Archive for the ‘Indiana’ Category

2021 State Business Tax Climate Index: Bring Me the Usual Suspects!

Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020

Every year the Tax Foundation publishes its State Business Tax Climate Index. As they state, they look at how each state taxes, not on the how much. Per usual, the names at the top and the bottom haven’t changed much.

The top ten states are:

  1. Wyoming
  2. South Dakota
  3. Alaska
  4. Florida
  5. Montana
  6. New Hampshire
  7. Nevada
  8. Utah
  9. Indiana
  10. North Carolina

The bottom ten states:

41. Alabama
42. Louisiana
43. Vermont
44. Maryland
45. Arkansas
46. Minnesota
47. Connecticut
48. New York
49. California
50. New Jersey

This is what the Tax Foundation states about the bottom ten:

The states in the bottom 10 tend to have a number of afflictions in common: complex, nonneutral taxes with comparatively high rates. New Jersey, for example, is hampered by some of the highest property tax burdens in the country, has the second highest-rate corporate and individual income taxes in the country and a particularly aggressive treatment of international income, levies an inheritance tax, and maintains some of the nation’s worst-structured individual income taxes.

I deliberately waited until election day to make this post. Why? Because some states have ballot measures today that will impact their rankings. For example, Californians will vote on whether to have a “split-roll” property tax, where business properties would be assessed annually based on current value rather than only when a property is sold. California today ranks 14th in property tax; if this measure passes, the ranking will fall dramatically. Illinois votes today on changing their personal income tax from a flat-rate tax to a progressive system.

Nevada, my state, ranks seventh. It’s not that every tax is great in Nevada (we have a poor sales tax system and unemployment insurance taxes); however, we lack income taxes. (We do have a gross receipts tax, called the Commerce Tax, that large businesses must pay.)

Some states, like Utah and Indiana, have most taxes but they administer them neutrally, simply, and with relatively low rates. Contrast that with California, which has an awful income tax system, high rates, and ridiculous regulations.

Below is a map (from the Tax Foundation) of the United States with the rankings of each state. If you’re considering locating a business, it makes sense to look at taxes (and other factors, too); the Tax Foundation’s annual guide is a tremendous resource.

Posted in California, Indiana, Nevada, Utah | Comments Closed

How to Wynne Your Money Back in Maryland

Tuesday, September 29th, 2015

Earlier this year the US Supreme Court ruled that Maryland had to issue full tax credits–including the county add-on tax–to individuals facing double taxation (typically, Maryland residents who earned income taxed in other states). Kay Bell in Don’t Mess With Taxes today noted that the Comptroller of Maryland (Maryland’s state tax agency) has created a webpage for those impacted.

The webpage gives the basics on this, and notes that the Comptroller’s office will not be contacting impacted taxpayers. There’s a link within to a web page on the Wynne Case and the Comptroller’s office has a new form (From 502LC) designed for this specific situation. There’s also a detailed FAQ.

I also need to point out this decision likely impacts other states and jurisdictions. Other states with “add-on” local taxes include Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, New York, and Pennsylvania. However, where this impacts taxpayers is residing in a state that does not allow a tax credit for local taxes (Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, and Wisconsin are some of the states so identified) and/or residing in a local jurisdiction that does not allow such a credit (jurisdictions in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Missouri, Delaware, and Indiana have been so identified). I have not looked at each state/local jurisdiction to see who is impacted. If you think you’re impacted–remember, you would need to live in a jurisdiction that hasn’t been allowing such a tax credit and have taken such a tax credit on a recent tax return–you should contact your tax professional.

Tags:
Posted in Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin | 1 Comment »

When a W-2G (or Other Information Return) Is Wrong

Wednesday, March 20th, 2013

Let’s say you’re self-employed, and you get a 1099-MISC from a customer. He notes he paid you $1,200. However, he really paid you $900. What do you do?

First, you contact the customer and attempt for him to correct the error. Hopefully, you can show him a copy of your invoice(s) or other documentation, and he or she will issue a corrected 1099-MISC.

But what if he refuses? Here, practicality must be used. Let’s say the total of your gross receipts is $32,000, and the total of your 1099-MISCs (and 1099-Ks) is $29,000. I’d likely just enter the 1099-MISC as received, and lower the “other” gross receipts by the extra $300. (IRS instructions on information returns state to use the actual number. The problem is that the automated underreporting (AUR) unit will almost certainly send you a notice if you use the wrong number.)

Earlier this week I was faced with a different situation. My client, an amateur gambler from Indiana, entered a poker tournament in Iowa. The tournament had a $300 buy-in, and my client cashed for $2,300. Under federal law, no W-2G would be issued because the amount of his win, $2,000, is less than the threshold for issuing a W-2G in a poker tournament ($5,000). However, under Iowa law withholding on nonresident’s winnings begin at gross winnings of $1,200 (at a rate of 5%). My client received a W-2G for $2,300, not $2,000. What should be done? (My client has excellent records, including the tournament buy-in receipt.)

The amount of the win is $2,000, not $2,300. Indiana does not allow gambling losses to be deducted on their state income tax returns, so this is an issue for my client. (This can be an issue for individuals on federal returns, too. Gambling losses are an itemized deduction, so they don’t impact Adjusted Gross Income (AGI). Many tax items are tied to AGI, such as being able to contribute to a Roth IRA.) However, if I enter $2,000 as the amount won for that W-2G, the IRS’s automated underreporting unit will flag the return.

The solution is to enter the W-2G as it was received, and then subtract out the $300 buy-in just below this. I included an explanation: “Buy-in for W-2G winnings.” Should the IRS, Iowa, or Indiana flag the return, we can respond with a perfect paper trail showing that what we did is to put the income my client really earned on the tax return. Given that this is a fundamental principle of US taxation, all should be well.

The same process can be used for other information returns that are erroneous: Enter the “wrong” numbers, and modify them with an explanation. Do realize that there is a chance that the AUR unit may ask for proof. This is yet another reason why the solution to many tax issues is to document, document, document.

Tags:, ,
Posted in Gambling, Indiana, Iowa | 7 Comments »

Bad States for Gamblers

Monday, October 22nd, 2012

It’s been a while since I’ve listed out the bad states for gamblers. Here’s an updated list. Make sure you read the notes because while all of these states have tax systems that are problematic for gamblers, some impact amateurs while others impact professionals. Note that I do not cover the laws that impact gambling here (such as Washington State’s law that makes online gambling a Class C felony).

Connecticut [1]
Hawaii [2]
Illinois [1]
Indiana [1]
Massachusetts [1]
Michigan [1]
Minnesota [3]
Mississippi [4]
New York [5]
Ohio [6]
Washington [7]
West Virginia [1]
Wisconsin [1]

NOTES:

1. CT, IL, IN, MA, MI, WV, and WI do not allow gambling losses as an itemized deduction. These states’ income taxes are written so that taxpayers pay based (generally) on their federal Adjusted Gross Income (AGI). AGI includes gambling winnings but does not include gambling losses. Thus, a taxpayer who has (say) $100,000 of gambling winnings and $100,000 of gambling losses will owe state income tax on the phantom gambling winnings. (Michigan does exempt the first $300 of gambling winnings from state income tax.)

2. Hawaii has an excise tax (the General Excise and Use Tax) that’s thought of as a sales tax. It is, but it is also a tax on various professions. A professional gambler is subject to this 4% tax (an amateur gambler is not).

3. Minnesota’s state Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) negatively impacts amateur gamblers. Because of the design of the Minnesota AMT, amateur gamblers with significant losses effectively cannot deduct those losses.

4. Mississippi only allows Mississippi gambling losses as an itemized deduction.

5. New York has a limitation on itemized deductions. If your AGI is over $500,000, you lose 50% of your itemized deductions (including gambling losses). You begin to lose itemized deductions at an AGI of $100,000.

6. Ohio currently does not allow gambling losses as an itemized deduction. However, effective January 1, 2013, gambling losses will be allowed as a deduction on state income tax returns. Unfortunately, those gambling losses will not be deductible on city or school district income tax returns, so Ohio will remain a bad state for amateur gamblers.

7. Washington state has no state income tax. However, the state does have a Business & Occupations Tax (B&O Tax). The B&O Tax has not been applied toward professional gamblers, but my reading of the law says that it could be at any time.

Posted in Connecticut, Gambling, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Washington State, West Virginia, Wisconsin | 1 Comment »

Worse than Michigan: Gary, Indiana

Monday, December 28th, 2009

I was sent a link this morning to the Report of the Fiscal Monitor for Gary, Indiana. This suburb of Chicago located along Lake Michigan has, “…a proud history, tremendous physical assets and human resources. Today, however, the City’s future is at risk.”

If you read the report, that last sentence is an understatement. Here are some of the lowlights:

  • Majestic Star Casino (projected to bring in lots of revenue to Gary) first had a dispute with the city and now has entered bankruptcy.
  • Revenues are projected to fall from $79.0 Million in FY2010 to $62.6 Million in FY2014 while expenditures are projected to increase from $76.5 Million to $84.5 Million during the same time-frame.
  • Property Tax Revenues will fall 50% over time.
  • $34.3 Million in judgments and other legal obligations currently outstanding with another $1.1 Million under appeal.

The key for Gary is personnel costs. These are going to have to come down. Cities can’t print money; if the revenue coming in is $50 million that’s what must go out. The unions in Gary and other locations are going to have to get used to less, less, less rather than more, more, more. Otherwise, they’ll be learning all about Chapter 9.

Tags:
Posted in Indiana | Comments Closed