Category

Incentives

Category

On March 9, 2022, the New Jersey legislature unanimously passed, and New Jersey Governor Philip D. Murphy signed, Senate Bill No. 1889 (“SB 1889”), which, among other limitations, prohibits entities with certain ties to Russia or Belarus from benefitting from New Jersey state and local economic development incentives, including certain state and local tax incentives. While several other states’ pension funds have moved to divest themselves of Russian financial holdings, SB 1889—which was swiftly introduced…

In a precedential ruling, the California Office of Tax Appeals held that the research and development tax credit is only available for activities “engaging in the scientific method.”  The decision, In re Swat-Fame, Inc., 2020-0TA-046P (June 1, 2020), found that trial-and-error modifications to garments did not constitute “qualified research” under R&TC section 23609.

As the weather is heating up, the Texas tax front continues to bring hot and exciting developments in the Lone Star State.  Two of the latest updates usher in a change to the sourcing of local sales tax for certain internet sales and the end of Texas’s internet access tax. Internet Sales   The Texas Comptroller has adopted amended regulations under 34 Tex. Admin. Code § 3.34 relating to the location where an internet order is…

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.