The U.S. Supreme Court’s Wayfair decision overturns decades-old precedent and fundamentally changes the use tax collection landscape while leaving a number of questions unanswered. Our State & Local Tax Group explains how this decision has huge implications for online retailers, states’ coffers, and consumers’ wallets.
The physical-presence standard under Quill is no more
What is the new standard?
Retroactivity and a host of other unresolved issues
Read the full advisory here. [...]Read more
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the latest challenge to Quill’s physical-presence standard for collecting state use taxes. Our State & Local Tax Group provides a first-hand account of the lively debate and analyzes the Justices’ willingness to overturn the 25-year-old standard.
South Dakota takes up Kennedy’s suggestion
What is the real-dollar impact?
Retroactivity becomes an issue
Read the full advisory here. [...]Read more
Which tax bills survived sine die? Our State & Local Tax Group reviews the three major tax bills of the 2017 Georgia General Assembly.
• HB 329 – the omnibus bill
• HB 225 – the rideshare bill
• HB 283 – the IRC conformity bill
On July 5, 2016, the Court of Appeals of North Carolina affirmed the 2015 decision by the superior court in The Kimberley Rice Kaestner 1992 Family Trust v. N.C. Dep't of Revenue, which held that North Carolina was constitutionally prohibited from taxing the income of the plaintiff trust. Essentially, the state asserted jurisdiction to tax the trust's income based solely on the fact that the beneficiaries of the trust were North Carolina residents (the trust had no other connection with the state). The superior court rejected this assertion, concluding that the state could not impose the tax [...]Read more
On June 9, Connecticut Governor Dan Malloy signed into law HB 5564, which adds Connecticut to the growing list of states that require gift card sellers or issuers to provide cash back to consumers in certain partial redemption situations. In particular, HB 5564 (enacted as Public Act No. 16-140) requires a seller or issuer of a gift card to provide the purchaser with either a proof of purchase receipt or a gift receipt for the purchase of such card. Once the card has been redeemed for goods or services and the remaining balance is less than $3.00, the redeeming seller or issuer must pay the [...]Read more
On Thursday, December 31, 2015, the Supreme Court of California issued its decision in Gillette Co. v. Franchise Tax Board, reversing the California Court of Appeal and holding that the Multistate Tax Compact is not a binding compact between its member states. Accordingly, the California legislature had the authority to, and did in fact, replace the state’s equally weighted apportionment formula with a double-weighted-sales formula in 1993. This highly anticipated decision by the California high court will undoubtedly have a significant impact on the landscape of ongoing disputes among taxpayers [...]Read more
In a provocative op-ed published in the March/April issue of the Journal of Multistate Taxation and Incentives, the Connecticut Commissioner of Revenue Services (Kevin Sullivan) argues that given Congress’s apparent unwillingness to pass the Marketplace Fairness Act, the states should consider taking matters into their own hands and simply act as if Quill is no longer good law.
The Commissioner appears to have been emboldened by Justice Kennedy’s concurrence in the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, No. 13-1032, __ S. Ct. __ (Mar. 3, 2015), in [...]Read more
This advisory reviews the Multistate Tax Commission’s efforts to create an Arm’s-Length Adjustment Service program to streamline states’ ability to effectively evaluate multistate transfer-pricing issues.
In an important decision with the potential to have long-lasting effects on Georgia property tax law, the Alston & Bird State & Local Tax (SALT) Team recently secured summary judgment for the Piedmont Park Conservancy (“the Conservancy”) in Fulton County Superior Court on the Conservancy’s claim that its charitable property is entitled to a “proportional” exemption from ad valorem tax.
This advisory is provided on the Alston & Bird website: www.alston.com/advisories/SALT-piedmont-park-conservancy/ [...]Read more
This advisory discusses Loeffler v. Target Corporation, which involved a claim for a refund of allegedly improperly collected sales taxes brought under California’s consumer protection laws, and how the California Supreme Court held that the refund scheme created by the California tax code provides the exclusive remedy for a dispute over the applicability of the state sales tax to retail transactions. The court’s holding closely followed the logic and policy reasoning outlined in an amicus brief filed in the case by Alston & Bird.
The advisory is provided on the Alston & Bird website: www.alston.com/advisories/loeffler-target/ [...]Read more