SALT

On October 15, 2009, TEI filed comments on Wisconsin's proposed combined reporting regulations. TEI's comments focused on: (1) the basis of assets owned by corporations that have not previously filed Wisconsin corporate income tax returns; (2) the calculation and sharing of research credits and carryforwards between members of a combined group; (3) the sharing of net business loss carryforwards between members of a combined group; (4) the mechanics of the controlled group election; and (5) the selection of a designated agent for a combined group.

On October 6, 2009, TEI filed comments opposing Colorado's economic nexus regulation. TEI maintains that if the Proposed Regulation is not revised to require some physical presence in the State, it will violate controlling Commerce Clause jurisprudence and subject both taxpayers and the State to months, and even years, of uncertainty and expense.

On April 28, 2009, TEI filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of the taxpayer in Geoffrey, Inc. v. Massachusetts Department of Revenue. In Geoffrey, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court concluded substantial nexus could be established where a taxpayer's only business in the state was licensing intangible property that generates income for the taxpayer. TEI maintains the Massachusetts court erred by concluding the bright-line, physical presence test embraced by the U.S.

On April 28, 2009, TEI filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of the taxpayer in Capital One Bank v. Commissioner of Revenue. In Capital One, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held the imposition of the Massachusetts Financial Institution Excise Tax on out-of-state taxpayers having no physical presence within Massachusetts did not violate the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. TEI maintains the Massachusetts court erred by concluding the bright-line, physical presence test embraced by the U.S.

On April 20, 2009, TEI filed comments with the Committee on Revenue and Taxation of the California State Assembly urging the defeat of legislation that would impose a 25-percent penalty on taxpayers who fail or refuse to furnish any information requested during a sales and use tax audit. TEI maintains the proposed legislation cannot achieve its stated purpose of advancing fairer and more efficient tax administration because it is vague, overbroad, and unnecessary and recommends the development of comprehensive administrative guidelines in lieu of a statutory amendment.

On February 23, 2009, TEI filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in VFJ Ventures, Inc. v. Surtees, urging the Court to hear challenges to Alabama's addback statute. Alabama's addback statute denies a deduction for ordinary business expenses paid to related corporations located outside Alabama. TEI's brief argues that the addback statute discriminates against interstate commerce in violation of the Commerce Clause and is unconstitutional.