18 October 2017 State and Local Tax Weekly for October 6 Ernst & Young's State and Local Tax Weekly newsletter for October 6 is now available. Prepared by Ernst & Young's State and Local Taxation group, this weekly update summarizes important news, cases, and other developments in U.S. state and local taxation. Massachusetts DOR adopts regulation imposing sales and use tax bright-line nexus on internet vendors The Massachusetts Department of Revenue (DOR) has adopted a regulation, 830 CMR 64H.1.7, that imposes a modified bright-line nexus standard for purposes of determining nexus and sales or use tax collection responsibilities for out-of-state internet vendors. The new regulation adopts nexus rules that are slightly more narrow than the broad, bright-line nexus standard previously set out in Directive 17-1 (issued by the DOR on April 3, 2017), which the DOR repealed before it went into effect with Directive 17-2 (issued on June 28, 2017). The regulation establishes a bright-line nexus rule, with exceptions. Under the regulation, the DOR will assert nexus over an out-of-state internet vendor "for each calendar year beginning with 2018, if during the preceding calendar year it had in excess of $500,000 in Massachusetts sales from transactions completed over the internet and made sales resulting in a delivery into Massachusetts in 100 or more transactions." From Oct. 1, 2017 through Dec. 31, 2017, the same test will be applied using Massachusetts sales and transactions occurring during the prior 12-month period (i.e., the period from Oct. 1, 2016 through Sept. 30, 2017). The regulation asserts that the DOR is not adopting a broad economic presence standard. Rather, it states the DOR is basing nexus on the following in-state activities: — Property interests in or the use of in-state software (e.g., "apps") and ancillary data (e.g., "cookies") that are distributed to or stored on the computers or other physical communications devices of an internet vendor's Massachusetts-based customers, and may enable the vendor's use of such physical devices; — Contracts or other relationships with content distribution networks1 resulting in the use of Massachusetts-based servers or the receipt of other related Massachusetts services; or — Contracts or other relationships with online marketplace facilitators or delivery companies resulting in the provision of Massachusetts sourced services, including, but not limited to, payment processing and order fulfillment, order management, return processing or otherwise assisting with returns and exchanges, the preparation of sales reports or other analytics and consumer access to customer service. The bright-line test established under the regulation does not apply to other types of vendors. Nevertheless, the regulation states that the nexus creating activities described above also would create nexus for other taxpayers. The regulation provides certain exceptions to the bright-line test. These exceptions appear intended to protect internet vendors whose websites can be accessed from Massachusetts but that have no other direct or indirect contacts with the commonwealth and who do not engage in any of the nexus-creating activities described in the regulation. Provisions of the regulation apply to sales starting on Oct. 1, 2017. The prior 12-month period is used to measure Massachusetts sales and Massachusetts transactions. Out-of-state internet vendors that have nexus under the new rules, but not otherwise, would not be considered vendors for any prior periods. If, however, an internet or non-internet vendor established nexus under the prior rules in previous periods, the DOR will apply the tax retroactively under the generally applicable look back rules. All States: Panelists on Ernst & Young LLP's (EY) final installment of the State income seminar series: analyzing tax base issues webcast provided in-depth technical insight on issues related to varying state approaches to net operating losses (NOLs) and dividend received deductions (DRDs). The webcast includes an overview of the differences between the federal NOL and DRD provisions and those in a variety of states, with a focus on state conformity considerations with IRC § 382 annual NOL valuation limitations and the separate return limitation year rules. The webcast is available for replay on the EY Thought Center website. Florida: The Florida Department of Revenue (Department) in response to a corporation's request for an agreement on the method by which income generated by or arising out of its qualified capital investment project should be determined for purposes of applying the Capital Investment Tax Credit (CITC), issued a technical assistance advisement (TAA) approving the corporation's request to treat 100% of its apportioned income generated in each year during the life of the CITC as project income. The amount of the CITC a qualifying taxpayer will be granted is based on the criteria met by the taxpayer (e.g., 5% of the cumulative capital investment but must be at least $25 million; 50%, 75% or 100% of the annual income tax liability generated by or arising out of the qualifying project, depending on cumulative capital investment; or tax due on the Florida corporate income tax return prior to applying for the credit that includes income generated by or arising out of the qualifying project). When the capital investment is at least $100 million, unused credit can be used in any one year(s) beginning with the 21st year after the commencement of project operations and ending with the 30th year after the commencement of project operations (the TAA provides information on how to determine unused credit carryforwards). Fla. Dept. of Rev., Tech. Assistance Advisement No. 17C1-005 (April 28, 2017) (released Aug. 28, 2017). New York City: The New York City Department of Finance properly exercised its statutory discretion in disregarding the installment method of accounting for a corporation's sale of property and imposing New York City General Corporation Tax (GCT) on the entire gain in the year of the sale because the corporation had ceased doing business in New York City after selling all of its assets under the installment method. The New York City Tax Appeals Tribunal found the corporation's maintenance of accounts at a bank branch in the city alone does not establish that the corporation was doing business there after the asset sale. If the corporation were permitted to report the gain on the sale using the installment method, it would avoid paying GCT on the deferred gain reflected in the payments due under the installment sale of the property after it ceased to do business in the city. In the Matter of 1018 Morris Park Ave. Realty Inc., No. TAT(E)14-4(GC) (N.Y.C. Tax App. Trib. Aug. 7, 2017). Ohio: On Sept. 26, 2017, the Ohio Supreme Court issued its decision in MacDonald v. Cleveland Income Tax Bd. of Rev., ruling that a Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan is an exempt pension for City of Cleveland income tax purposes. This decision concludes a controversy that had been making its way through Ohio courts for almost a decade. MacDonald v. Cleveland Income Tax Bd. of Rev., Slip Opinion No. 2017-Ohio7798. For additional information on this development, see Tax Alert 2017-1616. Alabama: The US Supreme Court (USSC) will not review the Alabama Supreme Court's decision in Jefferson County in which the Alabama court held that a constitutional amendment can be retroactively applied to cure a constitutional deficiency affecting a piece of enacted legislation that imposed a local sales and use tax in Jefferson County. Jefferson Cnty. and Jefferson Cnty. Comn. v. Taxpayers and Citizens of Jefferson Cnty., Nos. 1150326 and 1150327 (Ala. S. Ct. March 17, 2017), cert. denied, Dkt. 17-281 (U.S. S. St. Oct. 2, 2017). Mississippi: Amended regulation (Miss. Code R. tit. 35, part IV, Sub. 5, Ch. 1 § 201) expands the definition of who is known to be advertising hotel and motel rooms for rent to reach additional third parties. The terms "hotel" and "motel" are defined as "any entity or individual which is engaged in the business of furnishing one or more rooms, cottages or cabins designed for dwelling, lodging or sleeping purposes to transient persons and that are known to the trade as such." An adopted amendment expands "being known to the public as such" to include "[a]dvertising for rent to the general public, whether by the owner of the property or a third party." (emphasis added to highlight new text) The amended regulation was adopted Aug. 29, 2017. New York: The New York Department of Taxation and Finance (Department) has issued advice on the imposition of sales and use tax and telecommunications excise tax on a mobile virtual network operator's (MVNO) sales of prepaid calling minutes, texting rights, and data (collectively, "prepaid rights") through a variety of channels. The MVNO's sales of prepaid rights under its own brand name through third-party retailers are exempt for sales and use tax as a sale for resale; in this instance, the retailer must collect the tax at the point of sale. The MVNO, however, is subject to telecommunication excise tax on the gross receipts from these sales, as the MVNO rather than the retailer is the party liable for the mobile telecommunications services promised to the purchaser. The MVNO's sales of refills of its prepaid rights are subject to sales tax as the sale of a prepaid mobile calling service, and the MVNO is liable for the telecommunication excise tax because the refills constitute mobile telecommunications services to the extent the customer's place of primary use is in New York. Further, the sales of prepaid rights under the MVNO's own brand name to another MVNO qualify for resale exclusions for sales tax and telecommunications excise tax, because the second MVNO will resell that telecommunications service as its own service. Lastly, taxable sales should be sourced for sales tax purposes based on the location of the customer at the time of the purchase and for telecommunications excise tax based on the customer's place of primary use. N.Y. Dept. of Taxn. and Fin., TSB-A-17(1)C and TSB-A-17(18)S (Aug. 3, 2017). Puerto Rico: Puerto Rico's Treasury Department has announced in its Administrative Determination (AD) 17-19 that donations of tangible personal property and services to help with the aftermath of Hurricane Maria are not subject to sales and use tax (SUT). Specifically, donations of tangible personal property and services by foreign persons to: (1) hospitals; (2) nonprofit entities; (3) public and municipal instrumentalities of the Government of Puerto Rico and the US, including the legislative and judicial branches; and (4) individuals, are not subject to SUT. For additional information on this development, see Tax Alert 2017-1654. West Virginia: The U.S. Supreme Court will not review the West Virginia Supreme Court's ruling in CSX Transportation, in which it found a transportation corporation required to pay West Virginia's motor fuel use tax was entitled to a credit for sales tax paid to both other states and to the subdivisions of other states on purchases of motor fuel in the respective jurisdictions. Matkovich v. CSX Transportation, Inc., No. 15-0935 (W.Va. S. Ct. Nov. 16, 2016), cert. denied, Dkt. No. 16-1251 (U.S. S. Ct. Oct. 2, 2017). All States: The effective date has been set for the Environmental Mitigation Trust (Trust), which was created as part of the settlement of a civil enforcement case by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency against a car manufacturer that sold diesel-engine cars. As a result, grant funding from the Trust will soon be distributed among the 50 states, the Indian tribes, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia (each a "State" and collectively, the "States"). Accordingly, businesses and government entities should now begin to review their existing fleet inventory, as well as any planned fleet purchases, so they are prepared to file applications in all the appropriate States when the programs open to applications. For additional information on this development, see Tax Alert 2017-1617. Nebraska: The acquisition of an existing business, by itself, does not create or expand a microbusiness under the Nebraska Advantage Microenterprise Tax Credit Act, because the acquired business, property and jobs existed in the community prior to the acquisition of the business. The Nebraska Department of Revenue (Department) stated that for the purpose of calculating the tax credits it will treat the acquisition of an existing business as though the taxpayer had owned the business in the year prior to the year of application for the credit. The Department said in practice, this means that: (1) the purchase price of acquiring an existing business does not count as a new investment; and (2) the compensation and employer cost of health insurance paid by the previous owner of the acquired business in the year before the credit application is included in the base year, and that amount will be subtracted from the compensation and employer cost of health insurance in the tax year for the calculation of new employment. The Department noted that a taxpayer acquiring an existing business may earn tax credits on all purchases that otherwise meet the credit program's new investment criteria, and may earn tax credits on the compensation and employer cost of health insurance exceeding the amount paid to employees of the acquired business during the year before application. Neb. Dept. of Rev., Gen. Info. Letter No. 29-17-3 (Sept. 19, 2017). Missouri: The real and personal property of an entity that operates non-profit medical clinics did not qualify for a charitable property exemption because the entity did not provide substantial and persuasive evidence that the property is exempt under Mo. Const. Art. X, Sec. 6. To qualify for Missouri's charitable exemption requires meeting four requirements, and in this case the entity did not meet any of them. The entity owns the properties as a not-for-profit business, but it did not provide evidence establishing that it operates the properties on a not-for-profit basis. The entity also failed to prove that the property was "actually and regularly used exclusively for charitable purposes;" it failed to provide the percentage of patients that pay market rates compared to those who pay reduced rates or nothing. Further, the entity did not provide evidence based on personal knowledge that patients can receive free or discounted medical care, offerings, and services, and therefore, it did not prove the properties were dedicated unconditionally to charitable activity. Lastly, the entity failed to establish that the properties benefited society as it did not offer tangible evidence that it provides free or below cost services to those who need such services regardless of ability to pay. Northwest Health Services, Inc. v. Jones, Holt Cnty. Assessor, Nos. 16-60500 through 16-60503 (Mo. St. Tax Comn. Aug. 24, 2017). Puerto Rico: Puerto Rico's Treasury Department (PRTD) issued Information Bulletin 17-21 (IB 17-21) to extend the due date for filing certain returns and making tax payments due to Hurricane Maria. The PRTD also issued Administrative Determination (AD) 17-15_ suspending the biweekly payments of sales tax from Sept. 1, 2017, to Nov. 30, 2017, for those not considered large taxpayers. Furthermore, IB 17-21 provides a 30-day extension for taxpayers to submit to the PRTD documents and other information that may have been requested in the context of tax audit examinations and other similar procedures. For additional information on this development, see Tax Alert 2017-1652. Tennessee: The Tennessee Department of Revenue (Department) updated its guidance regarding procedures for reporting federal income revisions. In lieu of filing amended returns, federal income revisions must be reported to the Department on its Federal Income Revision Form. The following documentation must be included: (1) a completed Franchise and Excise Tax Federal Income Revision Form (taxpayers are instructed not to re-submit copies of franchise and excise tax returns previously filed); (2) a letter of explanation; (3) copies of pages from the Revenue Agent's Report and Federal Form 4549-A reflecting the examination changes; (4) for consolidated federal return filers, either a schedule with the changes that apply to the Tennessee taxpayer for which the revisions are being reported or a reconciliation reflecting all adjustments by entity; and (5) for taxpayers that file an amended federal return in relation to a federal audit adjustment, a copy of the taxpayer's Form 1120X or the first page of the amended federal return. If a taxpayer owes additional excise tax in one year but is owed a refund in another year, the taxpayer should apply the overpayment to the amount owed and can request a refund if adjustments result in a net overpayment. The guidance includes additional documentation requirements. Tenn. Dept. of Rev., Notice No. 17-16 (August 2017). Massachusetts: The Massachusetts Department of Revenue (Department) has initiated a suit against subsidiaries of an online retailer to force companies to provide sales data and identifying information with respect to the third-party vendors that use the online retailer's marketplace, and have sales to in-state customers and inventory held within the state. The Department stated that the purpose of the action is to assess the potential tax liabilities of the marketplace sellers. On Sept. 25, 2017, the same day that the Department filed suit, a Superior Court judge ordered the companies to produce to the Department the names, addresses, and federal identification numbers of their third-party vendors within 20 days. The Department originally had sought information from the companies regarding any third-party vendors that "store, or who have stored, any tangible personal property in any location in Massachusetts that is, or was, owned or leased by [the online retailer] or any other affiliated entity after Jan. 1, 2012." Massachusetts. v. Amazon Tech., Inc., No. 17-3065E, order (Mass. Super. Ct. Sept. 25, 2017). South Carolina: On June 21, 2017, the South Carolina Department of Revenue initiated a suit against an online retailer, asserting that the retailer, which operates an online marketplace for third-party sellers, was operating as a retailer or consignor within the state with respect to sales made through its marketplace, and should have been collecting tax on such sales to South Carolina customers. The online retailer argued that it lacks due process nexus with South Carolina because it does not have direct purposeful contact with the state when it provides services to third-party sellers in other states. The case is expected to be heard in early 2018. Amazon Services LLC v. S.C. Dept. of Rev., No. 17-ALJ-17-0238-CC (2017). Arizona: The Arizona Department of Revenue confirmed that beginning with the calendar year 2017, the new due date for filing Arizona Form A1-R, Arizona Withholding Reconciliation Tax Return or Form A1-APR, Arizona Annual Payment Withholding Tax Return and the corresponding Forms W-2 will be Jan. 31 (beginning on Jan. 31, 2018). For additional information on this development, see Tax Alert 2017-1609. Connecticut: The Connecticut Department of Labor recently notified EY that as of Jan. 1, 2018, it will no longer be able to administer the joint account election due to significant and permanent reductions in staff. As a result, and effective immediately, no new requests for joint accounts will be processed. In addition, all existing joint accounts will be dissolved effective Dec. 31, 2017. Each employer will receive notification of the dissolution from the Department. For additional information on this development, see Tax Alert 2017-1626. Missouri: The Missouri Department of Revenue confirmed that beginning with the calendar year 2017, the new deadline for filing Forms W-2 with the Department will be Jan. 31 (beginning with Jan. 1, 2018). The Department also announced that employers filing 250 or more Forms W-2 must file Forms W-2 and MO-W-3, Transmittal of Tax Statements, electronically. Filing on magnetic media will no longer be allowed for these employers. For additional information on this development, see Tax Alert 2017-1636. Texas: Upon request, the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) will extend the third quarter 2017 state unemployment insurance (SUI) contribution and wage report filing deadline from Oct. 31, 2017 to Dec. 31, 2017, for employers affected by Hurricane Harvey. Interest and penalties for late filing and payment will be waived. Before taking advantage of the extended filing due date, businesses should consider that failing to file the third quarter return by Oct. 31, 2017, could have an adverse impact on their 2018 SUI tax rate. The cut-off date for use of taxable wages in the computation of the tax rate each year is Oct. 31, 2017. For additional information on this development, see Tax Alert 2017-1645. Missouri: Emergency rule (Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 12, § 10-23.600) clarifies the application, inspection, and disciplinary processes and procedures for transportation network companies (TNC). A TNC is a corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, or other entity licensed by statute and operating in Missouri that uses a digital network to connect TNC riders to TNC drivers who provide prearranged rides. The regulations include a $5,000 application fee for initial TNC licensure. Fines of up to $500 can be imposed for a TNC's failure to comply with Missouri's statutory TNC licensing framework. The emergency rule expires Feb. 23, 2018. A permanent rule covering the same material has been proposed. Mo. Dept. of Rev., Emergency Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 12, § 10-23.600 (Mo. Register Sept. 1, 2017). Ohio: The U.S. Supreme Court will not review the Ohio Supreme Court's ruling in T. Ryan Legg Irrevocable Trust that a trust's capital gains on the sale of shares in a pass-through entity constituted a "qualifying trust amount" that can properly be allocated in part to Ohio because the trust qualifies as a pass-through shareholder for the business, bears the income tax consequences of the operation of the business, and enjoys the statutory right to access corporate information. T. Ryan Legg Irrevocable Trust v. Testa, No. 2016-Ohio-8418 (Ohio S. Ct. Dec. 28, 2016), cert. denied, Dkt. No. 17-84 (U.S. S. Ct. Oct. 2, 2017). South Carolina: The South Carolina Department of Revenue (Department) issued an advisory opinion discussing the application of the deed recording fee to various real estate transactions and summarizing the Department's longstanding opinion regarding the taxability of these transactions. The opinion explains how the fee is imposed, which party is liable for it, how "value" is determined for purposes of the fee, deductions from value, fee exemptions, what the fee is based on, and the general requirement to file an affidavit with the local clerk or register of deeds. The opinion includes frequently asked questions and answers to be used for reference regarding various deed recording fee issues (e.g., unrecorded deeds, refunds, charitable deeds, deeds to and from various entities, foreclosure deeds, bankruptcy deeds, and federal government deeds). This revenue ruling applies to all open periods and supersedes Revenue Ruling No. 15-3 and all conflicting previous documents and any conflicting oral directives. S.C. Dept. of Rev., Rev. Ruling No. 17-5 (Aug. 28, 2017). Washington: The U.S. Supreme Court will not review the Washington Court of Appeals ruling in Irwin Naturals, in which it held an out-of-state company selling nutritional supplements at wholesale and retail to Washington customers has nexus with the state for sales and use tax purposes. Nexus creating activities the company engaged in within Washington included having $5 million in retail sales; participating in various marketing activities such as new item presentation, category review, promotional planning, and educating sales staff and trade show exhibitions; and engaging in a wide variety of activities with its wholesale customers. Irwin Naturals v. Wash. Dept. of Rev., No. 73966-2-I (Wash. Ct. App., Div. 1, July 25, 2016), cert. denied, Dkt. No. 17-91 (U.S. S. Ct. Oct. 2, 2017). Washington: Non-profit hospitals are entitled to a business and occupation (B&O) tax deduction for amounts received from in-state and out-of-state's Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) coverage, and are not limited to such amounts received from only Washington's Medicaid and CHIP coverage. The Washington Board of Tax Appeals (Board) determined that the plain language of the statute (RCW 82.04.4311) and its stated legislative intent provided such a deduction. Regardless of this conclusion, the Board said it would have still reached the same decision under the "last antecedent rule" and the hospitals' analysis of the deduction's purpose showing that the deduction accrues to the Washington hospital rather than the non-resident patient or the state government paying for a patient's care. Peacehealth St. Joseph Medical Center v. Wash. Dept. of Rev., Nos. 14-123 and 14-124 (Wash. Bd. Tax App. March 29, 2017) (released Aug. 2017). Wisconsin: A partnership's conveyance of real property to the sole remaining partner was exempt from Wisconsin's real estate transfer fee (RETF) because the conveyance occurred after the partnership's dissolution as part of the process of winding up the partnership's affairs. The Wisconsin Tax Appeals Commission found the Wisconsin Department of Revenue's interpretation of Wisconsin law that conveyances from a corporation to a sole shareholder and from a limited liability company to a sole member are exempt from the RETF was reasonable, but its conclusion that a conveyance from a partnership to a sole partner under Wisconsin law is not subject to the RETF exemption was not supported by law or reason. JMJ Investments, LLP v. Wis. Dept. of Rev., No. 16-T-275 (Wis. Tax App. Comn. Aug. 3, 2017). New Jersey: In a case consolidating two appeals, BBB Value Services, Inc. v. N.J. Treasurer,2 the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division (Court) held certain gift certificates issued by a home furnishings retailer (retailer) before July 1, 2010, that could not be redeemed for cash were not subject to escheat under the state's Uniform Unclaimed Property Act (UUPA).2 Similar gift certificates issued later by the retailer's wholly owned subsidiary (subsidiary) were akin to "stored value cards" that were not yet due to be escheated nor to be escheated at face value when the subsidiary remitted them to the state. For additional information on this development, see Tax Alert 2017-1630. International: The European Commission (the Commission) published proposals on Oct. 4, 2017, for what is described as the largest reform of the European Union (EU) Value Added Tax (VAT) system in 25 years. The proposal will be forwarded to the European Parliament for consultation and to the Council of Ministers for their agreement. It will require unanimous agreement from all Member States in the Council before it can enter into force. For additional information on this development, see Tax Alert 2017-1637. International: The Dutch Supreme Court ruled on Sept. 29, 2017, that the position taken by a Dutch business, that recharging costs is an economic activity subject to value-added tax (VAT), is not supported by European Union (EU) or domestic case law. In its ruling, the Dutch Supreme Court held that, for a transaction to be subject to VAT, payment of a consideration is not the only requirement; the payment must be paid in return for an (identifiable) act (or for refraining from an act) as performed by the recharging entity in its capacity as a taxable person. The fact that a legal agreement exists between the parties involved that is the basis for recharging the relevant costs is not in itself sufficient for the recharges to be subject to VAT. For additional information on this development, see Tax Alert 2017-1613. All States: On Thursday, Oct. 19, 2017, from 12:00-1:00 p.m. EDT, Ernst & Young LLP will host a webcast on disaster relief, employee retention credits and other essential employer updates. Immediately after the extreme devastation caused by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria in the Southeastern US, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands, Congress enacted legislation creating a federal employee retention credit to assist employers that continued to pay wages to employees displaced because of inoperable work locations. In this webcast, EY professionals will explain where this federal tax credit is available, the employers that can benefit and the process for claiming the credit. Following are the topics included in this webcast: (1) understanding the federal employee retention credit, (2) legislative update, (3) update on IRS disaster relief announcements, and (4) employer considerations for future disasters. To register for this event, go to Disaster relief: employee retention credit. Illinois: On Nov. 2, 2017, from 4:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m, join EY as we discuss the ever-changing unclaimed property landscape, specifically in Illinois with the recent adoption of the Revised Uniform Unclaimed Property Act (IL-RUUPA). IL-RUUPA repeals the existing business-to-business (B2B) exemption and also adds a transitional provision to the law, requiring holders to look back over an eight-year transactional period. Per IL-RUUPA, holders will be required to reverse the B2B exemption previously taken and report additional due property by the May or November 2018 deadlines to ensure penalties and interest are not applied. The impact of IL-RUUPA is substantial and potentially material to holders of unclaimed property operating in Illinois or transacting with businesses in Illinois, which likely represents nearly all US organizations. Topics that will be covered during this webcast include: introduction and the shifting unclaimed property landscape, overview of B2B exemptions, due diligence requirements, details on IL-RUUPA and notable changes, practical application of the Illinois law changes, and credentials of the EY team and how we can assist. To register for this event, go to link. Because the matters covered herein are complicated, State and Local Tax Weekly should not be regarded as offering a complete explanation and should not be used for making decisions. Any decision concerning matters covered herein should be reviewed with a qualified tax advisor. 1 The term "contract distribution network or CDN" is "a person that operates an organized network of servers and other computer hardware that is generally placed in geographically distributed data centers within close proximity to internet users." 2 BBB Value Services, Inc. v. N.J. Treas., Nos. A-2973-14T3 and A-4880-14T3 (N.J. Super. Ct., App. Div., Sept. 21, 2017). Document ID: 2017-1724 |
