07.08.2013 Views

VAT News - empcom.gov.in

VAT News - empcom.gov.in

VAT News - empcom.gov.in

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

supplies. Claims that are still open will be settled. Closed<br />

claims, i.e. cases <strong>in</strong> which the taxable person had not<br />

challenged HMRC’s refusal to accept his claim on the<br />

ground of unjust enrichment, and those <strong>in</strong> which<br />

HMRC’s refusal had been upheld <strong>in</strong> court, can be resubmitted<br />

for consideration. However, it is not clear what<br />

time limits apply <strong>in</strong> this respect. If HMCR treats the<br />

resubmitted claim as a new claim, it will be out of time<br />

under the United K<strong>in</strong>gdom’s three-year limitation<br />

period. HMRC have been asked to clarify this po<strong>in</strong>t.<br />

Revenue Brief 0 /09.<br />

From our correspondent Karen Kill<strong>in</strong>gton<br />

KPMG UK LLP<br />

United States<br />

California<br />

Nexus of Internet vendors<br />

Follow<strong>in</strong>g the success of the New York Department of<br />

Taxation <strong>in</strong> the proceed<strong>in</strong>gs before the New York Superior<br />

Court concern<strong>in</strong>g the so-called “Amazon-tax”, 2<br />

other states are follow<strong>in</strong>g suit <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>troduc<strong>in</strong>g similar legislation.<br />

In California, two pieces of legislation have been proposed<br />

thus far to change the def<strong>in</strong>ition of nexus and<br />

force certa<strong>in</strong> Internet vendors to collect sales and use<br />

taxes. Proposal AB 27 establishes a presumption of nexus<br />

forc<strong>in</strong>g certa<strong>in</strong> remote sellers to collect and remit Californian<br />

sales and use taxes. This presumption is satisfied<br />

when a resident of California, directly or <strong>in</strong>directly,<br />

refers potential customers to a remote seller that generates<br />

over USD 10,000 <strong>in</strong> sales annually. The legislation<br />

further seeks to implement the Multistate Tax Commission’s<br />

controversial Nexus Bullet<strong>in</strong> 9 -1, which would<br />

impose the obligation to collect sales tax on retailers who<br />

utilize <strong>in</strong>dependent contractors to perform repair services.<br />

AB 178 is comparable to AB 27, except that it does<br />

not <strong>in</strong>clude the MTC Nexus Bullet<strong>in</strong> provisions.<br />

In Connecticut, Proposal SB 80 also establishes a presumption<br />

of nexus when a resident of Connecticut,<br />

directly or <strong>in</strong>directly, refers potential customers to a<br />

remote seller that generates over USD ,000 <strong>in</strong> sales<br />

annually, with effect from 1 April 2009. The bill was<br />

referred to the Jo<strong>in</strong>t Committee on F<strong>in</strong>ance, Revenue<br />

and Bond<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

In M<strong>in</strong>nesota, Proposals SF 282 and HF 401 would also<br />

impose the obligation to collect sales and use tax on<br />

remote sellers when a resident of M<strong>in</strong>nesota, directly or<br />

<strong>in</strong>directly, refers potential customers to them, which<br />

generates over USD 10,000 <strong>in</strong> sales. Proposal SF 282 was<br />

referred to the Senate Taxation Committee and proposal<br />

HF 401 to the House Taxation Committee.<br />

In North Carol<strong>in</strong>a, the Revenue Laws Study Committee<br />

has proposed Legislative Proposal # to impose the obligation<br />

to collect sales and use tax on remote Internet<br />

sellers (<strong>in</strong> addition to impos<strong>in</strong>g the state’s sales and use<br />

tax on “digital goods”). The bill has yet to be <strong>in</strong>troduced.<br />

Connecticut<br />

Nexus of Internet vendors<br />

See California.<br />

Michigan<br />

© IBFD INTERNATIONAL <strong>VAT</strong> MONITOR MARCH/APRIL 2009<br />

<strong>VAT</strong> <strong>News</strong><br />

Def<strong>in</strong>ition of sales price<br />

The def<strong>in</strong>ition of the term “sales price” has been<br />

amended to <strong>in</strong>clude consideration received by a seller<br />

from a third party.<br />

PB 4 8, 2008.<br />

Conformation to SSUTA<br />

By way of Public Acts 4 , 4 7 and 4 9, 27 Michigan has<br />

amended its state law <strong>in</strong> conformity with the Streaml<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

Sales and Use Tax Agreement (SSUTA 28 ) by means<br />

of:<br />

– allow<strong>in</strong>g consideration received by auto dealers<br />

from a manufacturer as reimbursement pursuant to<br />

a “family plan”-type discount transaction to be<br />

exempt from sales tax;<br />

– clarify<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>stance <strong>in</strong> which certified service<br />

providers are eligible for a sales tax exemption; and<br />

– updat<strong>in</strong>g and clarify<strong>in</strong>g various def<strong>in</strong>itions.<br />

Redef<strong>in</strong>ition of gross receipts<br />

Michigan SB 10 8, which was signed <strong>in</strong>to law as Public<br />

Act 4 , removed taxes, fees, <strong>in</strong>terest <strong>in</strong>come, royalties,<br />

surcharges, and other elements from the concept of gross<br />

receipts for the purposes of the state’s bus<strong>in</strong>ess tax.<br />

PA 4 , 9 January 2009.<br />

Biomass-harvest<strong>in</strong>g mach<strong>in</strong>ery<br />

Michigan HB 8 2, which was signed <strong>in</strong>to law as Public<br />

Act 41 , amended the sales tax provisions to provide an<br />

exemption for the sale of mach<strong>in</strong>ery that is capable of<br />

simultaneously harvest<strong>in</strong>g crops and biomass residue, or<br />

that is manufactured for the purpose of harvest<strong>in</strong>g agricultural<br />

biomass grown solely as an energy source.<br />

Medicaid medical services<br />

Michigan HB 192, which was signed <strong>in</strong>to law as Public<br />

Act 440, amended the Use Tax Act to provide that the use<br />

or consumption of medical services provided by Medicaid-managed<br />

care organizations be taxed <strong>in</strong> the same<br />

manner as tangible personal property.<br />

PA 440 of 9 January 2009.<br />

2 . See Amazon.com LLC and Overstock.com Inc. v. New York State Department<br />

of Taxation under <strong>VAT</strong> Case Notes <strong>in</strong> this issue, p. 1 .<br />

27. See Michigan HB 4 80, 4 and , respectively.<br />

28. See Robert F. van Brederode,“The Harmonization of Sales and Use Taxes<br />

<strong>in</strong> the United States”, International <strong>VAT</strong> Monitor (2007), pp. 4 8 to 44 .<br />

1

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!