prompt Payment: Changes Effective January 1, 2012 JONES DAY
January 2012 JONES DAY COMMENTARY California Construction Law: Important Changes Ahead A number of significant changes to California construction statutes take effect over the next year. The first group
More information2013 FORM 355U and Accompanying Schedules. Who Must File a Combined Report?
2013 FORM 355U and Accompanying Schedules Who Must File a Combined Report? For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2009 Massachusetts requires certain corporations engaged in a unitary business
More informationIII. Nexus Expansion Section 2 sets forth various provisions a state could use to expand a definition of doing business.
I. Introduction The attached model legislative language is a proposal for expanding sales/use tax collection requirements through state lawmaking. The proposal consists of three primary parts: 1. Nexus
More informationCOMBINED REPORTING WITH THE CORPORATE INCOME TAX
COMBINED REPORTING WITH THE CORPORATE INCOME TAX Issues for State Legislatures William F. Fox and LeAnn Luna * November, 2010 Report commissioned by the NCSL Task Force on State & Local Taxation of Communications
More informationSENATE BILL 526: Job Creation and Tax Relief Act of 2015
SENATE BILL 526: Job Creation and Tax Relief Act of 2015 2015-2016 General Assembly Committee: Senate Re-ref to Finance. If fav, re-ref to Commerce Introduced by: Sens. Rucho, Rabon, Tillman Analysis of:
More informationLocal Taxes on Sugar-Sweetened Beverages in California
Local Taxes on Sugar-Sweetened Beverages in California Legal Considerations and Procedural Requirements Many California cities and counties are interested in imposing a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages
More informationTEXAS TAX DEVELOPMENTS 2011 MARGIN TAX AND SALE/USE TAX UPDATE. Kirk Lyda Dallas 1.214.969.5013 klyda@jonesday.com
Volume 18 Number 4 December 2011 TEXAS TAX DEVELOPMENTS 2011 MARGIN TAX AND SALE/USE TAX UPDATE Kirk Lyda Dallas 1.214.969.5013 klyda@jonesday.com There were a number of important developments in the State
More information2015 NEVADA TAX REFORMS. Commerce Tax, Modified Business Tax, Business License Fee
Joshua J. Hicks Attorney at Law 775.622.9450 tel 775.622.9554 fax jhicks@bhfs.com 2015 NEVADA TAX REFORMS Commerce Tax, Modified Business Tax, Business License Fee Current as of June 10, 2015 A. Commerce
More informationIowa s S Corporation Apportionment Tax Credit. Tax Credits Program Evaluation Study
Iowa s S Corporation Apportionment Tax Credit Tax Credits Program Evaluation Study April 2016 By Angela Gullickson Tax Research and Program Analysis Section Iowa Department of Revenue Preface During the
More informationOverview. Texas Tax Code Chapter 171. Teresa Bostick, Claire Jamal, Jerry Oxford, Martha Preston, Nat Robberson & Jennifer Specchio
Overview Texas Tax Code Chapter 171 Presented by: Organizer: Panelists: Franchise Tax Policy Staff Janet Spies Teresa Bostick, Claire Jamal, Jerry Oxford, Martha Preston, Nat Robberson & Jennifer Specchio
More informationHow To Pay For A Backup Computer In The United States
New York State Department of Taxation and Finance Taxpayer Services Division Technical Services Bureau STATE OF NEW YORK COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION AND FINANCE ADVISORY OPINION PETITION NO. S951219A On December
More informationApril 17, 2008 ASSESSMENT OF CABLE TELEVISION AND VIDEO SERVICE TAXABLE POSSESSORY INTERESTS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION PROPERTY AND SPECIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT 450 N STREET, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA PO BOX 942879, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 94279-0064 916 445-4982 FAX 916 323-8765
More informationIllinois Department of Revenue Regulations. Title 86 Part 100 Section 100.9710 Financial Organizations (IITA Section 1501) TITLE 86: REVENUE
Illinois Department of Revenue Regulations Title 86 Part 100 Section 100.9710 Financial Organizations (IITA Section 1501) TITLE 86: REVENUE PART 100 INCOME TAX Section 100.9710 Financial Organizations
More informationSan Francisco Business Tax Reform: Summary of Gross Receipts Tax Legislation Introduced on June 12, 2012
San Francisco Business Tax Reform: Summary of Gross Receipts Tax Legislation Introduced on June 12, 2012 Ben Rosenfield, Controller Ted Egan, Chief Economist Background At the request of the Mayor and
More informationPerformance Marketing Ass n, Inc. v. Hamer, Illinois Supreme Court, No. 114496, October 18, 2013
October 2013 Illinois Provisions of Click-Through Nexus Law Held Void The Illinois Supreme Court held that the definition provisions in Public Act 96-1544 (H.B. 3659), Laws 2011, the sales tax click-through
More informationMichigan Business Tax Frequently Asked Questions
NOTICE: The MBT was amended by 145 PA 2007 on December 1, 2007. Act 145 imposes an annual surcharge to taxpayers' MBT liability, as well as makes other changes. Some of the FAQs below have revised answers
More informationMultistate Tax Commission Sales & Use Tax Subcommittee Draft Engaged in Business Model Statute Revisions as of July 1, 2015.
Multistate Tax Commission Sales & Use Tax Subcommittee Draft Engaged in Business Model Statute Revisions as of July, 0. DRAFTER S NOTES The following model definition of retailer engaged in business /
More informationINFORMATION NOTICE CORPORATION TAXES 2014-0X
INFORMATION NOTICE CORPORATION TAXES 2014-0X Discussion Draft: June 16, 2014 I. PURPOSE For purposes of determining the appropriate net income and capital stock franchise tax apportionment factors, this
More informationNew York State Corporate Tax Reform Outline Part A of Chapter 59 of the Laws of 2014 Signed March 31, 2014 April 2014
Corporations Subject to [Bill 1 and 5; Law (TL) 209 unless otherwise noted] Unifies Articles 9-A (Corporate Franchise ) and 32 (Bank Franchise ). o Current Article 32 taxpayers are subject to the revised
More informationCOMBINED REPORTING WITH THE CORPORATE INCOME TAX
COMBINED REPORTING WITH THE CORPORATE INCOME TAX Issues for State Legislatures William F. Fox and LeAnn Luna * November 2010 Report commissioned by the NCSL Task Force on State & Local Taxation of Communications
More informationCity and County of San Francisco Office of the Treasurer & Tax Collector
City and County of San Francisco Office of the Treasurer & Tax Collector Gross Receipts Tax & Payroll Expense Tax Online Filing Instructions Tax Year 2014 R e v i s e d 12/19/2014 Table of Contents A Guide
More informationLEX HELIUS: THE LAW OF SOLAR ENERGY Tax Issues
LEX HELIUS: THE LAW OF SOLAR ENERGY Tax Issues Charles S. Lewis, III 600 University Street, Suite 3600 Seattle, WA 98101-4109 206-386-7688 cslewis@stoel.com Kevin T. Pearson 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite
More informationDepartment, Board, Or Commission Authors Bill Number
BILL ANALYSIS Department, Board, Or Commission Authors Bill Number Franchise Tax Board Perea and Cannella AB 99 SUBJECT Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief SUMMARY This bill would extend the state exclusion
More informationLetter of Findings: 06-0349 Individual Income Tax For the Year 2004
DEPARTMENT OF STATE REVENUE Letter of Findings: 06-0349 Individual Income Tax For the Year 2004 01-20060349.LOF NOTICE: Under IC 4-22-7-7, this document is required to be published in the Indiana Register
More informationCity and County of San Francisco Office of the Treasurer & Tax Collector
City and County of San Francisco Office of the Treasurer & Tax Collector Gross Receipts Tax & Payroll Expense Tax Online Filing Instructions Tax Year 2014 R e v i s e d 2/19/2015 Table of Contents A Guide
More informationBitcoin/Virtual Currency: Is it time for my state to provide formal guidance?
Bitcoin/Virtual Currency: Is it time for my state to provide formal guidance? Joel Waterfield Managing Director joel.waterfield@us.gt.com 703.847.7595 2014 Grant Thornton LLP. All rights reserved. Discussion
More informationLAW OF BIOFUELS Tax Issues
LAW OF BIOFUELS Tax Issues Charles S. Lewis III Stoel Rives LLP 600 University Street, Suite 3600 Seattle, WA 98101 206-386-7688 cslewis@stoel.com Robert T. Manicke Stoel Rives LLP 900 SW Fifth Avenue,
More information2014 Schedule U-E. Massachusetts Unitary or Affiliated Group Income
2014 Schedule U-E NEW FOR 2014 - Market Based Sourcing The most significant change for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2014 is that in determining the sales factor of the corporate apportionment
More informationArticles: The Tax Implications of the DC Budget
Multistate Tax State Tax Matters May 1, 2015 In this issue: Articles: The Tax Implications of the DC Budget... 1 Amnesty: Missouri: New Law Authorizes Creation of 90-Day Tax Amnesty Program Permitting
More informationState Corporate Income Tax Rates As of July 1, 2009
State Tax Rates and Special Rates or Notes Brackets Alabama 6.5% Federal deductibility Alaska 1.0% > $0 2.0 > 10K 3.0 > 20K 4.0 > 30K 5.0 > 40K 6.0 > 50K 7.0 > 60K 8.0 > 70K 9.0 > 80K 9.4 > 90K Arizona
More informationState Corporate Income Tax Rates As of December 31, 2006 (2006's noteworthy changes in bold italics)
State Corporate Income Tax Rates As of December 31, 2006 (2006's noteworthy changes in bold italics) State Tax Rates and Brackets Special Rates or Notes Alabama 6.50% Federal deductibility Alaska 1.0%
More information(c) The statutory provisions for taxation of personal income are contained within Revenue and Taxation Code sections 17001 to 18181 inclusive.
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FINDINGS (a) Our state Revenue and Taxation Code provides for the taxation of personal income, corporate income and gross receipts or sales price of tangible personal property sold
More informationCompleting and Filing Schedule O
Department of the Treasury Instructions for Schedule O Internal Revenue Service (Form 1120) (Rev. December 2012) Consent Plan and Apportionment Schedule for a Controlled Group Section references are to
More informationState & Local Tax Alert
State & Local Tax Alert Breaking state and local tax developments from Grant Thornton LLP Michigan Enacts Legislation Designed to Eliminate Multistate Tax Compact Apportionment Election Refunds Allowed
More information2013 Ohio Small Business Investor Income Deduction
2013 Ohio Small Business Investor Income Deduction Instructions for Apportioning Business Income Solely for Purposes of Computing the Small Business Investor Income Deduction hio Department of Taxation
More informationSTATE TAX CONSIDERATIONS FOR STOCK PLAN PROFESSIONALS
STATE TAX CONSIDERATIONS FOR STOCK PLAN PROFESSIONALS A. William Caporizzo Kimberly B. Wethly Julie Hogan Rodgers WilmerHale February 25, 2008 Table of Contents I. State Taxation of Optionee...1 A. State
More informationMemorandum. Office of Chief Counsel Internal Revenue Service. Number: 200803016 Release Date: 1/18/2008 CC:PA:B03: POSTS-100069-07 UILC: 6324A.
Office of Chief Counsel Internal Revenue Service Memorandum Number: 200803016 Release Date: 1/18/2008 CC:PA:B03: UILC: 6324A.00-00 date: October 11, 2007 to: Mary P. Hamilton Senior Attorney (Boston) (Small
More information2 Business Income Tax
2 Business Income Tax 2 BUSINESS INCOME TAX PART A: GENERAL TAX PROVISIONS AND ADMINISTRATION OF CREDITS 1. FEDERAL TAX CONFORMITY South Carolina income tax laws conform substantially to the federal income
More informationTennessee Dept. of Revenue Draft 10/07/2015 1320-6-1-.34 Sales Factor: Sales Other than Sales of Tangible Personal Property in this State
1320-6-1-.34 Sales Factor: Sales Other than Sales of Tangible Personal Property in this State (1) General Rules (a) Market-Based Sourcing. Sales, other than sales of tangible personal property, are in
More informationState Tax Return. Go Crazy, Folks... But Not Too Crazy: 1 California Court Ponders Remedy For Macy's Victory Over San Francisco
November 2006 Volume 13 Number 11 State Tax Return Go Crazy, Folks... But Not Too Crazy: 1 California Court Ponders Remedy For Macy's Victory Over San Francisco Rachel Wilson Dallas (214) 969-5050 A taxpayer
More informationState & Local Tax Alert
State & Local Tax Alert Breaking state and local tax developments from Grant Thornton LLP U.S. Bankruptcy Court Rules Imposition of Oregon Corporate Excise Tax on Out-of-State Holding Company Was Unconstitutional
More informationANSWERS TO THE MOST FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT CORPORATE TAX REFORM
Department of Finance TM ANSWERS TO THE MOST FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT CORPORATE TAX REFORM These FAQs are meant to provide general guidance on topics of interest to taxpayers. However, taxpayers
More informationApportionment Formulas
Apportionment Formulas When a corporation s business activities extend into more than one state, such that the corporation is or could be taxed by more than one state, the question arises as to how to
More informationBusiness Tax Haven Legislation Review
Recent Trends in Combined Reporting and Apportionment NESTOA September 28, 2015 Maria P. Eberle Lindsay M. LaCava meberle@mwe.com llacava@mwe.com (212) 547-5702 (212) 547-5344 www.mwe.com Boston Brussels
More informationIRS-SJSU Small Business Tax Institute Assisting New and Growing Businesses June 18, 2014. Choice of Entity in California: Non-Tax Considerations
IRS-SJSU Small Business Tax Institute Assisting New and Growing Businesses June 18, 2014 Forms of Business Joel Busch, CPA, Esq. SJSU MST Program Tamara Pow, Esq., Strategy Law LLP Choice of Entity in
More informationJAN 2 2 2016. amended by adding a new section to be appropriately designated. costs of construction and operation incurred by a contractor
THE SENATE WENTY-EIGHTH LEGISLATURE, 0 STATE OF HAWAII JAN 0 S.B. NO. - A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO TAXATION BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII: SECTION. Chapter, Hawaii Revised
More informationSales and Use Taxes: Texas
Jay M. Chadha, Fulbright & Jaworski LLP A Q&A guide to sales and use tax law in Texas. This Q&A addresses key areas of sales and use tax law such as tax scope, multi-state transactions and collecting taxes
More informationThis letter discusses sales of software. See 86 Ill. Adm. Code 130.1935. (This is a GIL.)
ST 07-0125-GIL 08/16/2007 COMPUTER SOFTWARE This letter discusses sales of software. See 86 Ill. Adm. Code 130.1935. (This is a GIL.) August 16, 2007 Dear Xxxxx: This letter is in response to your letter
More informationFinancial Institutions Regulation Apportionment & Allocation Issues List For MTC Income and Franchise Tax Uniformity Subcommittee 1
Financial Institutions Regulation Apportionment & Allocation Issues List For MTC Income and Franchise Tax Uniformity Subcommittee 1 I. Property factor issues related to solicitation, investigation, negotiation,
More information