No Joy In Toyland

Posted on April 6, 2006 by Russ

Toys “R” Us operates in California and, of course, pays California taxes. California uses a three-part allocation formula based on unitary taxation to determine how much a corporation operating in multiple states must pay. Toys “R” Us came to the conclusion that if the sales portion of the formula included the principal amount of short-term notes, that their California tax would go down. So they filed an appeal, and took their case to court.

Toys ‘R Us lost in district court, and they appealed their claim for $4.8 million plus interest to the Court of Appeals (Third Circuit, CA). In FTB v Toys “R” Us, the main issue was whether the California rule results in an equitable apportionment formula. The Franchise Tax Board (FTB) successfully argued that if Toys “R” Us could include the principal, they could move between 11% and 28% of their annual sales to a different state by just relocating their Treasury Department.

The FTB tends go too far in its regulatory tactics and enforcement actvities; however, I completely agree with them and the Court’s decision. Perhaps principal could be included for a business that’s a financial services corporation. For a retailer, though, this doesn’t make sense.

Hat Tip: Central Valley Business Times

Posted in California | Comments Off on No Joy In Toyland

Being In Jail Is a Good Excuse

Posted on April 5, 2006 by Russ

The IRS wants to place a levy or a lien against you. The IRS says they mailed the notice, but it ended up at the wrong prison (you were in Attica, but the letter was sent to Gowanda; both are New York prisons). You request a hearing. The IRS sets a date for a conference (two years later), but the IRS chooses a date while you’re in solitary confinement and attending is out of the question. The IRS goes ahead with the levy. You go to Tax Court claiming you never had your fair hearing.

The Tax Court found that the petitioner had vigorously contested all his legal problems and it was likely he never received the original notice (it did, after all, go to the wrong prison). And the IRS should have rescheduled its conference; heading to New York City while you’re in solitary confinement just isn’t possible. The Tax Court ordered the IRS to give the petitioner a fair hearing.

Case: Butti v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 2006-66

Posted in Tax Court | Comments Off on Being In Jail Is a Good Excuse

Swearing at the Court Isn’t a Great Idea

Posted on April 5, 2006 by Russ

The IRS puts two liens against you. You fight the case, filing a lawsuit against the Commissioner of the IRS, claiming $4.5 million in damages for slander of title, inconvenience, aggravation, and generally annoying behavior. But you lose in District Court. You file an appeal to the Court of Appeals (here, the 10th Circuit). The IRS asks for the appeal to be summarily rejected, and that you pay a penalty for making a frivolous appeal.

If you’re going to file a lawsuit against the IRS, you had better have legal grounds; being annoyed isn’t enough according to the District Court that first ruled on this case. When the petitioner, Delbert Kyler, appealed, he told the Court that the IRS, “extorts money and property,” “exploits the power of the United States for criminal thuggery,” and that the U.S. Attorney was “obviously unschooled in the legal arts … [and] expects this court to bend over backwards and kiss his … allegedly royal ass.”

You and I may be laughing. Unfortunately for Mr. Kyler, the Court just wasn’t in a laughing mood, found his appeal frivolous, and ordered him to pay the “unschooled … legal arts” practitioners of the United States Attorney’s Office their legal fees of $8,000.

Case: Kyler v. Everson, 10th Circuit

Hat Tip: Tax Professor Blog

Posted in IRS | Comments Off on Swearing at the Court Isn’t a Great Idea

You Get Your Money’s Worth

Posted on April 5, 2006 by Russ

The Government Accountability Office (formerly known as the General Accounting Office) (GAO) released a study yesterday titled, “Paid Tax Return Preparers: In a Limited Study, Chain Preparers Made Serious Errors.” The study was also mentioned in today’s Wall Street Journal (paid subscription required).

The study showed that 10 out of 19 sample returns, side income that the preparer was told about wasn’t reported. Many preparers missed opportunities to save taxes on returns. None of the firms surveyed were named. Other errors found included unwarranted refunds (of over $1500), and unwarranted extra tax (of over $1500). Only two states, California and Oregon, require licensing of paid tax preparers.

The National Association of Enrolled Agents has been pushing for mandatory registration and licensing of all paid tax preparers. Legislation to accomplish that is inching its way through Congress.

Posted in Tax Preparation | Comments Off on You Get Your Money’s Worth

Mom and Dad Said I Didn’t Have to Pay Taxes

Posted on April 4, 2006 by Russ

No joking, that’s the argument a taxpayer used in Tax Court. Joe Kristan of Roth Tax Updates has the humorous details here. This Tax Court case is yet another entry in the “Don’t Try This Yourself” log. When you’re an adult, you get to make your own decisons; blaming your mother and father just doesn’t work. Being disowned by your parents is not a valid excuse to not pay your taxes.

Case: Gillings v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 2006-65

Posted in Tax Court | Comments Off on Mom and Dad Said I Didn’t Have to Pay Taxes

Protestor Strikes Out

Posted on April 3, 2006 by Russ

Many years ago, when I was running west coast operations for a telecommunications company, my office manger approached me with a problem. “There’s a gentleman out here who’s perfect for the in-house tech job, but he’s handed me these sheets for his W-4.” I looked at the sheets and realized that they were (what I now know as) typical tax protester stuff, claiming he wasn’t a citizen of the United States but a citizen of California, and thus exempt from US taxes. My office manger continued, “He refuses to fill out the W-4.”

That company had a policy that until all the employment paperwork had been completed, an employee couldn’t start working. I went to the potential new hire and told him, after introducing myself, “You can either fill out a W-4 or we’ll find someone else.” He protested, and I cut him off, telling him that we were a business and didn’t have time for tax shenanigans. He left and we found someone else.

Today the Tax Court looked at the case of a tax protestor. He submitted similar documentation in his job as a car salesman. He filled in his tax return for two years with all zeroes. The IRS didn’t find this as humorous as you and I would. Neither did the Tax Court. After admonishing the protestor for the error of his ways (and warning that he faced a penalty if he advanced the same groundless arguments in the future), the Court found for the IRS.

You can find the Tax Protestor FAQ here.

Case: Paikowski v. Commissioner, T.C. Summary 2006-48

Posted in Tax Court | Comments Off on Protestor Strikes Out

Stupid Sales Tax Tricks, California Style

Posted on April 3, 2006 by Russ

You’re a business owner, and you’ve just won a nice contract with the State of California. Don’t forget to add sales tax.

Yes, if you’re selling to the State of California, you must charge California sales tax. Let’s look at this logically, based on a $10,000 sale to a state agency.

We’ll assume that the sale is made in Orange County (sales tax rate of 7.75%), resulting in sales tax of $775.00. You collect $10,775, keep $10,000, and then remit $775 back to California. The Board of Equalization collects the money, and then turns it over to the General Fund. The General Fund allocates the money to the appropriate state and local agencies, including the agency that you sold to.

Wouldn’t life be simpler if the state were exempt from state sales tax? You could argue that local and state agencies wouldn’t benefit from the sale. However, the real beneficiaries of California’s policy are the bureaucrats administering sales tax. California’s rules increase their workload and lead to more employees. If California were to exclude government sales from sales taxes, sales tax revenues would go down, of course. But so would expenses.

In the end it would be a wash (as far as direct revenues and expenses). However, because you would need fewer employees to administer the Board of Equalization, and a bit less time for companies to prepare their quarterly reports to the BOE, costs would decrease and productivity would increase.

What are the chance of this happening? Just about zero.

Posted in California, Sales Tax | Comments Off on Stupid Sales Tax Tricks, California Style

Reiner Resigns; Baca Supports Vegas, Denver & Phoenix

Posted on March 31, 2006 by Russ

Rob Reiner resigned as head of the First-5 Commission on Wednesday, as more pressure mounts to do a thorough investigation. Indeed, as the Chronicle story notes, both Democrats and Republicans believe something’s fishy with how the Commission spent money raised through the cigarette tax.

Meanwhile, Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca and other law enforcement officers came out in support of Proposition 82, the help Las Vegas, Phoenix, and Denver Initiative (aka the tax the wealthy for mandatory pre-school initiative). Support for Proposition 82 has fallen to 52 percent, which is about 30 percent higher than it should be if voters realized the economic consequences. There’s still no word if the Nevada Development Authority will sponsor advertisements supporting Proposition 82.

Posted in California | Tagged | Comments Off on Reiner Resigns; Baca Supports Vegas, Denver & Phoenix

M Madness

Posted on March 31, 2006 by Russ

I live and work in beautiful Orange County, California. Several years ago the voters of this county passed a 0.5% sales tax increase to fund transportation issues (such as the widening of Interstate 5 through Orange County). That sales tax increase expires at the end of 2011. The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) administers the tax, and has been running a somewhat blatant advertising campaign in support of renewing Measure M. Just one little problem: that’s probably illegal.

No matter what your view is on Measure M, it’s irrelevant; it’s illegal (under California law) for a government agency to publicly campaign for a proposition. And as the Orange County Register noted in an editorial, the OCTA issued an 8-page campaign mailer an 8-page informational brochure praising the benefits of Measure M. Sort of sounds like the campaign for pre-schools that Rob Reiner ran. You can see the ad/brochure here.

While Rob Reiner has suffered the consequences of his actions, it’s uncertain whether the OCTA will. Hopefully, the Legislature and the Orange County Board of Supervisors will tell the OCTA to spend their money on improving the freeways and not on glitzy campaign literature informational brochures.

Posted in California | Comments Off on M Madness

CTEC: A Bit Behind The Times

Posted on March 30, 2006 by Russ

CTEC, the California Tax Education Council, released a press release reminding taxpayers of the automatic extension available (Form 4868). The press release noted that the extension, which is an extension of time to file, not pay, is for four months.

Well, that used to be correct.

This year the automatic extension is for six months, a rare case where the IRS is matching how California has handled extensions.

Somehow it seems appropriate that the agency that regulates some California tax preparers (CTEC regulates all preparers in California except EAs, CPAs, and attorneys) isn’t aware of the rules.

Posted in California | Comments Off on CTEC: A Bit Behind The Times