In a case filed by two customers on behalf of themselves and a yet-uncertified class of others similarly aggrieved, Wal-Mart may be forced to defend its Ohio sales tax refund practices in federal court. In the case of Brandewie v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., No. 1:14-cv-00965 (N.D. Ohio filed May 2, 2014), plaintiffs Shaun Brandewie and John Newbrough are suing Wal-Mart for breach of contract claiming that the retailer has breached its 90-day refund policy by refusing to refund a portion of the county sales tax previously charged on returned items.
In controversy are the plaintiffs’ purchases of merchandise in one Ohio county that they returned within 90 days to a Wal-Mart located in an Ohio county imposing a lower county sales tax. Wal-Mart refused to refund the full amount of the state and local sales tax previously collected and instead refunded only the amount that would have been collected had the initial purchase been made in the county of return. According to Brandewie and Newbrough, by doing so Wal-Mart breached its contract to refund the full amount previously paid.
Last Friday the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio denied Wal-Mart’s motion to dismiss the case, allowing it to move forward (for now) in federal court. Wal-Mart claimed in support of dismissal that exclusive jurisdiction for such claims lies with the Ohio Tax Commissioner. The court, however, disagreed, stating that a direct breach of contract claim may be brought in federal court if the disputed sales tax was not actually remitted to the Ohio Department of Taxation. Because at the time of the court’s ruling it was unclear whether Wal-Mart had actually remitted the tax, the court denied the motion.
This is not the first time that Wal-Mart has sparred with customers over the appropriate forum for sales tax related claims. As recently as December 2013, in Farneth v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., No. 2:13-cv-01062 (W.D. Pa. Dec. 30, 2013) the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania remanded a similar claim to state court. In that case, Brian Farneth had sought a refund of sales tax allegedly over-collected by Wal-Mart on shaving gel he purchased using a “buy one, get one” coupon. This case was initially removed to federal court. However, finding that the state tax laws at issue were more appropriately addressed in state court, the district court remanded based on comity. Notably, while it did cite the Tax Injunction Act in support of its ruling, the court favored the “more embracive” comity doctrine as the basis for its ruling.
With possible implications for this and other cases involving the jurisdiction of federal courts to hear state tax law cases, the U.S. Supreme Court may issue its decision in Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, No. 13-1032 (filed Feb. 25, 2014) as early as next Monday. At issue in that case is whether the Tax Injunction Act’s removal of such cases from federal jurisdiction applies only to cases involving tax imposition or collection.
by Ernst Hunter
Continue the discussion on Bloomberg BNA’s State Tax Group on LinkedIn: Was the court correct in denying Walmart’s motion to dismiss in Brandewie? From a practical perspective, is the Ohio Tax Commissioner better positioned to apply Ohio’s tax law? Should the court in Brandewie have applied a comity analysis similar to that in Farneth?
Take a free trial to Premier State Tax Library, a comprehensive research service that delivers deep, unique analysis, and time-saving practice tools to help practitioners make well-informed decisions.
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)