Scioto Insurance Company
The Supreme Court of Oklahoma held that a company was not subject to Oklahoma’s corporate net income tax as a result of receiving payments under a licensing contract that was not made in the State of Oklahoma and no part of which was to be performed in Oklahoma.
|
EchoStar Satellite Corporation
The New York Court of Appeals ruled that when a satellite television provider purchases equipment that is subsequently leased to its customers for a separately stated fee on which it collected and remitted sales tax, that purchase is exempt from the State’s sales and use taxes.
|
United Parcel Service General Services Co. (UPS)
The New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division affirmed the Tax Court and held that the Tax Court correctly decided that the Director should have abated late payment penalties on a good faith issue and that the amnesty penalty did not apply to a good faith issue found on audit.
|
Meredith Corporation
The New York Appellate Division, Third Department, granted the corporation’s request for refund of corporate franchise taxes. The court held that regardless of its mode of delivery–by satellite or via tangible media–certain programming acquired for broadcast at the corporation’s television stations was tangible personal property for purposes of the property factor of the business allocation percentage.
|
Reynolds Metals Company
The Michigan Court of Appeals held that Reynolds Metals Company was not required to pay the Single Business Tax on a gain of more than $1 billion on the sale of its investment in an Australian joint venture.
|
AE Outfitters Retail Co.
The Indiana Tax Court granted partial summary judgment against the Department of Revenue in a forced combination case.
|
Wendy’s International, Inc.
The Circuit Court of the City of Richmond granted Wendy’s motion for summary judgment and held that Wendy's is entitled to a refund of Virginia corporate income tax paid with respect to the addback of intangible expenses.
|
Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
The California State Board of Equalization ruled in favor of Home Depot in the first corporate income tax appeal challenging the FTB’s position that treasury gross receipts from marketable securities are excluded from the sales factor.
|
GMRI, Inc. (Red Lobster, Olive Garden)
The California State Board of Equalization ruled that the State could not impose sales tax on certain restaurant gratuity checks of parties of eight or more customers (called “large parties”).
|
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co.
The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the Court of Claims on summary judgment that the gain realized by E.I. DuPont on the sale of its interest in a partnership was not apportionable to Michigan, and that receipts from sales of foreign exchange contracts could be included in the denominator of its sales factor.
|
Clorox Products Manufacturing Company
The New Jersey Tax Court and the Appellate Division held that when New Jersey states that it will follow the federal tax-free treatment of a contribution to capital in exchange for stock, New Jersey must also follow the federal basis rules.
|
Sherwin-Williams Co.
The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts held that companies may legally reorganize themselves and, as long as the reorganization has economic substance, it must be respected for tax purposes even if the new structure also provides tax benefits.
|
Powerex
The Oregon Tax Court invalidated the retroactive application of a regulation of the Oregon Department of Revenue.
|
The Hair Club For Men
The New York State Division of Tax Appeals held that its “Bio-Matrix” process did not constitute the sale of tangible personal property and, therefore cannot be taxed.
|
Northeast Homeland Security Regional Advisory Council (NERAC)
The New York State Division of Tax Appeals rejected New York State’s attempt to expand the definition of taxable “information services” to what are essentially consulting services.
|
Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)
The Court of Appeals of Maryland ruled in favor of SAIC regarding a taxpayer’s right to receive interest on corporate tax refunds.
|
IGT
The New Jersey Tax Court rejected the Division of Taxation’s attempt to deprive the taxpayer of nearly four years of interest. The court held that as N.J.S.A. 54:49-14a barred taxpayers from filing refund claims once an assessment has been challenged and, but for the Throw-Out issue, the corporation was otherwise due a refund, the refund interest runs from the date the protest was filed and not the date of the final determination.
|