The Indiana Tax Court recently ruled in favor of The University of Phoenix, Inc. (“University of Phoenix”) on an important issue of first impression involving the sourcing of service revenue for purposes of computing Indiana’s corporate income tax apportionment factor. The University of Phoenix, Inc. v. Indiana Dep’t of State Revenue, Cause No. 49T10-1411-TA-00065 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2017). Baker & McKenzie LLP represented the University of Phoenix in the case. The Tax Court held that in sourcing service revenue, Indiana law requires a taxpayer activity/cost-based analysis and rejected the market/customer-based analysis historically advanced by the Indiana Department of State Revenue (“Department”). Read more…
States’ Conformity with Proposed Federal Border Adjustment Tax May Result in Violation of the Foreign Commerce Clause of the US Constitution
President Trump and Congressional Republicans appear eager to move onto federal tax reform given their recent failed attempt to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. But, enacting the first major overhaul to the Internal Revenue Code since the Tax Reform Act of 1986 will be no small task, especially considering that the proposed legislation greatly differs in its effects on corporate taxpayers. Read more…
U.S. Supreme Court Asks Michigan for Response in Retroactivity Appeal – Provides Hope for Taking Case
The U.S. Supreme Court has requested Michigan’s response to several certiorari appeals from taxpayers seeking relief from Michigan’s retroactive repeal of its Multistate Tax Compact (“MTC”) election. The Court was originally scheduled to review the Michigan petitions at its conference on January 19, but has now provided a February 9 deadline for Michigan’s response. Additionally, the Court’s January 19 conference to discuss Dot Foods, Inc., another state tax retroactivity case appealed to the Court several months ago dealing with the interpretation of a Washington business and occupation tax exemption, has been put on hold. See Dot Foods, Inc. v. Wash. Dep’t of Revenue, U.S., No. 16-308, cert. petition filed 9/9/16 and cert response filed 12/5/16. These recent actions by the Court appear to signal an interest in retroactivity cases, with heightened potential to take one or both cases.Read more…
South Dakota and Alabama Hatch Newegg Challenges to Quill
The bright-line physical presence nexus standard established by the US Supreme Court in Quill v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298 (1992) for sales and use tax purposes is under attack. Under this standard, a company must have a physical presence within a state in order for such state to constitutionally impose its sales or use tax upon that company. If such in-state physical presence does not exist, the imposition of tax is unconstitutional because it fails the “substantial nexus” requirement of the Commerce Clause. This has been the rule for the past 24 years, but now, in response to Justice Kennedy’s concurring opinion in Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, Dkt. 13-1032 (U.S. 2015) advocating for a reconsideration of Quill, South Dakota and Alabama have enacted controversial sales and use tax nexus laws designed to directly conflict with the US Supreme Court’s holding in Quill. Both states have found companies willing to challenge them, including Newegg, Inc., a company that has been targeted by both states in their attempts to overturn Quill. For additional background on the events leading up to each state’s change, please refer to the prior Tax News and Developments article States on the Verge of a Nexus Showdown (Vol. 16, Issue 2, April 2016).Read more…
