The Indiana Department of Revenue determined that a taxpayer and its two affiliated entities were not required to report their income using a “separate accounting” method because the Department’s audit staff failed to prove the standard apportionment formula did not fairly reflect the taxpayer’s business activities in Indiana. The taxpayer, a manufacturer
apportionment
Alaska Supreme Court Can’t See Russia, But Does See Unitary Business
By Zachary Atkins and Prentiss Willson
The Alaska Supreme Court held that a petroleum company and its subsidiaries were engaged in a unitary business and upheld the state’s use of an alternative apportionment formula for corporate income tax purposes. The taxpayer, Tesoro Corporation, was a petroleum refiner and marketer with its subsidiaries organized into five…
Be Careful What You Ask For: Illinois Grants Request for Alternative Apportionment
By Todd Betor and Andrew Appleby
The Illinois Department of Revenue granted a taxpayer’s request to use an alternative apportionment method, determining that application of the standard single sales factor formula did not fairly represent the market for the taxpayer’s goods, services or other sources of income. The taxpayer’s only sale during the year in…
No COP for You! Indiana Rules Out-of-State Information Service Provider Cannot Use COP Sourcing Method
By Madison Barnett and Prentiss Willson
The Indiana Department of Revenue determined in a Letter of Finding that an out-of-state information service provider must apportion its receipts from sales to Indiana customers to Indiana in a market-sourcing-like manner, even though the majority of its costs were incurred outside Indiana. The taxpayer provided information services electronically…
Add It Back: Virginia Denies Deduction for Royalties Paid to Affiliate
By Jessica Kerner and Andrew Appleby
The Virginia Tax Commissioner concluded that a taxpayer was not permitted to deduct a portion of the royalties it had paid to an affiliate by narrowly construing the “subject to tax” exception to the state’s addback statute. This exception provides that the deduction will be permitted if the “corresponding…
No Expressions of Goodwill from Arizona Department of Revenue
By Zachary Atkins and Andrew Appleby
An Arizona Department of Revenue hearing officer determined that the gross receipts from a taxpayer’s deemed asset sale pursuant to I.R.C. § 338(h)(10), including gross receipts attributable to goodwill, could not be included in the taxpayer’s sales factor for corporate income tax apportionment purposes. The taxpayer asserted that goodwill…
The Show Me (the Allocation) State: Passive, Non-Missouri Source Income Allocable as Nonbusiness Income
By Shane Lord and Prentiss Willson
The Missouri Administrative Hearing Commission held that a telephone company’s interest income received from its parent company was passive, non-Missouri source income and thus excludible from apportionable income as nonbusiness income. The interest income at issue was related to a note between the taxpayer and its parent company pursuant…
Two States, One Compact: Michigan Joins California in Reviewing the Multistate Tax Compact
By Todd Betor and Pilar Mata
On July 3, 2013, the Michigan Supreme Court granted International Business Machines Corporation’s (IBM) motion for leave to appeal the Court of Appeals’ November 20, 2012, judgment in favor of Michigan in International Business Machines v. Department of Treasury, Michigan Supreme Ct., Case No. 146440. Consequently, the highest…
Legal Alert: MTC’s Annual Meeting Update: Financial Institution Apportionment; Sales Tax Model Nexus Statute
During the Multistate Tax Commission’s Annual Conference and Committee Meetings in San Diego on July 22, 2013, the Income and Franchise Tax Uniformity Subcommittee discussed its effort to redesign the financial institution apportionment rules. In addition, the Sales and Use Tax Uniformity Subcommittee will move forward in drafting a model nexus statute.
View our full Legal …
Texas Apportionment: Think Outside the [Set-Top] Box
By Stephen Burroughs and Timothy Gustafson
The Texas Comptroller determined that receipts received for the delivery of satellite programming to Texas subscribers should be sourced to the site of the subscriber’s set-top box for apportionment purposes. The taxpayer provides direct broadcast satellite television programming to subscribers in Texas and across the United States. For the…



