In PENN Entertainment, Inc. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue, a unanimous Indiana Supreme Court reversed the tax court’s grant of summary judgment for the Indiana Department of Revenue requiring PENN Entertainment to add back approximately $2 billion in wagering excise taxes it paid to other states when calculating its Indiana adjusted gross income
addback
Skechers can’t get a shoe in the door: Wisconsin Supreme Court declines review of “sham” intercompany royalties
In a summary order issued May 20, 2026, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin declined to hear a petition for review filed by Skechers USA, Inc. (Skechers) concerning the Wisconsin Department of Revenue’s (Department) disallowance of corporate franchise tax deductions claimed for intercompany royalties. Justice Rebecca Bradley dissented but offered no written opinion explaining her reasoning.…
A valid business purpose: Virginia letter ruling concludes no add back required
In a recent letter ruling, the Virginia Tax Commissioner granted a corporate taxpayer relief from Virginia’s intercompany interest add‑back requirement, concluding that the taxpayer satisfied the statutory business purpose exception.
The case arose from a centralized cash management structure in which subsidiaries deposited cash with the parent entity and relied on intercompany loans when they…
Alabama Tax Tribunal: Interest payments not added back under Alabama’s subject-to-tax exception
On February 26, 2024, the Alabama Tax Tribunal (Tribunal) held that Huhtamaki Inc. (Huhtamaki), a packaging manufacturer, is not required to add back interest payments indirectly made to foreign affiliates through a U.S. parent company.
Under Alabama’s add-back statute, a corporation must add back otherwise deductible interest expenses directly or indirectly paid to a related…
New York Continues to Disregard Taxpayer’s Reliance on Disregarded Entity Rules
The New York State Tax Appeals Tribunal affirmed a New York State Division of Tax Appeals determination denying a refund claim to a taxpayer that sought to apply the income sourcing rules for registered broker-dealers to receipts from its separate investment advisory business. The taxpayer structured its broker-dealer operations and investment advisory operations into two…
New York Administrative Court (Again) Holds Royalties Received from Foreign Related Parties Cannot be Excluded from Taxable Income
On December 19, 2019, the New York Division of Tax Appeals (DTA) held that a corporate taxpayer must include royalties received from foreign affiliates in the computation of its entire net income for its 2007 through 2012 tax years. Matter of IBM Corp., DTA Nos. 827825, 827997, and 827998 (N.Y. Div. Tax App. Dec. 19…
Profits or Salary? New Jersey Tax Court Determines Distributions Are Dividends, Not Compensation for Services
The New Jersey Tax Court held that distributions made to a corporation’s two shareholders constituted dividends, and rejected the corporation’s argument that the distributions should be treated as compensation for managerial services that could be deducted for New Jersey Corporation Business Tax purposes. The Court explained that New Jersey has adopted the federal test to…
New Jersey Tax Court Allows Unreasonable Exception to Royalty Addback
The New Jersey Tax Court held that a parent corporation was not required to add back to its corporation business tax base any amount of royalty payments it made to a subsidiary. The parent company and subsidiary company each filed a New Jersey CBT return. The parent deducted the royalty payment, and the subsidiary included…
New Jersey Tax Court Rules Not Taxes Must be Added-Back as Taxes for CBT
On January 31, 2019, the New Jersey Tax Court issued its ruling on whether a taxpayer must add-back intercompany payments to its parent, estimated payments based on tax sharing agreements, as tax payments made to other states. The payments were to reimburse the parent corporation for taxes it paid on behalf of the combined group…
Massachusetts ATB Finds that Indiana Utility Receipts Tax Not a Deductible Transaction Tax for Massachusetts Corporate Excise Tax
The Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board disallowed a deduction for Indiana utility receipts tax (URT) paid by a natural gas distribution operator with operations in Indiana. The deduction for the URT was disallowed, for purposes of computing Massachusetts net income for corporate excise tax, because the URT is not a deductible “transaction tax.” The Board found…



