SALT Blog - SALT Blawg

On December 15, 2010, the Texas Third Court of Appeals heard oral argument on an appeal by Roark Amusement & Vending, L.P. in response to a lower court's decision upholding the Texas Comptroller's action imposing sales and use tax on the purchase by Roark for toys placed in a claw machine. Roark argued the sales and use tax sale-for-resale exemption applied as the toys in the claw machine were used in the performance of a taxable service. It argued that coin-operated amusement services should be subject "to the integral transfer sales and use tax exemption found in the 'sale for resale' tax exemption statute." Roark alternatively argued that 34 Tex. Admin. Code § 3.301(b) is invalid to the extent it excludes Roark's transaction from the sale-for-resale exemption, as the Comptroller improperly limited the Legislature's exemption.

In Hartman REIT Operating Partnership III LP v. Harris County Appraisal Dist., the parent entity ("Hartman Parent")filed a petition to dispute a property tax appraisal by the local taxing authority ("HCAD"). Texas Prop. Code § 42.21(b) mandates that the property owner bring a petition for review. But Hartman Parent had earlier transferred the property to its subsidiary ("Hartment Subsidiary") via warranty deed.

On December 17, 2009, Philadelphia City Council voted 15-2 in favor of Bill No. 090706 which, upon approval of the voters, would abolish the Board of Revision of Taxes (“BRT”) and establish, in its place, two separate agencies to perform Philadelphia’s property tax assessment and appeal functions.  On May 18, 2010, Philadelphia voters approved a ballot referendum abolishing the BRT and replacing it with the Office of Property Assessment and the Board of Property Assessment Appeals.

The reform of the current property tax assessment system was spawned by claims of political patronage and inaccurate assessments.  To combat a reoccurrence of those issues under the new system, the BRT’s duties will be split amongst the two new agencies.

On July 1, 2010, Florida and Nevada launched two separate tax amnesty programs, both are slated to expire September 30, 2010.  These tax amnesty programs are the latest of many state programs intended to raise large amounts of tax dollars to assist with the delicate budget balancing tasks facing the states.  The Florida and Nevada programs represent another opportunity for delinquent taxpayers to voluntarily pay overdue taxes with no penalty and no, or reduced, interest.

During April, both the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the City of Philadelphia implemented separate tax amnesty programs with the hope of generating revenue for the cash-strapped state and local coffers.  Both programs were slated to run for 54 days, with Pennsylvania’s from April 26, 2010 through June 18, 2010, and Philadelphia’s from May 3, 2010 through June 25, 2010.  The Pennsylvania amnesty program was modeled after the highly successful New Jersey 2009 amnesty program, which generated $725 million within six weeks.  At the close of the Pennsylvania and Philadelphia 54 ...

In general, Pennsylvania does not follow the Internal Revenue Code for Pennsylvania Personal Income Tax (“PIT”) purposes. During the late 1990s, the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue (“Department”) reversed its long standing position and diverged from federal income tax rules, becoming the only state to determine that elective nonqualified deferred compensation was taxable during the year it was earned, not when it was actually received. During 2005, the Pennsylvania legislature amended the PIT statute, thereby reversing the Department’s position. In ...