From the 12/09/16 edition of the Weekly State Tax Report:
While it has not been uncommon for state tax auditors to “stretch” the law to develop theories to propose tax assessments, recently, many courts, including state supreme courts, have followed this path. These decisions appear to be more concerned with the fiscal impact to the state resulting from a decision in favor of a taxpayer. Most of these decisions concern the application of statutory apportionment formulas or nexus-creating activities.
The most recent decision that appears to have a fiscal bias as to the outcome of the proceedings is Kimberly-Clark Corp. & Subsidiaries v. Commissioner of Revenue, Minnesota Supreme Court, No. A15-1322, June 22, 2016. In Kimberly Clark, the Minnesota Supreme Court held that the Multistate Tax Compact (the compact) was not a valid binding agreement. The issue, which has been and is being considered by several other states, is whether a taxpayer may elect an equally weighted three-factor apportionment formula based on the adoption of the compact. In 1983, Minnesota adopted the compact by incorporating its provisions into the Minnesota tax statutes. The compact contains an elective apportionment formula in Articles III and IV, which allows taxpayers to apportion their multistate income by using an equally weighted three-factor apportionment formula. Once the compact has been adopted by a particular state and that state becomes a party to the compact, the only way for the state to repeal any provision is to repeal and withdraw from the compact in its entirety and readopt only those provisions that the state wishes to retain.
Mary F. Bernard, director at Ryan LLC, and Mark L. Nachbar, principal at Ryan LLC, discuss recent court decisions that appear to be more concerned with the fiscal impact to the state resulting from a decision in favor of a taxpayer in this week’s BNA Insights article, available here (subscription required). Or sign up for a free trial to the Weekly State Tax Report.
Compiled by Chreasea Dickerson
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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
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 email@example.com.
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)