close
Share with your friends

KPMG reports: California, Indiana, New Mexico, South Carolina

KPMG reports: California, Indiana, New Mexico

KPMG’s This Week in State Tax—produced weekly by KPMG’s State and Local Tax practice—focuses on recent state and local tax developments.

1000

Related content

  • California: A ballot initiative would, if approved, end decades of established policy as to how commercial and industrial properties are taxed. Read a November 2020 report

  • Indiana: The Department of Revenue issued a “letter of findings” rejecting a recreational vehicle (RV) dealer’s position that it was taxable in other jurisdictions so that its receipts did not have to be “thrown back” to Indiana and included in the Indiana sales factor numerator. The taxpayer appeared to argue that because it reimbursed repair shops in the other jurisdictions for repairs to its customers' RVs, this treatment enabled it to fulfill its warranty obligations and was taxable in the other jurisdictions. Read a November 2020 report

  • New Mexico: A state appeals court held that a taxpayer was not required to file an amended return as a prerequisite to requesting a refund claim. For the tax year at issue, the statute did not specifically require a taxpayer to file an amended tax return. However, a Department of Revenue’s regulation mandates that a taxpayer claiming a refund must provide a copy of the appropriate, fully amended return for the period in which the refund was claimed.  After a hearing officer concluded that the regulation was a proper interpretation of the law, the taxpayer appealed. On appeal, the appellate court held that the Department's authority to regulate was limited to the extent the regulation effectively abridged the taxpayer's right to pursue a claim for refund. Read a November 2020 report

  • South Carolina: An administrative law court concluded that a statute allowing taxpayers that are subject to the license tax, an investment tax credit for qualifying property placed in service was ambiguous as to whether the credit limitation was $5 million annually or $5 million over the taxpayer’s lifetime. Because the credit worked as a deduction, the court concluded that ambiguity was resolved against the taxpayer. Read a November 2020 report

The KPMG name and logo are trademarks used under license by the independent member firms of the KPMG global organization. KPMG International Limited is a private English company limited by guarantee and does not provide services to clients. No member firm has any authority to obligate or bind KPMG International or any other member firm vis-à-vis third parties, nor does KPMG International have any such authority to obligate or bind any member firm. The information contained herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavor to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act on such information without appropriate professional advice after a thorough examination of the particular situation. For more information, contact KPMG's Federal Tax Legislative and Regulatory Services Group at: + 1 202 533 4366, 1801 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006.

Connect with us

 

Want to do business with KPMG?

 

loading image Request for proposal