Calling all trivia fans! Don’t miss out on a chance to show off your SALT knowledge!
We will award prizes for the smartest (and fastest) participants.
This Week’s Question
Tennessee only imposes personal income on interest and dividend income, which is known as this tax.
E-mail your response to SALTonline@eversheds-sutherland.com.
The prize for the first response to today’s question is a $20 UBER Eats gift card.
Answers will be posted on Monday. Be sure to check back then!
On May 11, a San Francisco trial court held that the California Constitution allows special local taxes proposed by voter initiative to be enacted with a simple majority vote, in contrast to the two-thirds vote required for special taxes proposed by local government. The ballot initiative in question imposed a $298 per parcel tax and was approved by 60% of San Francisco voters. The City brought an action to validate the tax and a City resident challenged, arguing that the California Constitution requires approval from two thirds of voters rather than a simple majority. The trial court’s decision rejecting the claim closely tracks two July 2019 decisions rendered by the same trial court ruling that a simple majority vote is sufficient. Separate trial courts in Fresno and Alameda Counties have reached the opposite conclusion, ruling in September 2019 and November 2019 respectively, that the two-thirds vote requirement applies to all special local taxes, whether proposed by voter initiative or local government. The earlier cases from San Francisco, Fresno, and Alameda Counties are currently on appeal, and it is expected that this most recent decision by the San Francisco County Superior Court will also be appealed.
The trial court held that the case presented an additional “novel” claim, namely the taxpayer’s claim that the initiative was really the City’s initiative and not a true voter initiative because the San Francisco Unified School District and the United Educators of San Francisco were involved in creating the initiative. The Court rejected this argument, noting that such activity is commonplace and is not prohibited by the San Francisco Charter or California’s Elections Code. Taxpayers argued that this effectively blesses local government efforts to end-run around the two-thirds vote requirement otherwise applicable to local government initiatives by styling such initiatives as voter initiatives.
Thank you to everyone who participated in last week’s trivia question!
Last Week’s Question:
Which president once handled state tax cases, securing favorable rulings for taxpayers involving property taxes and local gross receipts taxes?
The Answer:
Rhode Island
Lincoln later stated that he believed the county property tax case “was worth half a million dollars” to the railroad company. Abraham Lincoln, Speech at Carthage, Illinois (Oct. 22, 1858).
Keep an eye out for our next trivia question on Wednesday!
Meet Alice and Cooper, two “Cajun” cats owned by Justin Stone, Amazon’s new Senior Manager of State and Local Tax. Earlier this month, Justin joined Amazon, coming from our very own SALT team at Eversheds Sutherland.
Justin adopted Alice and Cooper during his first year of practice, and decided to stick with the names given to them by their foster mom. Surprisingly, neither their foster mom nor Justin are big Alice Cooper fans. Alice and Cooper are now eight years old, and inseparable. The two of them especially enjoy sleeping, and eating their favorite treats – paper and plastic. 
There are some differences between the two. Cooper really hates when Justin is on the phone or his laptop, which has made working from home just a bit more challenging. On the other hand, Alice is described as “purr-fect!” But Cooper isn’t always a troublemaker and will actually play fetch with you as if he were a dog.
When Justin started working at Amazon, he needed to bring Both Alice and Cooper out to Seattle. The veterinarian prescribed anxiety medication for the flight, but unfortunately Cooper’s dosage was not very effective. Justin’s father had Cooper safely tucked away under the seat in front of him, and about halfway through the six-hour flight, Cooper started whining. Every time someone noticed Cooper whining, Justin’s dad would just remark, “That isn’t my cat!”
The cats are now fully settled in Seattle and enjoying the extra time with Justin working from home.
We wish Justin, Cooper, and Alice all the best at Amazon!
This podcast is hosted by Open Weaver Banks and features excerpts from the webcast of a casual conversation with Duncan Riley, Director of the Conciliation Bureau at the NYC Department of Finance.
Open and Eric Tresh ask Duncan about his perspective on the New York City Conciliation Bureau’s role in heading off litigation and resolving tax disputes, as well as the impact of COVID-19 on his Department’s work.
Listen now:
Listen to the hour-long version of the webcast here.
Subscribe for more:
On May 28, 2020, the Louisiana Legislature passed S.B. 138, which, if signed by the Governor, will require marketplace facilitators to collect and remit state and local sales and use taxes if they exceed an economic nexus threshold of $100,000 in sales or 200 transactions in the state in the current or previous calendar year.
Beginning July 1, 2020, the bill directs marketplace facilitators to register with the Louisiana Sales and Use Tax Commission for Remote Sellers (Commission) within 30 days of meeting either threshold and begin collecting the tax within 60 days. Following the Senate’s concurrence to a House floor amendment, the bill will now be sent to Governor John Bel Edwards, who is expected to sign it into law. If enacted, only four states with a sales tax remain that have not enacted a marketplace collection law: Florida, Kansas, Mississippi, and Missouri.
Read our full legal alert here.
The North Carolina legislature has introduced a pair of bills, H.B. 1080 and S.B. 727, which would require marketplace facilitators of prepared food delivery to collect local meals taxes on top of the existing obligation to collect state sales tax. The pending bills also clarify that the state’s marketplace collection threshold of $100,000 or 200 transactions per year applies only to remote businesses. The bills are an example of the recent trend among states to eliminate bifurcation of tax remittance of state and local sales and non-sales taxes. If enacted, the legislation would become effective July 1, 2020.
Kansas Legislators adjourned their legislative sessions without passing key state tax legislation: S.B. 266 would have established legislative thresholds for its remote seller rules and would have enacted remittance requirements for marketplace facilitators, but the initiative failed. Without S.B. 266, Kansas also won’t apply a legislative threshold to the remote-seller collection rules.
Calling all trivia fans! Don’t miss out on a chance to show off your SALT knowledge!
We will award prizes for the smartest (and fastest) participants.
This Week’s Question
Which state imposes an 18% interest rate on underpayments of taxes—the highest in the nation?
E-mail your response to SALTonline@eversheds-sutherland.com.
The prize for the first response to today’s question is a $20 UBER Eats gift card.
Answers will be posted on Monday. Be sure to check back then!
