The Colorado Department of Revenue has determined that an information technology provider’s sale of its backup service, which allowed its customers to back up business applications, files, and systems, and also included the delivery of computer servers to customers’ locations, constituted a nontaxable service.  Although the Department “considered whether the placement of [the] servers constitut[ed]

On September 10, the Colorado Department of Revenue promulgated four sets of regulations related to remote sellers and marketplace facilitators. One set, adopts a special rule that establishes the sales tax requirements and conditions for sales made through a marketplace facilitator’s marketplace. A second set updates Rule 39-26-102(3) to clarify when a retailer is doing

The Colorado Department of Revenue has proposed several regulations related to taxation of digital goods, remote sales, and marketplace collection. First, it proposed a “doing-business” rule, which clarifies a person maintains a business in Colorado if the person meets the economic nexus test of $100,000 annual retail sales in Colorado. It also proposed another

With the threat of COVID-19 looming, several state legislatures will halt or temporarily suspend their legislative sessions, including: Colorado, Delaware, Connecticut, Georgia, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, New Hampshire, and Vermont. For many states, this is an unprecedented move while in others, the legislature has not adjourned early since the Civil War. Other state legislatures, like California’s

The Colorado Court of Appeals held that the City of Aurora correctly levied use tax on American Multi-Cinema, Inc.’s (AMC’s) license agreements with film distributors. The court concluded that the true object of the arrangement was to obtain tangible personal property (i.e., the data files) rather than being a nontaxable, intangible right. In the past,

The Colorado Department of Revenue will hold a stakeholder work group to discuss a draft sales tax rule that will “clarify the Department’s treatment of digital goods as tangible personal property.”  In advance of the meeting, the Department has prepared a draft rule.  Interested parties can attend the work group meeting on March 4,

The Colorado Supreme Court issued two decisions simultaneously holding that neither Oracle Corporation nor Agilent Technologies, Inc. were required to include in their combined income tax returns holding companies that did not meet the statutory definition of an “includable C corporation.” To be included in a combined return in Colorado, an affiliate must have more

By Samantha Trencs and Eric Coffill

The Colorado Court of Appeals held that a corporate parent doing business in Colorado was not required to include its subsidiary holding company that held no property or payroll in Colorado or elsewhere in its Colorado unitary combined corporate income tax report. The holding company was not an “includable&rdquo

By Samantha Trencs and Carley Roberts

In a private letter ruling, the Colorado Department of Revenue stated that an affiliated group of corporations engaged in distinctly different commercial activities requiring different apportionment methodologies under Colorado law could use the allocation and apportionment methodology set forth in two previous private letter rulings (PLR-11-002 and PLR 15-005)