Author

Drew Hemmings

Browsing

On September 22, 2017, the Massachusetts Department of Revenue (the “Department”) officially promulgated a remote vendor sales tax nexus regulation, 830 CMRH.1.7: Vendors Making Internet Sales (the “Regulation”).  The Regulation sets forth the following bright-line nexus threshold:

An Internet vendor with a principal place of business located outside the state that is not otherwise subject to tax is required to register, collect and remit Massachusetts sales or use tax with respect to its Massachusetts sales […] if during the preceding 12 months […] it had in excess of […]” (1) “$500,000 in Massachusetts sales from transactions completed over the Internet […]”; and (2) “made sales resulting in a delivery into Massachusetts in 100 or more transactions.

The Delaware Secretary of State recently finalized its estimation regulations without any substantive change to Delaware’s proposed estimation practices. The final version of these regulations, which became effective July 11, 2017, acknowledges that the state received numerous public comments criticizing the proposed regulations, including the state’s practice of extrapolating unclaimed property liability to Delaware based on all unclaimed property reported in the base period, including property that was escheatable to other states.  However, as anticipated, the Secretary of State “decided to not make [any] suggested changes”.  The Secretary of State’s finalized estimation regulations can be viewed here:  Abandoned or Unclaimed Property Voluntary Disclosure Agreement Program.

On May 3, 2017, in Romantix Holdings Inc. v. the Iowa Dept. of Revenue, the Court of Appeals of Iowa affirmed the Iowa Department of Revenue’s (the “Department”) determination that (1) a parent holding corporation was ineligible to join its Iowa subsidiaries’ consolidated Iowa income tax returns because the holding company was not subject to Iowa income tax; and (2) the holding company’s Iowa subsidiaries could not deduct certain expenses incurred and paid directly by the holding corporation but ratably allocated to the subsidiaries based on a percentage of revenue approach.  While the Court ruled against the taxpayer on both issues, this case more broadly holds that an in-state operating subsidiary’s use of an out-of-state holding company’s intangible property, including a business trademark, does not necessarily create nexus for the out-of-state holding company with Iowa.  The Court’s ruling potentially conflicts with determinations from other state courts under similar facts where intangible holding companies were held to have nexus based on the activities of in-state operating subsidiaries involving the out-of-state entities’ intangible personal property. See our prior coverage, Colorado District Court Holds Economic Nexus Exists for a Minnesota Intangible Holding Company and Agrees to a Modified Alternative Apportionment Method, June 19, 2017.      

On June 29, 2017, the Delaware Governor signed a technical correction bill (“SB 79”) to the State’s unclaimed property overhaul legislation (“SB 13”), after SB 79 unanimously passed the Delaware House of Representatives and the Delaware Senate. To briefly recap, Delaware enacted SB 13 on February 2, 2017 in an effort to reform its widely-criticized unclaimed property laws. Some of the more beneficial changes in SB 13 included a reduced audit look-back period of 10 report years, and the ability for certain holders currently under audit to elect to convert the existing audit into a voluntary disclosure agreement or to elect an expedited audit option — both of which would result in the waiver of penalties and interest.