Publications
Newsletter

The BR State + Local Tax Spotlight: June 2021

The BR State + Local Spotlight
Click here to download this edition of The BR State + Local Spotlight.
 

Note from the Editors

Welcome to the June 2021 edition of The BR State + Local Tax Spotlight. We understand the unique demands of staying on top of important State + Local Tax developments, which happen frequently and across numerous jurisdictions. Staying updated on significant legislative developments and judicial decisions helps tax departments function more efficiently and improves strategy and planning. That is where The BR State + Local Tax Spotlight can help. In each edition, we will highlight for you important State + Local Tax developments that could impact your business. In this issue, we will be covering:

  • A recent Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision that addresses apportionment of sales tax for software used in multiple states;
  • An opinion from the Supreme Court of Ohio concerning the City of Cleveland’s taxation of a nonresident’s income from stock options;
  • A recent New Jersey Tax Court decision that bars the assessment of tax in years open under the statute of limitations if the assessment is based on audit adjustments to net operating losses in closed years; and
  • The U.S. Solicitor General’s arguments in an amicus brief filed in a dispute between Massachusetts and New Hampshire over the taxation of telecommuting employees’ income.

We invite you to share The BR State + Local Tax Spotlight with your colleagues and visit Blank Rome’s State + Local Tax webpage for more information about our team. Click here to add State + Local Tax to your subscription preferences.

— Matthew F. Cammarata and Eugene J. Gibilaro


ARTICLES

Massachusetts High Court Finds Statutory Right to Apportionment of Sales Tax for Software Used in Multiple States
By Craig B. Fields

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied the Commissioner of Revenue’s attempted money grab and held that there is a statutory right to apportion sales tax on receipts from the sale or license of software that was purchased and used in Massachusetts, but also used in multiple other states. Read More »

Ohio High Court Upholds Taxation of a Nonresident’s Income from Stock Options
By Eugene J. Gibilaro

The Supreme Court of Ohio upheld the City of Cleveland’s taxation of a nonresident’s income from stock options even though the income was recognized by the nonresident seven years after the nonresident had ceased working or residing in the city. Read More »

You Had Your Chance: New Jersey Tax Court Prohibits Audit Adjustments to Closed Years
By Matthew F. Cammarata

The New Jersey Tax Court held that the Division of Taxation (“Taxation”) cannot assess tax in years open under the statute of limitations if the tax is attributable to the elimination of net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards from years that are closed under the statute of limitations. Read More »

Grasping at Straws: The Amicus Brief of the United States in New Hampshire v. Massachusetts
By Nicole L. Johnson

Last October, New Hampshire filed a challenge with the U.S. Supreme Court condemning Massachusetts’s temporary rule requiring nonresident employees of Massachusetts’s employers to continue sourcing income to Massachusetts, even if the employees were no longer working in the state. Read More »


SAVE THE DATE: BLANK ROME’S STATE + LOCAL TAX SUMMIT

Please join us as we return in person for our annual State + Local Tax Summit, which will be held on Friday, August 13, 2021, at Blank Rome LLP’s New York office. The Summit will include timely and important discussion of the state and local issues affecting your company. Learn More »

© 2021 Blank Rome LLP. All rights reserved. Please contact Blank Rome for permission to reprint. Notice: The purpose of this update is to identify select developments that may be of interest to readers. The information contained herein is abridged and summarized from various sources, the accuracy and completeness of which cannot be assured. This update should not be construed as legal advice or opinion, and is not a substitute for the advice of counsel.