Author

Lindsay LaCava

Browsing

Given the positive feedback from our weekly webinar series, the Baker McKenzie SALT Team is launching a monthly webinar that will cover coast-to-coast state and local tax developments. The purpose of this webinar is to keep you informed of updates and trends that may impact your business. Our first session will take place on Wednesday, July 8, 2020 from 1:00 – 2:00 pm ET. Presenters will include Lindsay LaCava, Stephen Long, Mike Shaikh, and Roman…

The Idaho Supreme Court recently affirmed a District Court’s judgment that the gain from the sale of a 78.54% membership interest in a limited liability company did not constitute “business income” under Idaho Code section 63-3027.  In Noell Indus. Inc. v. Idaho State Tax Comm’n, Docket No. 46941 (Idaho 2020), the court determined that “this type of gain does not meet the definition of ‘business income’ under either the transactional test or functional test (including the unitary business test),” and was therefore not apportionable income.

On the heels of its loss in Matter of TransCanada Facility USA, Inc. DTA NO. 827332, on May 14, the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance proposed draft regulations addressing the Article 9-A Franchise Tax treatment of Qualified New York Manufacturers (“QNYMs”).[1] These draft regulations, which are not currently in effect but which do shed light on the Department’s current thinking, amplify a position that the Department has taken in prior informal guidance and on audit regarding contract manufacturing arrangements and the scope of activities that constitute “manufacturing” that is not in the statute. The position that a taxpayer that engages in contract manufacturing cannot qualify as a QNYM is contrary to prior New York authorities addressing “manufacturing” in the investment tax credit context and contrary to judicial authorities defining “manufacturing” under relevant federal tax law. In addition, the draft regulations set out a new position—again, one not found in the statute—that “digital manufacturing” is not manufacturing, and that only manufacturing that results in the production of “tangible” goods will qualify for QNYM treatment.

The Baker McKenzie State and Local Tax (SALT) Subpractice Group is presenting a series of short webinars to keep members of the SALT community abreast of recent developments in these less than certain times.  We hope you will attend so we can stay connected as we address these issues together. The next session in the series, SALT Implications of Corporate Restructurings, will take place on Wednesday, May 20 at 1:00 pm ET.  If you would…