Earlier this month, the California Franchise Tax Board released Legal Ruling 2022-02, regarding the sourcing of Internal Revenue Code Section 751(a) gain from the disposition of a nonresident individual’s partnership interest when the IRC Section 751 property is located in California.

In this article for Law360, Eversheds Sutherland Senior Counsel Eric Coffill discusses

On January 12, 2017, the California Court of Appeal held in a published opinion that a taxpayer passively holding a 0.2 percent interest in a California-based limited liability company (CA LLC) was not “doing business” in the state for purposes of being subject to California’s franchise tax. The court reasoned as follows:

  • Under California Revenue

By Ted Friedman and Charlie Kearns

The New York City Tax Appeals Tribunal held that the Petitioner, a Delaware LLC, owed New York City real property transfer tax (RPTT) on the transfer of an interest in certain real property. The Tribunal applied the step transaction doctrine and treated the contribution of the Petitioner’s tenant-in-common interest

By Scott Booth and Timothy Gustafson

The Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board ruled that an out-of-state corporation’s subsidiary qualified as a financial institution by virtue of the lending activities undertaken by the trusts in which it held beneficial ownership and from which the subsidiary derived more than 50% of its gross income. Under Massachusetts’ statutory “catchall”

By Todd Betor and Pilar Mata

In a Letter of Findings, the Indiana Department of Revenue disallowed a corporate partner’s attempt to deduct flow-through income from a limited liability company as “foreign source dividends and other adjustments” on its Indiana corporate income tax return. Indiana requires corporate partners to report their share of partnership income,