10 new documents this month.
https://star.comptroller.texas.gov/view/202408016H
In this hearing, a taxpayer did not follow administrative practice and procedure and their claims were denied. This is a common failing for self represented taxpayers. If a taxpayer doesn't follow procedural requirements, they have little chance of receiving the possible benefit of a hearing.
https://star.comptroller.texas.gov/view/202408015H
Again, we have findings where the taxpayer made claims, but either did not appropriately or correctly present evidence and their claim was denied.
Some interesting points:
There was an agreed waiver of ~3 years of interest due to the delay for notice of hearing.
More specific than the above blurb, we have a contractor asserts they are doing work out of state but picking up materials in Texas, however because the can only prove materials were purchased and that the out of state jobs existed, explicitly not tying the purchases to the out of state job, the claim was denied. The testimony on which the taxpayer asserted he drove the materials out of state himself was insufficient to meet evidentiary standards.
This is a common situation in construction and finding sufficient records after the fact is troublesome, and should be more on the minds of contractors doing this sort of work.
https://star.comptroller.texas.gov/view/202408017H
This is a c store with fraud penalty contest of estimate. Mark ups were beer 129.88%, tobacco 117.19%, soda 182.57%, and general merchandise 155.72%. Seems pretty standard, with general merchandise being low, but likely making up a very small part of the audit.
Again this is a situation where the taxpayer asserts fault in the audit, but does not appropriately submit evidence, and is found invalid.
https://star.comptroller.texas.gov/view/202408014L
PLR for a very specific multinational corporation issue. Beyond my professional interest.
https://star.comptroller.texas.gov/view/202408013L
PLR that pre-authorizations for medical procedures, are not taxable. What's interesting here, is the comptroller does point out the language that is in the current data processing rule :
As part of its service, Taxpayer performs activities that may meet the definition of a data processing service. However, these activities are performed to facilitate the pre-authorization service. Taxpayer’s use of a computer to facilitate its service requires a trained individual’s understanding and skill to either approve or deny pre-authorization requests (e.g., the use of the computer as a tool in providing the service requiring specialized knowledge or interpretive skills). STAR Accession No. 200502776L (Feb. 17, 2005). Staff uses their specialized knowledge when manually reviewing requests to determine insurance coverage. Therefore, Taxpayer’s pre- authorization service is not a taxable data processing service.
What's interesting is something of that language may be changed soon.
https://www.sos.texas.gov/texreg/archive/September132024/Proposed%20Rules/34.PUBLIC%20FINANCE.html
The proposed rule seems to remove some of the language, however likely won't see action until after this upcoming session.
https://star.comptroller.texas.gov/view/202409007H
Nothing too interesting here. Restaurateur trying to tackle 'insufficient documentation' with limited success. If it's not abundantly clear, this is not an issue that fairs well in hearings.
https://star.comptroller.texas.gov/view/202409008H
Golf Course! A relatively unusual taxpayer type. The taxpayer apparently charged tax on everything, and did not pay tax on range balls, as they believed they were for resale. This is a care custody and control issue that likely would not find purchase in hearings, and in my opinion, doubtfully find purchase elsewhere as the situation appears pretty cut and dry. Range balls are used and returned to the range, which subverts the 'integral transfer' that has been seen as necessary to purchase that type of item without tax.
https://star.comptroller.texas.gov/view/202409010H
This is a "digital marketing services for its clients, including website design, social posting, content creation, and reputation management" company and it's pretty bad. What's very interesting is this was done as a 6 month sample, rather than any other sampling methods. It's not a preferred one so I would be interested in why it was used. It's not preferred for, among other reasons, looking at only a few months in an audit is generally less representative than random transactions throughout.
What's additionally interesting in the because some of the services were taxable all income was considered taxable, which jumps a couple steps when much of the advertising rule is on the exemptions. I would suspect this person would have done much better if they had representation from the start of the audit, as this looks to be unreasonable.
https://star.comptroller.texas.gov/view/202410001M
Emma put out a memo on some technical aspects of mobile telecommunications services. Beyond the scope of my professional interest.
https://star.comptroller.texas.gov/view/202410002W
The Governor issued a disaster declaration in 143 counties. This offer some relatively modest sales tax exemptions that can be more thorroughly reviewed here. https://comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/publications/94-182.php
The declaration with all of the counties can be found here. https://gov.texas.gov/uploads/files/press/DISASTER_wildfire_disaster_proc_IMAGE_10-14-2024.pdf. I am not aware of a OCR'd version or table version of this document.
