Articles Posted in Apportionment

Posted

On November 7, 2023, the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine held a taxpayer’s receipts from the performance of pharmacy benefit management (PBM) services should be apportioned using a look-through approach.  Specifically, the court held such services receipts should be apportioned to the state where the prescription drug is dispensed by retail pharmacies to individual members (i.e., the market member method), rather than the state where the taxpayer’s client’s primary commercial and administrative headquarters is located (i.e., the market client method).

maine-2-300x54

Continue Reading ›

Posted

 

https://seesalt.pillsburylaw.com/files/2020/05/250px-Seal_of_California.svg_.pngIn the Appeal of Southern Minnesota Beet Sugar Cooperative (2023-OTA-342P) (Beet Sugar), the California Office of Tax Appeals (OTA) issued a precedential opinion holding the California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) is not entitled to apply its FTB Legal Ruling 2006-01 (Apr. 28, 2006) to prohibit taxpayers from including in their apportionment factors property, payroll, and sales that generated statutorily deductible income. The OTA’s guidance on the FTB’s interpretation and application of Legal Ruling 2006-01 in this opinion also has implications beyond the specific issue in Beet Sugar, as the FTB has been attempting to expand the application of the limited legal ruling to other inapplicable situations. For example, an opinion by the OTA in the Appeal of Microsoft Corporation & Subsidiaries (OTA Case Number 21037336) is also anticipated to be issued soon, which appeal concerns whether the FTB is entitled to apply Legal Ruling 2006-01 to prohibit taxpayers from including in their apportionment sales factors statutorily deductible foreign dividend amounts.

Continue Reading ›

Posted

On July 3, 2023, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed A.B. 5323 into law to amend New Jersey’s Corporation Business Tax (CBT). seal-of-new-jersey_800-300x300The bill enacted a variety of clarifications, corrections and modifications to the CBT.

Continue Reading ›

Posted

https://seesalt.pillsburylaw.com/files/2020/05/250px-Seal_of_California.svg_.pngThe California Office of Tax Appeals (OTA) held a California resident was not entitled to claim an other state tax credit (OSTC) for taxes paid to Massachusetts because gain from the sale of an LLC membership interest was wholly sourced to the taxpayer’s domicile under California law. Continue Reading ›

Posted

Florida-300x300On March 1, 2023, a Florida trial court confirmed that costs of performance (COP) sourcing, not market-based sourcing, is Florida’s standard methodology for sourcing service receipts for apportionment purposes.  In Billmatrix Corp. v. State of Florida, Department of Revenue, No. 2020-CA-000435 (Fla. 2d Cir. Ct. Mar. 1, 2023), the court strongly rebuked the Florida Department of Revenue for attempting to apply market-based sourcing in contravention of its own COP sourcing regulation. Continue Reading ›

Posted

The Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts has proposed significant amendments to its service receipts sourcing regulation in the wake of the Texas Supreme Court’s decision in Sirius XM Radio, Inc. v. Hegar, 643 S.W.3d 402 (Tex. 2022).  The proposed amendments would dispense with the Comptroller’s long-standing “receipts-producing, end-product act” test and align the underlying regulation with the SiriusXM decision.

Continue Reading ›

Posted

https://seesalt.pillsburylaw.com/files/2020/05/250px-Seal_of_California.svg_.png

In the Appeal of Sheward, 2022-OTA-228P (May 25, 2022), the California Office of Tax Appeals (OTA) held the California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) failed to follow its own market-based sourcing apportionment regulation by prematurely using reasonable approximation to source the income of a multistate unitary business.  During the tax year 2017, the taxpayer operated a business providing in-person services as a horse racetrack judge in California and Minnesota but failed to file a California return.  Related to such services, the taxpayer received Form 1099s from the State of California, the State of Minnesota, and Minnesota Harness Racing, Inc.

Continue Reading ›

Posted

The California Court of Appeal held a nonresident S corporation shareholder’s pro rata share of gain on the sale of goodwill classified as business income by the S corporation has a California source and is subject to tax for personal income tax purposes to the extent of the S corporation’s California apportionment formula and is not sourced 100 percent to the nonresident shareholder’s domicile. Continue Reading ›

Posted

https://seesalt.pillsburylaw.com/files/2020/05/250px-Seal_of_California.svg_.png

In One Technologies LLC v. Franchise Tax Board, an out-of-state California corporate taxpayer filed suit in California trial court challenging the state’s mandatory single sales factor apportionment formula on the basis its passage in 2012 via voter initiative Proposition 39 unconstitutionally violated the “single subject rule.”

Continue Reading ›