Pillsbury State & Local Tax partner Marc Simonetti, special counsel Zachary Atkins and associate Caroline Koo explore the recent Delaware court decision of Verisign and the implications it has for taxpayers in Tax Notes State’s SeeSALT Digest.
The Connecticut House of Representatives is considering multiple proposals that would permit Connecticut residents and part-year residents to take credits for tax paid to other states while working from Connecticut during the pandemic. Connecticut law currently allows credits for tax paid to another state only if: (1) the individual was physically located in such other state while working; or (2) the individual is a resident of a state that applies the “convenience of the employer” sourcing rule. Two bills have been introduced, both of which would expand the allowable credits only for Connecticut residents and part-year residents for the tax year beginning January 1, 2020. H.B. 6183; S.B. 873. Continue Reading ›
Partner Carley Roberts, counsel Robert Merten III and associate Malcolm Brudigam authored Part 1 of a multi-part series in Tax Notes State’s SeeSALT Digest to review the landscape of market-based sourcing rules and provide an in-depth focus on various states’ use of reasonable approximation.
A Delaware state court invalidated the Delaware Division of Revenue’s policy limiting net operating loss (NOL) deductions for members of federal consolidated groups, holding that the policy violated the Uniformity Clause of the state constitution. Verisign, Inc. v. Director of Revenue, No. N19C-08-093 JRJ (Del. Super. Ct. Dec. 17, 2020). The decision presents a potential refund opportunity for Delaware corporate taxpayers who were members of a federal consolidated group, and for Delaware corporate income tax purposes had their separate-company NOL deductions limited to the group’s consolidated NOL.
Pillsbury attorneys Marc Simonetti, Zack Atkins and Caroline Koo explain.
To read the full article, please click here.
SeeSALT partners Jeff Vesely, Craig Becker, Carley Roberts and Breann Robowski break down Governor Newsom’s proposed tax legislation, recently passed by the California Legislature, to raise additional income tax revenue to assist in balancing the California budget. (AB 85). The Senate and Assembly each achieved the two-thirds majority vote required for California tax increases (27-11 in the Senate and 56-20 in the Assembly), with Governor Newsom expected to sign the legislation later this week.
To view the full article, please click here.
The Mississippi Supreme Court rejected a taxpayer’s corporate income tax refund claim as untimely, holding that the timely issuance of a notice of examination and commencement of an examination tolled the statute of limitations for the Department of Revenue to make an assessment or effect a refund, but not for the taxpayer to claim a refund. Caesars Entm’t, Inc. v. Miss. Dep’t of Revenue, No. 2019-CA-00155-SCT (Miss. May 7, 2020). Continue Reading ›
State income tax relief in the form of tax return filing and tax payment extensions, and the deployment of related administrative guidance, has evolved rapidly in the last several weeks in the face of the COVID-19 crisis. Of the 45 jurisdictions, including the District of Columbia, that impose an income tax on corporations, 40 have established income tax relief to corporate taxpayers in the form of tax payment extensions, return filing extensions and/or various penalty and interest relief during the extension period. Arkansas, Minnesota and Montana are playing hardball, affirmatively announcing no income tax relief will be provided to corporate taxpayers. Massachusetts has announced it purportedly does not have the authority to extend income tax filing or payment deadlines to corporations but has provided late-filing and late-payment penalty relief. And unique as always, Florida still appears to be on the fence.
Continue Reading ›
Forty-four states plus the District of Columbia impose an income tax on corporations. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, 36 of those 45 jurisdictions have established income tax relief to corporate taxpayers in the form of tax payment extensions. Of those 36, most also extended the return filing deadline and have waived all penalties and interest during the extension period. Four states are playing hardball, affirmatively announcing no income tax relief will be provided to corporate taxpayers: Arkansas, Minnesota, Montana and New Hampshire. Three states seem to be keeping their heads in the sand, having made no announcement at all regarding tax relief to corporate taxpayers: Alaska, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania. And two states appear to be on the fence: Florida and New Jersey.
See our latest matrix for comprehensive coverage (updated April 14), on state income tax relief to corporations, other business entities, and individuals. Our coverage is organized in a manner that is quick to digest, and links to primary source authority are provided for ease of reference and to track future developments. Pillsbury SALT will continue to track these tax relief developments in the rapidly evolving landscape of the COVID-19 pandemic.