Posted
by and

On April 6, the Third District California Court of Appeal decided Morning Star Packing Company v. California Air Resources Board, a case that challenged California’s cap-and-trade auction process as an unconstitutional tax because it was not enacted by two-thirds majorities in both chambers of the State Legislature, as required for new taxes by the California Constitution (propositions 13 and 26). The appeal pursued by Morning Star Packing Company against State Air Resources Board et al. was consolidated with a separate suit filed by the California Chamber of Commerce and by intervener National Association of Manufacturers. That decision is important not only to the future of the auction process, but also as to the key question of what is a tax as opposed to a fee or, in this case, as opposed to a “something else.”

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by

On January 30, 2017, the California Legislature Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation held an informational hearing on “Life after Lucent: Administering California’s Technology Transfer Agreement Law.” The California State Board of Equalization (SBE) and the Board’s staff are currently wrestling with the meaning of the Technology Transfer Act (TTA) provisions in sections 6011 and 6012 of the Revenue and Taxation Code in connection with implementation of the California Court of Appeal decision in Lucent Technologies v. Board of Equalization, 241 Cal. App. 4th 19 (2015). The January 30 hearing demonstrates that the Legislature is now apparently interested in this issue.

To learn more, please contact the author.

Posted
by , and

As consumer products become more high tech, the line between computers and traditional devices has blurred. Even basic products, such as toothbrushes, alarm clocks, doorbells, smartphones, cameras, home security systems, printers and copiers now include technical software that enables new functionality options for the device. As a general principle, tangible personal property, but not intangibles or services, is subject to California Sales and Use Tax. Software “embedded” into a product has value distinct from the value of the rest of the device and that distinct (intangible) value is not subject to sales tax. On the heels of two recent taxpayer victories in the California Court of Appeal relating to taxation of software, this article discusses current developments on how to treat such embedded software for California sales (and use) tax purposes.

(The remainder of this article can be accessed in the January 2017 edition of the Journal of Multistate Taxation and Incentives.)

Posted
by

(This article originally was published in Vol. 25, No. 4 of the California Lawyers Association’s California Tax Lawyer.)

Section 995 and 995.2 of the California Revenue & Taxation Code exempt all software except for basic operational programs from property taxation. Basic input output systems, known as BIOS, draw the line between the taxable and nontaxable. BIOS, which by definition is necessary to the operation of the computer, handles primitive functions such as turning the computer on and off. BIOS is taxable. Everything else, such as operating systems like Windows, is not taxable. (Property Tax Rule 152; Cardinal health 301 Inc. v. County of Orange (2008) 167 Cal.Appl.4th 219.) Often, computers or other electronic devices are sold with nontaxable software (i.e., non-basic operating systems or application software) preloaded onto the device. When there is no separate sales price for the nontaxable software, it is termed “bundled” or “embedded” software. Embedded software is not taxable. Id.

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by and

(This article originally was published by Law360 on March 17, 2016.)

A New York state Division of Tax Appeals administrative law judge issued three determinations addressing the tax implications for unauthorized insurance companies, both life and nonlife.[1] Significant uncertainty has surrounded New York state’s taxation of unauthorized insurance companies since New York state amended its insurance tax provisions (Article 33) in 2003. The Department of Taxation and Finance even issued a technical memorandum in 2012 reversing its prior position on unauthorized life insurance company taxation. These ALJ determinations provide much needed clarity, although questions still remain.

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by and

In Part I of this series, we shared our experience and insight regarding New York sales tax audits involving online services. We described our strategy of: (1) providing a highly technical description of how a service operates and what users can and cannot do; (2) emphasizing the role of employees or external data points, such as proprietary databases or communication links with third parties; and (3) comparing the primary purpose of the service to a more traditional (nontaxable) service.

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by

The Multistate Tax Commission’s (MTC) Annual Conference and Committee Meetings are being held on July 27-30, 2015, in Spokane, Washington. On Tuesday, July 28, 2015, at approximately 1:00 pm PDT (exact time subject to change), an MTC working group will present this model market-based sourcing regulation working draft to the MTC’s Uniformity Committee. Many on the working group consider the working draft to be close to the regulation’s final form.

To learn more, please contact the author.

Posted
by and

Since late 2008, the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance has routinely taken the position that charges for application service provider (ASP) services, software-as-a-serve, or other online services may be subject to New York sales tax as licenses of software, which are taxable as sales of tangible personal property. Some sellers began collecting sales tax on this basis, and the department has audited and assessed many sellers who did not.

Posted
by and

(This alert was also published as a bylined article by Law360 on July 31, 2015.)

Over five years into a personal income tax residency audit by the California Franchise Tax Board (FTB), Gilbert Hyatt filed a civil suit in Nevada state court against FTB alleging tortious conduct by FTB auditors. After more than 17 years of litigation, including a previous trip to the United States Supreme Court, the High Court has again agreed to weigh in, this time to decide the extent the United States Constitution requires Nevada to provide the FTB immunity from such a civil suit.

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by and

On May 15, 2015, the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance released Advisory Opinion TSB-A-15(2)S which concluded that sales of certain cloud computing services are not subject to New York State sales and use tax. The Advisory Opinion is noteworthy because of the Department’s position on the taxability of licensing prewritten software.

Continue Reading ›