|Det. No. 15-0128, 36 WTD 368 (2017)||36WTD368.pdf||
Health care providers appeal the denials of their requests for refund of B&O tax paid on: (i) receipts from insurance carriers that participate in federal health insurance programs, asserting that Washington’s tax is preempted by federal law; and (ii) receipts from certain prescription infusions or injections. Taxpayers’ petitions are denied.
|Det. No. 15-0130, 36 WTD 379 (2017)||36WTD379.pdf||
A provider of gantry cranes to the [United States agency] appeals the assessment of government contracting B&O tax and use tax on grounds that it is a seller of tangible personal property liable only for retailing B&O tax, rather than a government contractor liable for government contracting B&O tax and use tax on materials incorporated into the work. We deny the petition.
|Det. No. 16-0117, 36 WTD 384 (2017)||36WTD384.pdf||
Taxpayer, a medical marijuana business, protests an estimated assessment of retailing B&O tax and retail sales tax. Taxpayer maintains it was a collective garden that does not conduct taxable transactions. In the alternative, Taxpayer maintains the sales of marijuana qualify for the retail sales tax exemption afforded prescription drugs. The assessment is affirmed.
|Det. No. 16-0141R, 36 WTD 394 (2017)||36WTD394.pdf||
Taxpayer requests reconsideration of Det. No. 16-0141. Taxpayer requests correction of an assessment of retailing [B&O tax] and retail sales tax on income received from providing customers digital certificates, maintaining that its service is excluded from the definition of DAS as a service that “primarily involves the application of human effort by the seller.” We affirm the assessment.
|Det. No. 16-0289, 36 WTD 399 (2017)||36WTD399.pdf||
An LLC that owns real property in Washington protests the assessment of REET on the transfer by one of its two members of a fifty-percent interest in Taxpayer to the other member. Taxpayer argues that the Department’s Special Programs Division used an incorrect amount as the “selling price” of the fifty-percent interest, and also should have assessed REET proportional to the interest percentage transferred. We grant in part and deny in part Taxpayer’s petition, and remand to Special Programs.
|Det. No. 16-0345, 36 WTD 403 (2017)||36WTD403.pdf||
A speculative builder petitions for correction of an assessment of use tax and/or deferred sales tax on materials and subcontractor services used in the construction of speculatively built homes. The assessment of tax is sustained.
|Det. No. 16-0350, 36 WTD 406 (2017)||36WTD406.pdf||
A LLC, that owns real property in the state, petitions for correction of an assessment of REET on the transfer of a controlling interest in the LLC asserting that the transfer of interest was a gift where there had been no change in the parties responsible for the debt on the property or in the source of funds used to make monthly mortgage payments. Taxpayer’s petition is denied.
|Det. No. 16-0399, 36 WTD 412 (2017)||36WTD412.pdf||
A taxpayer objects to the reclassification of its income from the retailing B&O tax classification to the wholesaling B&O tax classification. If the reclassification stands, the Taxpayer also objects to the measure of the tax being the income it received from the retail price of the goods.