home home Find a law or rule home Washington Tax Decisions home Washington Tax Decisions Washington Tax Decisions

June 30, 2014

Det. No.11-0347, 33 WTD 195 (2014) Registered investment advisory firm protests the denial of its refund claim and contends that it is entitled to the lower business and occupation (“B&O”) tax rate provided for “international investment management services” under RCW 82.04.290.  Taxpayer’s petition is granted in part and remanded in part.
Det. No.13-0156R, 33 WTD 199 (2014) [Taxpayer] seeks reconsideration of a determination that denied Taxpayer’s request for refund of service and other activities business and occupation (“B&O”) tax paid on payments received from a foundation. Taxpayer’s petition for reconsideration is denied, based on a conclusion that the payments received were to further a business purpose and not gratuitous.
Det. No.13-0198R, 33 WTD 204 (2014) A nonprofit hospital petitions for reconsideration of Determination No. 13-0198 (Determination), which affirmed the Department of Revenue’s denial of a refund of business and occupation (B&O) taxes it paid on revenues it received for providing medical services to employees under its employee medical benefit plan, and which sustained the B&O tax assessed on amounts the hospital excluded from its gross income as alleged discounts to its employees.  We deny the hospital’s petition for reconsideration.
Det. No.13-0330, 33 WTD 213 (2014) A real estate brokerage appeals service and other business activities business and occupation (“B&O”) tax assessed on amounts it received from its associate brokers as payment for their share of miscellaneous office expenses.  Taxpayer’s petition is denied in part and granted in part.
Det. No.13-0401, 33 WTD 217 (2014) Taxpayer leases digital equipment to movie theatres and also receives income in the form of virtual print fees from contracted movie distributors each time that distributor’s movie is booked for showing on a theatre screen equipped with Taxpayer’s leased digital equipment.  Taxpayer protests the Department’s reclassification of the income Taxpayer received from the virtual print fees from the retailing and the wholesaling business and occupation (B&O) tax classification to the service and other activities B&O tax classification.  Further, although Taxpayer reported the VPFs under retailing, it now argues that the fees are properly taxable under the income from royalties B&O tax classification.  We affirm the reclassification to the service and other business activities B&O tax classification and deny Taxpayer’s petition.
Det. No.14-0009, 33 WTD 223 (2014) A real estate development limited liability company (“LLC”) assessed real estate excise tax (“REET”) in a controlling interest transfer disputes the measure of tax for one parcel of real property and asserts the county assessor’s value is not the true and fair value of such parcel.  Petition denied.
Det. No.14-0102, 33 WTD 228 (2014) A real estate development limited liability company (“LLC”) assessed real estate excise tax (“REET”) in a controlling interest transfer disputes the measure of tax for one parcel of real property and asserts the county assessor’s value is not the true and fair value of such parcel.  Petition denied.