Over the
years I have had clients that expanded aggressively into numerous states. I was
continually evaluating when they reached the “trigger” to start withholding
sales taxes or payroll taxes or filing income taxes with name-the-state.
This is an
area that has radically changed since I started practice three decades ago.
There was a time when you practically had to have a storefront in the state
before you had to start worrying about taxes. Now you have states that want to
tax you should you attend a business convention there. Among the most recent lines
of attack is something called “economic nexus,” meaning that - if you target
the state’s citizenry as an economic market – the state figures it has enough power to tax you. Think about that for a moment. Say someone is
weaving Alpaca sweaters in Miami and decides to sell a few over the internet in
Illinois or Massachusetts. ANY sales into a state would trigger nexus under this theory. Many tax professionals, me included, are skeptical whether economic nexus would even survive a constitutional challenge under the commerce clause of the Constitution.
Unfortunately the Supreme Court has refused to hear cases on tax nexus for about as long as I have been in practice, so there have been few checks-and-balances as the states claim tax superpowers for themselves.
Unfortunately the Supreme Court has refused to hear cases on tax nexus for about as long as I have been in practice, so there have been few checks-and-balances as the states claim tax superpowers for themselves.
Let’s segue
this discussion to registering a corporation to do business in a state.
A
corporation or an LLC is only a corporation or LLC because a state says that
they are. That is the way it works. The state wants an annual check for this, and,
if asked, they will then say that you are a corporation or LLC. It is a great
money tree. Paulie would have approved.
Let’s kick
it up a notch.
Let’s say
that you have an Ohio corporation. An opportunity strikes and you start doing business
in Kansas. You know to worry about Kansas income taxes, sales taxes, payroll
taxes, et cetera. What you may not consider
is telling Kansas that your corporation is doing business in their state. In
addition to possible fines and so forth when you finally surface, there is the
possibility of compromising your attorneys’ hands should something happen, such
as litigation.
Or responding
to an IRS notice.
That one
somewhat surprised me, but it appears that California (let’s be honest: California
would be among our first guesses for any incident of state tax idiocy) is
making things easier for the IRS.
I am looking
at Medical Weight Control Specialist v
Commissioner.
Medical had
its corporate privileges suspended by California, presumably for failing to pay
Paulie his annual check. It happens, unfortunately.
Medical got
into it with the IRS, which eventually sent them a 90-day letter, also known as
a Statutory Notice of Deficiency (or “SNOD”).
NOTE: Appealing the SNOD is what gets you into Tax Court. The
Court gives you 90 days to appeal and not a moment over. There a sad stories of
people who missed it by minutes, but there is no “close enough” rule here.
The IRS sent
the SNOD to Medical in May, 2013. Medical filed its appeal with the Tax Court
in June, 2013.
I do not
know what Medical’s tax issues were, but I can tell you that the IRS wanted
over $1 million-plus from them.
Medical made
things right with Paulie in May, 2014.
OBSERVATION: One year later.
Medical obtained
a “certificate of reviver” and “certificate of relief from contract voidability”
from California.
Someone at
the IRS must have read Sun Tzu and the maxim that the battle is won before the
armies take the field. The IRS filed a motion to dismiss. Medical did not
legally exist when it filed its appeal, and that which does not legally exist
cannot file an appeal of a SNOD with the Tax Court.
Medical
fought hard, they really did, but California law was against them. The Tax
Court agreed with the IRS and dismissed the appeal.
And there went
$1 million-plus.
Now, every
state is different, so the answer for an Ohio corporation (say) might be
different from a California corporation. But I will ask you what I would ask a
client: is it worth it to test the issue?
The IRS
seems to have caught on to this Oh-you're-a-California-corporation-sorry-about-your-luck thing. I see that
another California taxpayer – Leodis C Matthews, APC – got its appeal bounced when
the IRS made virtually the same argument.
Please remember to pay Paulie.
No comments:
Post a Comment