California’s long-anticipated market-based sourcing āguidanceā is finally out. Legal Ruling No. 2022-01 provides the Franchise Tax Board’s take on how to find the market in certain business-to-business sales. Though the guidance emphasizes that a seller should look to where its direct customer receives the benefit of sales of services, it keeps with current market-based sourcing trends amongst states and directs taxpayers to source such receipts based on the location of the taxpayerās customerās customer. The…
On July 21, the Washington Department of Revenue (āDORā) issued its analysis of the Court of Appealsā decision from March 30, 2020, in LendingTree, LLC v. Depāt of Revenue, no. 80637-8-I (Wash. App. Ct. Mar. 30, 2020). Ā As set forth in the analysis, from the DORās perspective, the LendingTree court followed the existing Washington Business and Occupation tax (āB&Oā) attribution rules and guidance and did not create a new interpretive legal framework.[1]Ā Although the DOR lost the case, and the court held that LendingTreeās receipts could not be sourced based where its customersā customers were located, the DORās response suggests that they are factually distinguishing the case and will continue to attribute receipts to the customerās customer location if that is where it determines the benefit of the services occurs.
On Friday, July 24, 2020, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania issued its decision and order on the Pennsylvania Department of Revenueās motion to intervene in the highly-anticipated case of Synthes USA HQ, Inc. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, No. 108 F.R. 2016.Ā The Synthes case is noteworthy not only because the Commonwealth Court addresses, for the first time, the Department of Revenueās hotly debated interpretation of the stateās former ācosts of performanceā statute, but also because…
The Texas Court of Appeals recently issued a decision that applied market-based sourcing for services, despite the stateās statute that requires the sourcing of receipts to the location where the service is performed.Ā In Hegar v. Sirius XM Radio Inc., No. 03-18-00573-CV (Tex. App. Austin, 2020), the court narrowly defined the scope of āperformanceā as the final act that gets the service to the customer, thereby ignoring all of the costs that went into the performance and production of the service up to that point.Ā Such an application produces a result that equates to market-based sourcing.