By Zachary Atkins and Pilar Mata
A California Court of Appeal held that a mobile telecommunications service provider could pursue refund actions against local taxing authorities in California without first having to refund the disputed taxes to its customers. Pursuant to a settlement agreement, New Cingular, the provider, filed refund claims against 132 California cities
By Christopher Chang and Pilar Mata
The New Jersey appeals court ruled that BIS LP, Inc. (BIS) was entitled to receive a New Jersey Corporation Business Tax (CBT) refund in the ongoing BIS litigation saga. In 2011, BIS, an out-of-state limited corporate partner, prevailed before the appeals court, securing a decision that found BIS lacked
By Jonathan Maddison and Andrew Appleby
The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania held that tax records detailing yearly totals of room rental tax and other occupancy data submitted by hotel taxpayers to a locality were not subject to disclosure under Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Know Law (RTKL). A newspaper, under the RTKL, requested that Lancaster County provide detailed tax
By Nicole Boutros and Timothy Gustafson
A New York State Division of Tax Appeals Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) upheld the denial of corporation franchise tax refund claims, determining the taxpayers were not engaged in a unitary business. The taxpayers and their subsidiaries (“Group”) provided services in what the ALJ found were “similar and related lines
By Ted Friedman and Timothy Gustafson
The Supreme Court of Missouri reversed and remanded a decision of the Administrative Hearing Commission (see our coverage of the Commission’s January 28, 2013 decision here) and held that income from a “rabbi trust”—a trust established by a corporation to fund a nonqualified deferred compensation plan for company
By Zachary Atkins and Andrew Appleby
A New York appellate court held that the Department of Taxation and Finance could not retroactively apply a 2010 amendment to the Tax Law to a transaction entered into by a Florida couple nearly four years earlier. The nonresident taxpayers sold their stock in an S-corporation to a third
By Sahang-Hee Hahn and Timothy Gustafson
The Indiana Department of Revenue required an out-of-state clothing company and its subsidiary to file a combined Indiana corporate income tax return, determining that the taxpayer’s transfer pricing study was insufficient to establish that its intercompany transactions were conducted at arm’s length. The taxpayer was the parent of a
With 200+ posts on the most important state and local tax developments across the nation, the Sutherland SALT Shaker mobile app is the best way to stay up-to-date on the latest in state and local tax.
With updates added continually, state tax professionals now have a go-to source for state-by-state, tax-by-tax, issue-by-issue coverage and commentary
By Ted Friedman and Prentiss Willson
The Indiana Department of Revenue determined that affiliated entities of an out-of-state manufacturing corporation were not unitary. The corporation conducted marketing operations as one business segment and production operations as a second business segment. The corporation included its marketing entities in its Indiana consolidated return. On audit, Department staff
By Stephanie Do and Andrew Appleby
The Indiana Department of Revenue determined that an out-of-state wireless communications equipment wholesaler’s in-state business activities were protected by P.L. 86-272, and therefore, the wholesaler did not have nexus for Indiana corporate income tax purposes. The wholesaler’s in-state activities were limited to shipping products to Indiana customers by common
