By Nicole Boutros and Timothy Gustafson

The New York State Department of Taxation and Finance issued an advisory opinion determining that a securities broker may source receipts from “matched principal transactions” based on the “production credit method” provided in New York tax law. The taxpayer was a U.S. entity operating in six states, including New

By Scott Booth and Andrew Appleby

The Massachusetts Governor released his proposed fiscal year 2015 budget, which includes a tax provision that is targeted directly at the insurance industry. Currently, income earned by pass-through entities, such as partnerships, owned by licensed life or property and casualty insurers is excluded from Massachusetts income tax because

By Zachary Atkins and Andrew Appleby

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that treating a merger between two in-state banks differently than a merger between an in-state bank and an out-of-state bank did not violate the Uniformity Clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution. If two in-state banks merged, Pennsylvania law formerly required the combination of the banks&rsquo

By Scott Booth and Andrew Appleby

Although states continue to challenge the validity of captive insurance companies, Wendy’s has notched several taxpayer victories. In a win involving Scioto Insurance Company (Scioto), Wendy’s captive insurance company, the Illinois Appellate Court held that Scioto constituted a bona fide insurance company that was properly excluded from Wendy’s combined

By Madison Barnett and Timothy Gustafson

In a case involving the exclusion of captive insurance companies from combined reporting groups, the Indiana Tax Court held that a captive must be physically present in Indiana to be “subject to” the insurance premiums tax and therefore exempt from the corporate income tax. The Tax Court initially

By Shane Lord and Andrew Appleby

The California Superior Court ruled that certain special purpose entities (SPEs) owned by Harley-Davidson, Inc. had nexus in California. The taxpayer formed the SPEs as securitization subsidiaries, which the court held were subject to California income taxation because the SPEs: (1) were “financial corporations” under California law; and (2)

By David Pope and Jack Trachtenberg

The New York State Department of Taxation and Finance has determined that a financial services firm is not subject to the New York State sales and use tax because the product being sold by the taxpayer constitutes a single, integrated, nontaxable service.  The taxpayer provides its clients with investment

By Scott Booth and Timothy Gustafson

The Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board ruled that an out-of-state corporation’s subsidiary qualified as a financial institution by virtue of the lending activities undertaken by the trusts in which it held beneficial ownership and from which the subsidiary derived more than 50% of its gross income. Under Massachusetts’ statutory “catchall”