In this episode of the SALT Shaker Podcast, Eversheds Sutherland Associate Jeremy Gove teams up with Associate Cyavash Ahmadi to discuss the complexities of combined reporting, specifically comparing and contrasting the combined reporting regimes in New York and California. They discuss several of the nuances of both states’ systems and even debate what “Joyce v. Finnigan” really means!

Jeremy’s overrated/underrated question deals with a “wannabe” video game – what do you think of pinball machines?

Questions or comments? Email SALTonline@eversheds-sutherland.com. You can also subscribe to receive our regular updates hosted on the SALT Shaker blog.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Listen now: 

Subscribe for more:

   

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 two states recently proposed expansions to their False Claims Acts?

E-mail your response to SALTonline@eversheds-sutherland.com.

The prize for the first response to today’s question is a $25 UBER Eats gift card. Answers will be posted on Saturdays in our SALT Shaker Weekly Digest. Be sure to check back then!

 

 

Until recently, it was generally assumed that a two-thirds vote was required for the passage of all local taxes imposed to fund a specific purpose, or special taxes, in California under the state Constitution. The 2017 California Supreme Court decision in California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland called this into doubt by holding in another context that a tax placed on the ballot by voter initiative was not subject to the same constitutional restrictions as a tax placed on the ballot by a local governing body.

At the time, many predicted that the decision could have a far-reaching impact on the local tax landscape, including California Supreme Court Justice Leondra Kruger in a dissenting opinion. Common sense dictates that more taxes will pass when it is easier to do so.

A flurry of litigation in San Francisco, Oakland and Fresno ensued shortly thereafter concerning new special taxes that passed by a simple majority but not a supermajority vote. Trial courts came down on both sides of the issue. The appellate courts, however, uniformly found that special taxes proposed through a voter initiative only require a simple majority vote to pass. When the California Supreme Court denied review of those appellate decisions, the die was cast.

Today, localities up and down the state are embracing the voter initiative process for imposing special taxes, and taxpayers are left dealing with the fallout. In their article published by Law360, Eversheds Sutherland attorneys Tim Gustafson and John Ormonde recap the history of the simple versus supermajority vote saga and discuss what the result means for California taxpayers going forward.

Read the full article here.

On April 25, the Washington Court of Appeals held that a company that arranges and manages displays for installation and placement in multiple retail brands’ stores through subcontractors was subject to the state’s retailing business and occupation tax (the “B&O tax”) and retail sales tax as a retailer making retail sales, rather than a provider of “services and other activities.” According to the court, the company made “retail sales” by arranging and managing such “roll-out” work in Washington.

The company, Dynamic Resources, Inc. (DRI), performs services for various brands and retailers. When one of its clients has a marketing campaign, DRI arranges and manages the installation of visual displays, window displays, branding elements, vinyl decals and in-store marketing promotions in the brands’ locations throughout the country by subcontracting with its network of contractors.

DRI argued that its visual display work did not meet the definition of a “retail sale” and instead fell within the catchall B&O tax classification for “services and other activities” subject to different tax rate and sourcing rules. The court disagreed and held that DRI’s business activities constituted “retail sales” based on a plain reading of the statute. According to the court, DRI: (1) “clearly ‘installed’ personal property performing its roll-out work,” and (2) made statutory “retail sales” in connection with its visual display work by decorating “‘new or existing buildings or other structures under, upon, or above real property.’”

Dynamic Res., Inc. v. Dep’t of Revenue, No. 83281-6-I, Wash. Ct. App. (Apr. 25, 2022).

In this episode of the SALT Shaker Podcast policy series, Eversheds Sutherland Partner and host Nikki Dobay is joined again by Carol Portman, President of the Taxpayers’ Federation of Illinois, for a review of the 2022 Illinois legislative session, which adjourned earlier this year. (You can catch up on their discussion of the 2021 session here!)

Carol explains that while there weren’t any large scale tax measures during the 2022 session, there were several smaller tax breaks aimed at individuals and a few other smaller items to have on your radar. She also provides some updates from the state’s Department of Revenue and opines on the state’s upcoming election.

They conclude with Nikki’s surprise nontax question for the week –  if you were a late night talk show host, who would you invite as your first guest or musical appearance?

The Eversheds Sutherland State and Local Tax team has been engaged in state tax policy work for years, tracking tax legislation, helping clients gauge the impact of various proposals, drafting talking points and rewriting legislation. This series, which is focused on state and local tax policy issues, is hosted by Partner Nikki Dobay, who has an extensive background in tax policy.

Questions or comments? Email SALTonline@eversheds-sutherland.com. You can also subscribe to receive our regular updates hosted on the SALT Shaker blog.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Listen now: 

Subscribe for more:

   

The Mississippi Department of Revenue withdrew its proposed regulation which sought to expand the state’s sales tax to apply to cloud computing. The proposed regulation amendments defined taxable cloud computing to include software as a service, platform as a service, and infrastructure as a service. Despite the proposed regulation’s withdrawal, there may still be future changes to Mississippi’s sales tax on software, as earlier this year, the Governor signed a bill creating a study committee to analyze the state’s taxation of remote and internet-based computer software products and services.

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: In the first edition of the Eversheds Sutherland SALT Scoreboard for 2022, taxpayers prevailed in how many significant cases?

E-mail your response to SALTonline@eversheds-sutherland.com.

The prize for the first response to today’s question is a $25 UBER Eats gift card. Answers will be posted on Saturdays in our SALT Shaker Weekly Digest. Be sure to check back then!

Meet Sora! Our May Pet of the Month is a delightful, seven-year-old rescue pup belonging to Marji Gordon-Brown, Vice President and Associate Tax Counsel at MacAndrews & Forbes. Marji is also the senior vice president of TEI’s New York Chapter.

While Sora’s exact breed is unknown, we do know he’s pup-dorable. The shelter gave him his name, and Marji’s best guess is that he’s a shepherd and beagle mix.

In addition to being at least 60 pounds, he loves to eat just about anything, which makes walking him in his native Manhattan – filled with outdoor dining – a bit of a challenge.

He especially loves snacks with a crunch, like apples and carrots. According to Marji, as soon as he hears the sound of a knife hitting the cutting board, he runs into the kitchen to see if he can get a nibble!

Beyond his daily trips to the dog park, he loves to sunbathe, howl at passing sirens and play with any toys that squeak.

We’re so glad Sora has joined our Pet of the Month club!

 

In this episode of the SALT Shaker Podcast, Eversheds Sutherland Associate Jeremy Gove speaks with Partner Tim Gustafson and Associate Annie Rothschild regarding California procedure and strategy considerations associated with the different options for challenging corporate tax deficiency assessments.

Tim and Annie recently authored an article in Tax Notes State addressing certain benefits and potential drawbacks of bringing a matter before the relatively new Office of Tax Appeals versus proceeding directly to superior court via a refund action. 

Finally, this week, Jeremy’s overrated/underrated question deals with seltzer water, or as his daughter calls it, “spicy water.”

Questions or comments? Email SALTonline@eversheds-sutherland.com. You can also subscribe to receive our regular updates hosted on the SALT Shaker blog.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Listen now: 

Subscribe for more:

   

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: The Wisconsin Department of Revenue recently published updated guidance that states that marketplace providers are responsible for the collection and remittance of what Wisconsin tax?

E-mail your response to SALTonline@eversheds-sutherland.com.

The prize for the first response to today’s question is a $25 UBER Eats gift card. Answers will be posted on Saturdays in our SALT Shaker Weekly Digest. Be sure to check back then!