For over 50 years, Bloomberg Tax’s renowned flagship daily news service, Daily Tax Report® has helped leading practitioners and policymakers stay on the cutting edge of taxation and...
Oct. 12 — States show no sign of retreating from their “kill Quill” agenda absent an uncertain, post-election congressional solution for the intensifying battle over remote sales taxation, according to leading tax practitioners.
The clash between states and remote retailers over cross-border transactions was at the top of state and local tax trends for 2016. States amplified an already growing campaign against the U.S. Supreme Court’s rule established in Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298 (1992), which prohibits states from mandating sales tax collection from businesses without an in-state physical presence ( 128 DTR J-1, 7/5/16 ).
During an Oct. 11 panel that launched the 2016-17 D.C. Bar state and local tax lunch series, practitioners predicted that states won’t abort the battle. The resolve is due, in large part, to states’ increasing frustration with Congress, which for almost two decades has failed to articulate a new rule to reflect a digital marketplace not confined by state borders.
There is no guarantee of a congressional solution in a lame-duck session, but the November results may dictate when and how Congress ultimately fashions a new federal framework for taxing remote sales.
“Whatever is done in lame duck has to meet with some kind of cooperation in both chambers, which is why November 8th is critically important,” said Maureen Riehl, principal and counsel for MultiState Associates Inc., speaking on the prospects of several federal bills impacting states. “Because they’re either going to be ready to play. Or they’re going to be ready to hurt. Or they’re going to be really, take their marbles and walk away.”
Several federal remote sales proposals are pending at various stages:
From the audience, MTC Executive Director Greg Matson noted that Goodlatte’s regime doesn’t solve his primary concern—states regulating outside their borders—as it permits each state to impose its tax base on residents that don’t have a vote in the state. Thomas Shimkin, MTC legislative counsel and director, also questioned whether Goodlatte understands that the proposed definition of “origin state” undermines his principles—an “origin state” is defined as the state “in which the remote seller has physical presence and has employed the greatest average number of employees,” which may have no connection with a headquarter state.
Stephen P. Kranz, a Washington, D.C.-based partner with McDermott Will & Emery LLP, explained that while the current discussion draft fixed problems from prior iterations, complexities and wrinkles remain.
“There are some results that are inherent in the origin system that cannot be changed,” he said.
Describing the Judiciary Committee chairman’s proposal, Kranz estimated that Goodlatte’s framework could yield approximately 26 end results—factoring in the varying tax bases, tax rates, states not participating in the proposed clearinghouse and states with no sales tax.
Riehl noted that Goodlatte has held up competing remote sales proposals from reaching the House floor for a vote, including the RTPA. And she questioned whether the OSSA masks an underlying motivation to stymie progress on the issue.
“Is this all a ruse?” she said, questioning “who would come up with this as an alternative?”
Riehl explained that in September, Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) directed Goodlatte and Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R -Utah), who is the RTPA sponsor, to work out their differences. While there was no resolution before the October break, she said “there is some good faith effort trying to be made yet before the end of the Congress” to arrive at a deal between the two congressmen.
In the other chamber, Riehl said that leaders of the marketplace coalition and Senate leaders are discussing an alternative to the original MFA version—something that may resemble the Chaffetz bill. And while Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) promised to hold a 2016 vote on the MFA in exchange for Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) lifting objections to a vote on the permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act, it’s not clear if, when and how that may happen.
Ultimately, Riehl said that the bills may carry over into the next Congress. However, the question remains over “how long does anybody have the stomach to continue that,” particularly given the litigation over state regimes enforcing remote sales tax.
In the meantime, states aren’t expected to back down from the anti- Quill movement.
Kranz anticipates that in in 2017, states will focus their legislative efforts on three primary models:
Kranz noted that while practitioners largely didn’t consider the ongoing Colorado litigation, Direct Mktg. Ass’n v. Brohl, as the proper vehicle to challenge Quill, a cross-petition filed last week by the state director of revenue requests that the U.S. Supreme Court assess the validity of the nearly 25-year-old decision. While this issue wasn’t decided by the lower courts, Kranz said that the dispute may end up being the case that re-litigates Quill in the near future.
To contact the reporter on this story: Jennifer McLoughlin in Washington at email@example.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Ryan C. Tuck at firstname.lastname@example.org
Copyright © 2016 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to email@example.com.
Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)
Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).
This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)