Over the last few decades, states have had the opportunity to broaden their income and franchise tax base by ensnaring a larger proportion of out-of-state taxpayers in their taxing regime through adoption of broad economic or factor-based economic nexus standards.

However, states have traditionally struggled to do the same with respect to their sales and use tax base because of the long-standing United States Supreme Court nexus decision in Quill Corp. v. North Dakota (1992).” 1 For nearly three decades, the dicta contained in Quill have prevented states from adopting economic-based nexus
standards with respect to sales and use taxes, requiring instead a more stringent physical presence standard (or “substantial nexus”).
The Supreme Court has repeatedly declined to hear challenges or cases related to Quill, until recently. Read More

Monika Miles

Almost every conversation in and around state tax consulting begins with nexus. Why? Because it’s still of utmost importance to companies to know whether they have nexus, or taxable presence, in a state such that the state can require them to register to collect and remit sales tax and/or to pay income based or franchise taxes. If a company doesn’t have taxable presence, then they are not obligated to file in a particular state. I’ve been practicing in state tax for longer than I care to admit, and I still have this conversation daily with existing clients and new clients as we talk about their potential exposure to taxes in multiple states. It doesn’t help that states are getting more aggressive and creative (maybe a little too aggressive and creative) in defining what constitutes nexus. Read More