Washington Tax Decisions

2025
Title Date Document Description
Det. No. 22-0105, 44 WTD 070 (2025) 44WTD070.pdf

A taxpayer that operates a television station that is licensed and regulated by the FCC distributes content through over-the-air broadcasts and via retransmission by third-party MVPDs, such as cable operators and direct-to-home broadcast satellite providers. The taxpayer asserts that it engages in television broadcasting with regard to its retransmission to MVPDs, including its own locally-produced content, and is eligible for the preferential B&O tax rate available for radio and television broadcasting. We deny the petition.

Det. No. 22-0170, 44 WTD 093 (2025) 44WTD093.pdf

A . . . retailer petitions for correction of an assessment of retail sales tax and retailing B&O tax on grounds that the measure incorrectly includes estimated over and short cash register receipts determined using a projection based on a sample of DSTATs. We deny the petition.

Det. No. 22-0069, 44 WTD 064 (2025) 44WTD064.pdf

A seller of two separate real properties under a single transaction to a single buyer disputes the Department’s assessment of REET on the transaction, asserting that the consideration it received from the buyer under the transaction represented the true and fair value of the real properties. The seller objects to the Department’s use of the county assessed value as the selling price of the real property at the time of sale. We grant the petition.

Det. No. 22-0133, 44 WTD 081 (2025) 44WTD081.pdf

A data center owner disputes the assessment of B&O on gross income it received from its provision of data center space to certain customers, arguing that the income is derived from the rental of real property and is therefore exempt from B&O tax. We grant the petition in part and deny it in part, and remand the matter to the audit division for adjustments.

Det. No. 22-0196, 44 WTD 097 (2025) 44WTD097.pdf

A taxpayer disputes the assessment of REET on its sale of a certain [real] property. The Department assessed REET on the grounds that the sale was a nominal sale and the sale price did not reflect the fair market value. We grant the petition.