Policy and Legislation

Subscribe to Policy and Legislation via RSS

The California Supreme Court reversed the appellate court’s decision regarding the Franchise Tax Board’s (FTB) authority to conduct an audit to determine whether a taxpayer is entitled to an enterprise zone hiring credit. DiCon Fiberoptics, Inc. v. Franchise Tax Bd., Case No. S173860 (Apr. 26, 2012).

California’s Enterprise Zone Act (the Act) permits a taxpayer that employs a “qualified employee” in an enterprise zone to claim a tax credit for five years. To be a “qualified employee,” at least 90% of the employee’s services must “directly relate[ ] to the conduct of the taxpayer’s trade or business located in an enterprise zone,” and the employee must perform at least 50% of his or her services in the enterprise zone. Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code § 23622.7(b)(4)(A). In addition, the employee must fall within one of several categories that demonstrate the employee is disadvantaged or endures some form of employment barrier. Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code § 23622.7(b)(4)(A)(iv). To claim the credit, taxpayers are required under the Act to: (1) obtain from the local zone government authority a certification (or “voucher”) that provides the qualified employee meets the eligibility requirements; and (2) retain a copy of the certification and provide it upon request to the FTB. Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code § 23622.7(c).Continue Reading Franchise Tax Board’s Broad Audit Authority to Review Returns and Ascertain Correct Amount of Tax Underscored in Enterprise Zone Hiring Credit Decision by California Supreme Court

On March 22, 2012, Utah Governor Gary Herbert signed House Bill 384 (2012) into law, expanding the types of companies that are required to collect and remit Utah sales and use tax. HB 384 requires sellers that hold “substantial ownership interests” in certain “related sellers” to collect and remit Utah sales and use tax. Today, the Utah State Tax Commission released guidance on how to determine whether a business entity’s activities trigger the state’s new affiliate nexus law. The new nexus regulations go into effect on July 1, 2012.

The new affiliate nexus law, Utah Code Ann. § 59-12-107(2)(b), treats a seller as if it is selling tangible personal property, a service, or a product transferred electronically for use in Utah and will be required to collect and remit sales and use taxes if:Continue Reading Utah Quietly Expands Affiliate Nexus Statute

The Illinois Department of Revenue (Department) issued General Information Letter (GIL) ST 12-0009-GIL (Feb. 28, 2012), which states that retailers that sell “deal-of-the-day” vouchers must collect and remit sales tax on the amount a customer pays for the voucher if the retailer can identify such amount. Otherwise, the retailer must collect and remit the full value of the “deal-of-the-day” item sold. The Department stated that it is in the process of preparing a bulletin to explain the tax treatment of deal-of-the-day websites, but it issued this GIL using guidance provided at a practitioners’ meeting on February 2, 2012.

The taxpayer in ST 12-0009-GIL requested information regarding the taxability of a prospective business venture similar to GroupOn, a popular website that sells vouchers redeemable for items sold by retailers at a discount. The Department provided several examples of how a typical GroupOn-type transaction should be treated for Illinois sales tax purposes when a customer purchases a $25 voucher redeemable for $50 of food at a retailer.Continue Reading Illinois Buys Into Providing Guidance for Deal-of-the-Day Voucher Transactions

On May 30, 2012, California Assembly Bill (AB) 2323 (Perea) passed the Assembly floor by a vote of 47-19. AB 2323 would require the State Board of Equalization (BOE) to issue written decisions in cases involving amounts in controversy of $500,000 or more, excluding consent items. If enacted, the BOE could decide the type of…

Please join Sutherland’s State and Local Tax Team for a webinar to discuss recent developments regarding California’s sales and use tax treatment of sales of intangible property bundled with tangible property and sold subject to the seller’s patent or copyright interest.

California’s special tax provisions, known as technology transfer agreements (TTAs), have widespread application and have…

Georgia Governor Nathan Deal signed three bills that will enact a wide range of changes to Georgia’s tax structure and procedure (HB 386, HB 100, and HB 846). These changes include a new sales tax exemption for energy used in manufacturing, an affiliate nexus provision, creation of a new Georgia Tax Tribunal, publication of letter rulings, and changes to the taxation of motor vehicles, among others. The bills are the culmination of the comprehensive tax reform effort started in 2010 by the Tax Reform Council. While the bills fall short of the dramatic changes originally proposed by the Council (which included taxation of services and groceries, and communications tax reform), they nevertheless include a number of taxpayer-friendly changes.Continue Reading Georgia Tax Reform 2.0: Three Bills Signed by Governor

False claims act (FCA) statutes allow private persons to bring civil actions against alleged wrongdoers on behalf of the government. FCAs and qui tam actions vary, but generally impose significant penalties for “knowingly” failing to comply with a state law. In this edition of A Pinch of SALT, Sutherland SALT’s Jack Trachtenberg, Jeff Friedman and…

Almost a year after vetoing similar legislation, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed SB 1046 on February 21, 2012, which allows “multistate service providers” to elect to use a market sourcing methodology for purposes of computing the sales factor numerator.  The election is limited to taxpayers that derive more than 85% of sales from services…

Understanding states’ various approaches to accountant-client privileges can make the difference in protecting communications from disclosure in litigation. In this edition of A Pinch of SALT, Sutherland SALT’s Pilar Mata and Melissa Smith examine the scope and breadth of accountant-client privileges that have been adopted by some states.

Read “Demystifying Accountant-Client Privileges in State…

A recently released California Chief Counsel Ruling authorized a corporate taxpayer to use its customers’ billing addresses as a proxy for the customers’ “commercial domicile” in calculating the taxpayer’s sales factor numerator. Chief Counsel Ruling 2011-01 (Aug. 23, 2011, rel. Dec. 28, 2011).

For sales factor purposes, California sources the sales of intangibles and services using costs of performance (COP) apportionment. The sales of intangibles and services are attributable to California if a greater proportion of the income-producing activity is performed in California than in any other state, based on COP. Before 2008, taxpayers could not include payments to agents and independent contractors as part of the taxpayer’s COP analysis. But beginning in 2008, California began to require taxpayers to take into account payments made to agents and independent contractors in calculating COP. As part of the analysis, the taxpayer must determine the location of the income-producing activity, and the regulations provide a comprehensive list of cascading rules to determine the appropriate location of the income-producing activity. See Cal. Code Regs. tit. 18, § 25136.Continue Reading We Know Where You Live: California’s Billing Address Sourcing