Washington Tax Decisions for 06/29/2018
|Det. No. 17-0211, 37 WTD 165 (2018)||06/29/2018||37WTD165.pdf||
A credit card processor protests B&O tax imposed on interchange fees paid to its sponsoring bank on the grounds that it never actually receives the interchange fees and that the interchange fees are excludible from gross income as an advance or reimbursement under WAC 458-20-111. The petition is denied.
|Det. No. 17-0234, 37 WTD 171 (2018)||06/29/2018||37WTD171.pdf||
A telecommunications company sought review of an assessment of service and other activities B&O tax imposed on receipts of USF support distributions. The taxpayer asserted that the Department cannot tax those receipts because the taxpayer previously paid B&O tax on the revenue it used to contribute to the USF. The taxpayer also asserted that the assessment should be waived based on the Department’s silence on the issue in prior audits. The Department denies the taxpayer’s petition.
|Det. No. 18-0007, 37 WTD 177 (2018)||06/29/2018||37WTD177.pdf||
Taxpayer protests an assessment of successorship liability. We hold that Taxpayer was a successor because Taxpayer received more than 50% of the predecessor’s assets.
|Det. No. 18-0010, 37 WTD 183 (2018)||06/29/2018||37WTD183.pdf||
A Washington resident requests a refund of use tax paid on a boat the resident asserts was never used in Washington. Because there is no evidence that the Washington resident ever used the boat in Washington, the petition is granted.
|Det. No. 18-0127, 37 WTD 187 (2018)||06/29/2018||37WTD187.pdf||
A LLC protests the Department’s denial of its annual report filing extension for the preferential aerospace B&O tax rate arguing that the reports were due when it became eligible to claim the tax preference when it filed its tax returns with the Department. We deny the petition.
|Det. No. 18-0135, 37 WTD 192 (2018)||06/29/2018||37WTD192.pdf||
A provider of . . . services appeals the assessment of evasion penalties on grounds that it did not intentionally evade its tax liability, and delinquent penalties on grounds that its failure to pay was due to circumstances beyond its control. We deny the petition.