Archive for the ‘Sales Tax’ Category

2010 California Use Tax Returns Due on January 31st

Tuesday, January 18th, 2011

If you own a business in California (including a sole proprietorship, an LLC, or a corporation) and you have had $100,000 of gross receipts or more in a year from 2008 through 2010 and do not otherwise have to file a sales tax return, you must file a Use Tax return. Use Tax is the equivalent of sales tax when you purchase a product where sales tax is not charged but it normally would be. For example, if you buy a book from Amazon.com you still owe tax on the purchase even though Amazon won’t charge you sales tax (it’s now Use Tax).

You must register on paper for filing a Use Tax return (and then mail the form to your local BOE office). After your registration is processed, you will then be able to go online and file (and pay) your Use Tax return.

And those returns are due in just two weeks — on January 31st.

Shaming in Sales Tax for the Fourth Quarter

Wednesday, December 1st, 2010

The Board of Equalization posted its fourth quarter 2010 list of the 250 most delinquent taxpayers. The BOE collects sales and use tax in California. (Now, if you’re asking me how the fourth quarter results can be posted at the end of November, well, I can’t answer that question. It’s likely the New Math.)

The BOE’s news release notes the newest 22 (or should that be bottom 22) tax delinquents. Sizzler restaurants are apparently having trouble remitting sales taxes, as several franchisees are shown with large dollar balances. The largest balance is from 2002, and is from California Target Enterprises, Inc. of Downey; they owe $18.1 million. It took a balance of $646,587 to make the list: Mira Loma Marine Commander Boats of Huntington Beach is shown owing that amount.

To date, $4.1 million has been collected through this program, with another $27 million to be paid through installment agreements. Unfortunately, there’s a total of $393 million owed by the 250 on the list so there’s definitely a way to go.

Amazon 1, North Carolina 0

Wednesday, October 27th, 2010

Back in April I reported on Amazon.com’s petition for declaratory relief from North Carolina; the North Carolina Department of Revenue requested information on every purchase of goods since 2005 in the Tar Heel State. And that request was rather inclusive:

By letter hand delivered on March 19, 2010, to Amazon in Seattle, Washington (the “March Information Request”), the DOR stated that Amazon’s initial response to Question 16 of the December Information Request omitted the “Bill to Name; Bill to Address (Street, City, State, and Zip); Ship to Name; Ship to Address (Street); Product/item code or description” (the “Customer Data”). The DOR demanded that Amazon provide this information “for examination” on or before April 19, 2010.

Well, the District Court has made its ruling in Amazon.com v. Lay

The DOR concedes that it has no legitimate need or use for having details as to North Carolina Amazon customers’ literary, music, and film purchases. In spite of this, the DOR refuses to give up the detailed information about Amazon’s customers’ purchases, while at the same time requesting the identities of the customers and, arguably, detailed records of their purchases, including the expressive content. With no compelling need for both sets of information, the DOR’s request runs afoul of the First Amendment. It bears noting, too, that the DOR’s requests for information were made solely in the context of calculating Amazon’s potential tax liability. Amazon has provided all of the data necessary to determine its tax liability, except any potential tax exemptions. The DOR has failed to articulate the compelling need to calculate these possible exemptions, particularly where it has admitted that it can and will assess Amazon at the highest rate and it would permit Amazon to “challenge the assessment and … establish that exemptions or lower tax rates applied to some products.” Even assuming there is a compelling need to calculate Amazon’s tax liability inclusive of exemptions, the DOR’s requests are not the least restrictive means to obtain the information. The request is overbroad. The Court GRANTS the motion for summary judgment.

So on First Amendment grounds Amazon wins this battle. Amazon also wins based on the Video Privacy Protection Act (the NC DOR’s request would cause Amazon to violate that act).

Note, though, that the court specifically noted that Amazon must comply with valid tax rulings. Of course, whether Amazon must collect North Carolina tax will continue to be fought….

Alabama Highest in Sales Tax Rates

Monday, August 23rd, 2010

If you don’t want to pay sales tax, go to Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire, or Oregon. On the other hand, if you like high sales taxes, head to Alabama. That’s the crux of a report issued by the Tax Foundation.

The report ranks the 25 largest cities by sales tax. Not surprisingly, Portland, Oregon has the lowest tax rate among cities with populations over 200,000 (0%); however, it’s not one of the 25 largest US cities. For those, you need to head to either Detroit or Baltimore (6%). On the other hand, Los Angeles and Chicago are on top at 9.75%. In cities with populations of 200,000 or more, Irvine ranks 26th at 8.75%. On top at 10% are Birmingham and Montgomery, Alabama.

It’s just a reminder that not only do we pay income tax but we must all pay a host of other taxes. Sales tax is the most obvious, but our government today bombards us with a host of ‘user fees’ that are just disguised taxes.

Sales Tax Collections Drop $4.7 Billion in California

Saturday, June 19th, 2010

Well, that’s the amount that California sales tax collections dropped in the 2008-2009 fiscal year according to the Board of Equalization. Readers of Taxable Talk already know that income tax collections have fallen, so this unsurprising news is a double whammy to the Bronze Golden State. The report (the full report is available here) also notes that property values fell by $106.6 billion; that has and will continue to impact local governments in California.

Taxable sales fell 12% ($68.5 billion decrease); the only reason that sales tax collections to California didn’t fall by the same amount is that the sales tax rate was increased in April 2009 by 1% (from 7.75% to 8.75% in Orange County).

Prospects for increased revenue to California are bleak in the near term. California continues to impose numerous regulations and costs to businesses; it’s as if the Democrats in the legislature want businesses to leave. There is no driving force in California for job creation (this is true to a lesser extent nationally). Tax increases that will hit in 2011 are likely to cause even more economic troubles. And it may take a miracle for the legislature to finalize a balanced budget this year–they are running out of gimmicks and mirrors to use to balance the budget.

Yes, I have those pessimism blues on a Saturday morning.

North Carolina Has a Use for Amazon

Wednesday, April 21st, 2010

Via the Volokh Conspiracy comes the news that North Carolina is seeking the names of everyone who has bought anything from Amazon.com since 2003. Now, why in the world would the North Carolina Department of Revenue want to know what everyone in North Carolina has purchased from Amazon?

Use Tax.

When you buy something from an out-of-state merchant that has no physical presence in the state, you are supposed to pay Use Tax. Use Tax laws have, for the most part, been on the books for years (California’s law dates back to the 1930s). North Carolina tax authorities figure that if they sent an administrative summons to Amazon maybe they could find $16 million or so of easy money.

In December, North Carolina sent the first request to Amazon. Amazon sent a list of what North Carolinians purchased from Amazon by product, city, and ZIP Code, but left off the customer names and addresses. There’s no question that Amazon isn’t subject to collecting sales tax in North Carolina–they have no offices, employees, or any physical ties to the state. So the “audit” of Amazon’s sales tax collections in North Carolina would seem to be just a grab for the names of state residents who hadn’t paid Use Tax.

And that was basically confirmed. North Carolina wasn’t satisfied with the initial data that Amazon sent:

By letter hand delivered on March 19, 2010, to Amazon in Seattle, Washington (the “March Information Request”), the DOR stated that Amazon’s initial response to Question 16 of the December Information Request omitted the “Bill to Name; Bill to Address (Street, City, State, and Zip); Ship to Name; Ship to Address (Street); Product/item code or description” (the “Customer Data”). The DOR demanded that Amazon provide this information “for examination” on or before April 19, 2010.

That comes from the request for Declaratory Relief filed by Amazon in federal court in Seattle. “Amazon respectfully asks this Court for … [a] declaration that, to the extent the March Information Request demands that Amazon disclose its customers’ names, addresses or any other personal information, it violates the First Amendment and 18 U.S.C. § 2710 .”

If North Carolina is successful, expect every state to come calling on every online merchant demanding sales information. I might even get summonsed by Florida, a state where there’s sales tax on services (I do have clients in Florida). This will be a very important battle that will likely shape sales and use tax law for some time.

FUBAR Update: The Use Tax Letters Begin to Arrive

Wednesday, March 10th, 2010

Yesterday, my first client received his Use Tax Enrollment Letter. At least this client managed to ask me if they had to do anything with it. The letter, dated March 1st, arrived on March 9th. The deadline for filing 2007 and 2008 Use Tax returns as noted in the letter is January 31, 2008 and January 31, 2009. The letter notes that penalties will apply but that you can request a penalty abatement.

I just can’t wait for some of my gambling clients in California to get this letter and tell me about it in March…2011.

Bill Leonard, the former member of the Board of Equalization, was going to ask the BOE for a one month-delay. It does not appear that will be going anywhere. (Mr. Leonard resigned from the BOE yesterday.) Spidell was pushing the Legislature for a six-month delay. With State Senator Calderon noting the legislation is working perfectly (a perfect FUBAR?) there’s no possibility of that happening.

Even better is the fact that businesses who aren’t notified by the BOE still must register with the BOE if they meet the criteria.

I hope no one wonders why California’s tax system is now ranked as the worst in the country.

The Use Tax Mess in California

Tuesday, February 16th, 2010

I’ve often wondered, how do you make the Franchise Tax Board (California’s income tax agency) look good? Well, I and other California tax professionals have discovered the answer: Have the Board of Equalization implement a program that had such a poor design that the FTB looks good in comparison. That program is the mandatory Use Tax registration for California businesses.

Use Tax is the equivalent of sales tax for products where sales tax isn’t collected. Let’s say you buy a $10 book from Amazon.com. Amazon won’t collect sales tax in California (they do not have a nexus in California); you are supposed to remit the $0.88 in sales tax yourself. Most individuals don’t, of course.

The California legislature decided to force more businesses to comply with the law. Mandatory registration was enacted for any business entity (Schedule C, Schedule E, LLC, LLP, S-Corporation, Corporation, Trust, and Tax Exempt Organization) with $100,000 or more in revenues in 2007, 2008, or any year ongoing that has not had to register with the BOE (generally, businesses that had no sales tax collection requirement). The BOE sent out letters in September and October to businesses they found ordering them to register and file Use Tax Returns for 2007, 2008 and all future years.

To say the BOE was unprepared for this would be kind. At tonight’s Orange County Enrolled Agents meeting, one practitioner noted that she duly registered last October, filed her 2007 and 2008 Use Tax Returns and paid $36 in use tax, only to receive, “The nastiest letter I’ve ever received from any tax agency in my career. It threatened me, my business; I’m surprised they didn’t threaten to take my first born!” After a few back and forth letters, her situation was resolved.

However, most entities impacted by this haven’t bothered to do anything. Adding to the misery for tax professionals are the deadlines. The forms are due on April 15th. Now can we think of anything else that might be due on April 15th?

The BOE will on March 1st send out log-in codes and usernames to a web site where the returns can be filed. As Lynn Freer (the head of Spidell) said tonight, “Option A, the client will throw the letter away. Option B, they’ll bring it to you next year. Option C, they’ll tell you about it in August. Option D, they’ll bring it to you to do with their tax returns.”

Even better are those businesses who reach the $100,000 threshold in 2009. They must register in March, and likely wait six weeks to file their returns (that’s how long the BOE is taking to process the registration forms). Or they can go to their local BOE office except that those office personnel haven’t been trained yet.

Another joy is the penalty situation. You can get penalties abated (primarily for 2007 and 2008) automatically…except you must mail the request to the BOE.

There’s only one way to describe this: FUBAR. Lynn Freer and Spidell are spearheading an attempt to delay the due date until October 15th. (Here’s a link to a Word document explaining why this is a good idea.) Hopefully this won’t be as big a mess as I think it will be.

Finally, my compliments to State Senator Ron Calderon (D-Montebello). When asked by Lynn Freer about the legislation his office said it was wonderful as designed and the due date doesn’t need to be changed. If Senator Calderon spoke to his tax professional he’d learn how wrong he really is.

Cook County (Chicago) Sales Tax to Drop

Wednesday, December 2nd, 2009

It’s rare these days to read about any tax rate dropping. County Commissioners in Cook County, Illinois, home of Chicago and some of the metropolis’ suburbs, voted earlier this year to cut the county’s sales tax rate by 0.5%. Cook County Board President Todd Stroger vetoed the rollback. Yesterday, the veto was overridden. On July 1, 2010, the sales tax rate will fall. For Chicago, this means that the sales tax rate will fall from 10.25% to 9.75%.

“Some people will die needlessly for lack of access to the health care our system provides today,” Stroger said to the Chicago Sun-Times.

Two other politicians have clearer heads about the matter. Republican County Commissioner Timothy Schneider called it “…a $195 million rebate to the people of this county.” Democratic County Commissioner Forrest Claypool noted that it was part of a voter revolt. He told the Sun-Times, “What people see … is a county government that is too often a friends and family plan, a jobs machine for the politically connected.”

Politicians everywhere need to realize that there’s no such thing as government’s money. All of the money to fund government comes from the people. Commissioner Claypool noted that there’s no reason why government can’t be run more efficiently. He’s right. When times are tough government needs to cut back. Finally, Mr. Stroger’s comments about lives being lost is fatuous. Union employees will have to make do with either a smaller raise or perhaps the same salaries or even cuts. After all, that’s what we the people are having to do during the recession.

Another List To Avoid

Sunday, November 29th, 2009

Every six months theBoard of Equalization, California’s sales and excise tax agency, publishes its list of the top 250 debtors to the BOE. The list was updated this past week with 28 new entrants.

Unlike the list of the top 250 income tax debtors, this list mainly consists of businesses; indeed, I was struck by how many automobile dealerships and related businesses are on the list. The largest new lien is against Mastermind Group, Inc. dba Bay Auto Brokers, Inc. in Richmond (in the San Francisco Bay Area). That business has a $1,241,847 lien. The largest lien is for $7,976,634 to De Won Motors Group, Inc. in Los Angeles.

The listings have caused some entities to pay their tax. All told, 23 taxpayers owing a total of $25 million have made some payments on their debt with $3.4 million collected to date. Unfortunately, that’s a drop in the bucket; the total owed on the list is a staggering $288 million.