On May 14, 2021, the Indiana Tax Court upheld a pharmacy benefit management company’s sourcing of its receipts under Indiana’s costs of performance rules applicable to receipts from services. The court rejected the Indiana Department of Revenue’s position that the receipts should instead be sourced according to the rules for sales of tangible personal property.

On April 14, 2021, the Oregon Tax Court issued a ruling on cross motions for summary judgment in a case involving the inclusion of receipts from commodity hedging activities in the taxpayer’s sales apportionment factor. Chevron filed amended Oregon corporation excise tax returns including its gross hedging receipts in its Oregon sales apportionment factor, and

The Illinois Tax Tribunal issued an order denying PepsiCo Inc. and Affiliates’ (“PepsiCo”) motion for summary judgment and found that PepsiCo’s subsidiary, Frito-Lay North America, Inc. (“FLNA”), was not an excluded 80/20 company and must be include in the PepsiCo Illinois unitary group corporate income tax return.[1] As originally filed, PepsiCo excluded FNLA from

The New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, affirmed a New York City Tax Appeals Tribunal decision regarding the proper method for calculating a corporation’s receipts factor for General Corporation Tax purposes.  The corporation offered a subscription-based service that allowed its clients access to experts and consultants in a broad variety of disciplines, and access

The California Court of Appeal held that California income tax applies to the entire amount of trust income that is derived from California sources, even though a trust is managed in part by a non-resident trustee. The taxpayer had requested a refund on income taxes paid on capital gains, claiming that the income was incorrectly

The North Carolina Supreme Court affirmed a lower court decision that held that a manufacturer of brake pads used by railroads did not qualify for an exception to the state’s standard three-factor apportionment formula that allows “public utilities” to instead apportion their income using a single-sales factor formula.

In February 2019, the North Carolina Superior

California uses market-based sourcing to apportion sales of other than tangible personal property to the state. Under the governing statute, sales of services are sourced to California to the extent the purchaser of the service receives the benefit in the state.1 Sales of intangible personal property are sourced to California to the extent the

The Tennessee Court of Appeals held that a manufacturer’s proceeds from a legal malpractice action are business earnings subject to the Tennessee excise tax. The malpractice action arose when the taxpayer’s attorneys improperly filed a European patent. The damages awarded in settlement of the claim were based on profits the taxpayer would have earned if

Oral argument was held June 11 in the highly unusual case of Synthes USA HQ Inc. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

  • The Attorney General faced skeptical questioning from the Commonwealth Court, with one judge suggesting that the Attorney General was “defeating,” rather than representing, the interests of the Department of Revenue.
  • Synthes involves the question of

The Washington Court of Appeals held that Seattle’s method of apportioning the City’s business and occupation tax (B&O tax) was unconstitutionally applied and unfairly apportioned when the City excluded compensation paid to independent representatives from the apportionment payroll factor. The taxpayer, a financial services firm headquartered in Seattle, generated most of its income through the