A recording of the Sutherland SALT Quick Call: Deciphering Wynne with Professor Walter Hellerstein is now available. In this Quick Call, Jeff Friedman and Professor Hellerstein discuss the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Maryland Comptroller v. Wynne and its implications.
commerce clause
Hubba, Hubba, Hubba! Money, Money, Money! Who Do You Trust? California and North Carolina Differ on the Constitutionality of Taxing Undistributed Foreign Trust Income
By Michael Penza and Timothy Gustafson
The California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) issued an information letter explaining that a trust is taxable in California if any of the following three conditions are met: (1) the trust has income from California sources; (2) a trustee is a resident of California; or (3) a non-contingent beneficiary is…
Join Sutherland SALT on May 21 for a Quick Call: Deciphering Wynne with Professor Walter Hellerstein
Following Monday’s U.S. Supreme Court decision that Maryland’s personal income tax regime is unconstitutional, join Sutherland SALT and Professor Wally Hellerstein, University of Georgia Taxation Law Professor and author of State Taxation, on Thursday, May 21 at 2:00 p.m. EST for a discussion including an analysis and potential implications of the Court’s ruling.
Wynne Court Holds That Internal Consistency Lives, Applies to Taxation of Resident
A divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Maryland’s personal income tax regime is unconstitutional. Comptroller of the Treasury v. Wynne, 575 U.S. __ (2015). The Court affirmed the Maryland Court of Appeals in a 5-4 decision and held that Maryland unconstitutionally created the risk of multiple taxation.
View the
This is Not a Joke: Federal Court to Consider Quill and Comity
In the ongoing saga over Colorado’s use tax reporting laws in Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ordered a full briefing on the Comity Doctrine and the Commerce Clause on April 13. The outcome of this case could have broad implications for states and taxpayers seeking…
Phone (Your Out-of-State) Home: Mississippi Court Declares Discriminatory Dividend Exclusion Statute is Unconstitutional
By Charles Capouet and Timothy Gustafson
The Mississippi Chancery Court held that the state’s dividend exclusion statute is unconstitutional because it violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The statute excludes from a taxpayer’s gross income intercompany dividends received from domestic affiliates doing business and filing income tax returns in Mississippi. In so doing,…
Constitutional Challenges to Ohio CAT’s Bright-Line Presence Nexus Test Advance
By Stephanie Do and Madison Barnett
The Ohio Board of Tax Appeals determined that two out-of-state online retailers with no physical presence in Ohio were subject to Ohio’s Commercial Activity Tax (CAT). The Board, declining to rule on the taxpayers’ constitutional arguments, found that the online retailers met Ohio’s statutory bright-line presence nexus test based…
U.S. Supreme Court Sends 4-R Act Case Back to Lower Court for the Second Time
A day after issuing its decision in Direct Marketing Ass’n v. Brohl, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Alabama Department of Revenue v. CSX Transportation, Inc. The Court held that a rail carrier can show discrimination under subsection (b)(4) of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 by demonstrating that it is…
All Nine Agree: U.S. Supreme Court Holds that the Tax Injunction Act Does Not Bar DMA’s Action in Federal Court
Today the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Direct Marketing Ass’n v. Brohl that the Tax Injunction Act does not bar Direct Marketing Association’s federal lawsuit against Colorado’s sales tax reporting regime. The substantive challenge to the constitutionality of the reporting regime will continue at the Tenth Circuit. Continue reading…
Michigan Court of Claims Upholds Retroactive Compact Repeal Legislation
Upholding retroactive legislation recently enacted by the Michigan Legislature, the Michigan Court of Claims today dismissed multiple cases where taxpayers had appealed the Department of Treasury’s denial of their ability to elect three-factor apportionment under the Multistate Tax Compact. See, i.e., Taskawa America, Inc. v. Department of Treasury, Case No. 11-000077-MT (Mich. Ct.



