The New York State Department of Taxation and Finance issued an advisory opinion regarding whether three different financial advice services are subject to New York sales and use tax. Section 1105(c)(1) of the New York Tax Law imposes sales tax on receipts from the “furnishing of information” by printed matter, including the collection, compilation, or analysis of information of any kind or nature and furnishing reports on the same. However, the statute excludes from the scope of “furnishing of information”: 

  1. Information that is personal or individual in nature; and 
  2. Information that is not or may not be substantially incorporated into reports furnished to others.

New York courts have further qualified the first criterion by requiring that an information service be “uniquely” personal or individual in nature.Continue Reading New York Issues (Another) Advisory Opinion on Taxability of Financial Advice Services

At both the federal and state levels, the GOP won a number of game-changing races that will impact state and local tax policy in 2011 and beyond.  Of the 37 gubernatorial races held in 2010, Republicans won 23.  All six Republican incumbents won; Republicans defeated Democratic incumbents in two of the seven other incumbent races. 

The Arizona Superior Court denied Home Depot a bad debt deduction related to customer credit card transactions. Home Depot USA Inc. v. Arizona Department of Revenue, TX 2006-000028 (Dec. 10, 2010). The court reviewed three conditions that must be met under Arizona law in order for a bad debt to be deducted: 

  1. The transaction upon which the bad debt deduction is being taken was reported as taxable;
  2. The debt arose from a debtor-creditor relationship based upon a valid and enforceable obligation to pay a fixed or determinable sum of money; and 
  3. All or a portion of the debt is worthless. Id.

In determining whether Home Depot could claim the deduction associated with its private label credit card transactions, the court relied on a decision of the Arizona Appeals Court and interpreted the first and second conditions as  limited only to those persons who made the sale and originally reported the tax. Id. (DaimlerChrysler Services North America, LLC v. Arizona Dep’t. of Revenue, 210 Ariz. 297, 302 (Ariz. App. 2005)). While Home Depot made the sales and reported the tax, it did not incur the bad debt directly. The finance company paid Home Depot the amount of each transaction, less a negotiated percentage that included the overall cost of bad debt for all transactions.Continue Reading Retailers, Finance Companies and Sales Tax Refunds on Bad Debt – Heads I Win, Tails You Lose

The South Dakota Supreme Court appears to have added the South Dakota sales tax to the list of fees associated with automated teller machine (ATM) usage. TRM ATM Corporation v. South Dakota Dep’t. of Rev., 2010 SD 90 (December 8, 2010). In TRM, an Oregon company that owned, operated, sold, leased, and serviced ATM machines was assessed South Dakota sales tax on transaction processing and surcharge fees received from sponsor banks and core-data companies (parties that serve as intermediaries in the ATM transaction by contracting with card-holders’ depository banks to make ATM services available to cardholders). 

While TRM conceded the taxability of its transaction processing and surcharge fees under South Dakota’s sales and use tax laws, TRM claimed it was not liable for payment of the South Dakota sales tax. TRM made two arguments.Continue Reading The Latest ATM Fee, a Sales Tax?

The South Carolina Tax Realignment Commission (TRAC) has released its Final Report, which includes proposed draft legislation to achieve its recommendations. As expected, the recommendations include the expansion of the sales tax base to include “data processing, software delivered over the Internet, and digital products.” In addition, the recommendations include language to expand sales tax

The Direct Marketing Association (DMA) filed a motion for preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on August 13 in an effort to stop Colorado from enforcing the recently enacted—and highly controversial—sales tax notice and reporting obligations on remote retailers. Arguing that “affected DMA members will suffer irreparable harm to their businesses” without an injunction, the motion seeks to relieve remote retailers of the burdens of Colorado H.B. 1193 until the substantive issues in the lawsuit are resolved. The parties have attempted to narrow and expedite discovery on the Commerce Clause claims and to consolidate the preliminary injunction proceedings with a trial on the merits on those claims. It appears that the parties agree that resolution of these issues prior to enforcement of the end-of-year reporting requirements is beneficial to both the state and taxpayers.Continue Reading DMA Lawsuit: Twists and Turns Continue