The Texas Supreme Court issued a decision holding that service receipts are sourced to the physical location of the taxpayer’s personnel or equipment that performed the service for which the customer paid. The decision resolves disagreement regarding the proper interpretation of a Texas franchise tax apportionment statute that addresses the sourcing of service receipts. The statute sources a service provider’s receipts to Texas to the extent the service is “performed” in Texas. The taxpayer argued that its receipts from sales of satellite radio programming subscriptions were properly sourced to the location where its personnel and equipment performed the radio production and transmission services necessary for its radio programming (“origination sourcing”). The Comptroller interpreted the apportionment statute to source service receipts to Texas if the “receipt-producing, end-product act” takes place in Texas, which the Comptroller argued occurred where each subscriber’s radio received and decrypted the taxpayer’s radio signal (“destination sourcing”).
2022 ABA/IPT Virtual Advanced Tax Seminars
Pillsbury SALT partner Breann Robowski will present during the 2022 ABA/IPT Virtual Advanced Tax Seminars in March.

Contractual Delivery Terms Control Application of Alabama’s Wholesale Oil License Fee

The Alabama Tax Tribunal held the taxpayers’ wholesale sales of fuel that entered and exited the state via the Colonial Pipeline were subject to the state’s wholesale oil license fee. The sales in question were made to Alabama license holders and involved fuel imported from out-of-state. The fuel would either enter Alabama from out-of-state through the Colonial Pipeline or be injected in the pipeline at a point in Alabama. In either instance, the fuel was bound for final movement out of Alabama with there being no subsequent point in Alabama where the fuel could exit the pipeline.
COST’s 2022 Sales Tax Conference & Audit Session
Pillsbury SALT partner Carley Roberts will present at COST’s 2022 Sales Tax Conference & Audit Session on March 10.
California Tax Credits and NOL Deductions Are Back! Governor Signs Legislation Reinstating Business Taxpayer Benefits Limited by 2020 Legislation

California Governor Gavin Newsom has signed legislation (i.e., S.B. 113) to, among other things, reinstate business tax credits and net operating loss (NOL) deductions originally limited by the enactment of A.B. 85 in 2020.
Trade Groups Ask SCOTUS to Hear Commerce Clause Challenge to Washington B&O Surtax on Financial Institutions

Two organizations, the Washington Bankers Association and American Bankers Association (collectively, the “Associations”), are urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of Washington’s business and occupation surtax on large financial institutions. On January 28, 2022, the Associations filed a cert petition arguing that the surtax discriminates against interstate commerce in violation of the Commerce Clause and that the Washington Supreme Court’s decision upholding the surtax is erroneous.
2022 CalTax Foundation Webinar Series
Pillsbury SALT partner Craig Becker will participate in the CalTax webinar series on February 8.

How to Be Reasonable When Reasonably Approximating the Market: Part II
Pillsbury SALT attorneys Carley Roberts, Jeff Phang, and Lexi Louderback recently published “How to Be Reasonable When Reasonably Approximating the Market: Part II” in Tax Notes State. Read more here.
Verizon’s Small Business Accelerator Program
Pillsbury SALT attorney Zachary Atkins will present during Verizon’s Small Business Accelerator Program on January 19.
California Supreme Court Addresses Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies in Context of Proposition 218 BID Assessments
California Supreme Court holds that courts can entertain arguments that a BID assessment scheme violates certain provisions of Proposition 218 when raised by a party who did not articulate these objections in public hearings held to consider protests.
On December 20, 2021, the California Supreme Court reversed the court of appeal which had concluded that petitioners failure to present their objections to proposed business improvement districts (“BIDs”) and related assessment schemes at the appropriate public hearings meant they had not exhausted their extrajudicial remedies, a lapse that prevented the court from deciding petitioners’ claims on the merits. Hill RHP Housing Partners, L.P. et al. v. City of Los Angeles, No. S263734.


