costs-of-performance

Subscribe to costs-of-performance via RSS

The New York State Department of Taxation and Finance (the Department) recently released an advisory opinion analyzing the proper characterization and sourcing of various revenue streams derived from the facilitation of online trading activities. Petition No. C080222A, TSB-A-11(8)C (July 12, 2011).  Relying on our old friends, Deloitte & Touche, LLP, TSB-A-02(3)C (Apr. 18, 2002); Ins. Servs. Offices, Inc., TSB-A-99(16)C (Apr. 7, 1999); and New York Merchantile Exch., TSB-A-00(15)C (Apr. 18, 2002), the opinion represents the Department’s growing trend to expand the category of “other business receipts,” to source receipts on a market rather than on a cost-of-performance basis.

In the opinion, the Parent is a Delaware corporation headquartered in New York. It owns and operates an Internet-based platform (Exchange) that serves as a marketplace for over-the-counter (OTC) global futures markets. Although the Parent is not a registered broker-dealer, the Exchange serves as a marketplace for buyers and sellers of certain commodities contracts, financial contracts, and other derivatives contracts in futures and OTCs to meet and execute trades on a real-time basis. All of the Parent’s property and equipment associated with the Exchange is located outside of New York, and all of the clearing administration for the OTC is performed outside of New York. In addition to the Parent’s activities, its affiliates generate receipts from various transactions, including open outcry trading, digital auction, flat monthly subscriptions, and trades executed with the assistance of interdealer brokers.Continue Reading The Big Apple Goes to the Market for Online Trading Revenue

The Utah State Tax Commission has amended its rules for apportioning financial institution receipts attributable to services from a costs-of-performance sourcing rule to a market-based sourcing rule (Utah Admin. R. R865-6F-32(3)(l)). Effective December 9, 2010, financial institutions must include in the sales factor numerator receipts from services not otherwise specifically addressed in the regulation “if the purchaser of the services receives a greater benefit of the services in Utah than in any other state.” 

The change in sourcing methodology is consistent with Utah’s recently amended general corporation apportionment statute, Utah Code Ann. § 59-7-319, which similarly provides for the market sourcing of services (based on where the purchaser receives a greater benefit of the service). The change to market sourcing for financial institutions is another departure by Utah from the Multistate Tax Commission’s (MTC) model regulations for the apportionment of financial institution income. Continue Reading Utah Goes Market for Sourcing of Financial Institution Services

Chaos resulting from the California budget crisis reached a crescendo in recent weeks because of a new budget agreement, a bevy of voter referendums addressing tax legislation, and new regulations addressing corporate income tax apportionment issues. In the aftermath of the chaos, California has again significantly modified its corporate income tax apportionment provisions, for…