This month we travel to the birthplace of religious freedom in America, the state of Maryland. Formed by George Calvert in the early 17th Century, the state was intended as a refuge for persecuted Catholics from England. George Calvert was the first Lord of Baltimore and the first English proprietor of the then-Maryland colonial grant. Maryland was the seventh state to ratify the U.S. Constitution, and played a pivotal role in the founding of Washington D.C., which was established on land donated by the state.
As a semiconductor manufacturing company, what do you need to know about nexus and multi-state tax laws? Despite the fact that much of the manufacturing is often done in other countries (often by third party contract manufacturers), many of these businesses engineer and test the devices domestically, which often makes them subject to a wide range of laws from various states across the country.
In the most recent Washington legislative session, lawmakers declined to extend several important research and development (R&D) tax incentives in Washington. The High Technology B&O Tax Credit for R&D Spending and the High Technology Sales and Use Tax Deferral/Waiver, will expire December 31, 2014. While there is some possibility these incentives will be restored in 2015, taxpayers should proceed as if these incentives will expire permanently at December 31, 2014.
Many taxpayers know of the high technology B&O tax credit, which provides a B&O tax credit of roughly 1.5% of taxpayer’s research and development expenditures. Although not as well known, the high technology sales and use tax deferral is also a valuable incentive to high-technology businesses investing in research and development facilities. Although the Read More
California State Board of Equalization Manufacturing Exemption from Sales and Use Tax is Scheduled to Begin in July, 2014
A law created by Governor Brown’s 2013 Economic Development Initiative allows certain businesses in manufacturing or in the fields of biotechnology or physical, engineering, and life sciences to purchase or lease manufacturing or research and development equipment at a reduced sales and use tax rate for purchases occurring on or after July 1, 2014. (See Assembly Bill 93 (Stats. 2013, Ch. 69) and Senate Bill 90 (Stats. 2013, Ch. 70); and Revenue & Taxation Code section 6377.1.) The California State Board of Equalization (BOE) will be the agency overseeing and implementing this manufacturing exemption. Read More
Proposed Treasury Regulations issued on September 5, 2013 provide that if expenditures qualify as research or experimentation expenditures, it is irrelevant whether a resulting product is ultimately sold or used in the taxpayer’s trade or business.
As a synopsis, I.R.C. § 174 allows taxpayers to elect to take a current deduction for research and experimentation expenditures in the tax year they are paid or incurred or to defer certain research and experimentation expenditures and amortize them. Since its enactment in 1954, I.R.C. § 174(c) has provided that I.R.C. § 174 does not apply to any expenditure for the acquisition or improvement of land, or for the acquisition or improvement of property to be used in connection with the research or experimentation and of a character that is subject to depreciation or depletion. In 1957, the IRS (hereinafter the “Service”) issued Treas. Reg. § 174-2(b)(1) and (b)(4) to implement this rule. This is referred to as the “Depreciable Property Rule”.
Tax professionals have long debated on whether the sale of a product resulting from otherwise qualifying research or experimentation expenditures should subsequently disqualify those expenditures from I.R.C. § 174 treatment. The Service had previously taken the position that I.R.C. § 174(c) precluded I.R.C. § 174 treatment in the case of a subsequent sale of a Read More