|
|

|

| |
|
 |
| | Articles: (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ) |
| |

|
| |
Cybertax
- Taxation of Electronic Commerce
By
Charles R. Beaudrot, Esquire
Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP
crb@mmmlaw.com
404.504.7753
New
electronic technologies, particularly the communications technologies
associated with the Internet, have effectively eliminated not only
state, but national, borders on the information highway. As a result,
transactions are at risk of being subjected to tax in more than
one state, or indeed, in more than one country.
I.
Federal Tax Issues.
A.
Policy Issues. Electronic Commerce poses significant tax policy
and administration issues:
- Neutrality - Ideally the tax rules applicable to Electronic Commerce
should not place it at a disadvantage to other forms of trade.
- Administrative Complexity - The decentralization of the Internet
makes it difficult to track, monitor and collect tax with respect
to Internet transactions.
- Disintermediation - The loss of traditional third party intermediation
(for example, the banking system) results in an increased difficulty
in tracking and enforcing tax liability. The loss of withholding
agents is a central issue.
- Auditability - The ability to monitor the Internet challenges
tax administrators at all levels.
B.
Substantive Tax Issues.
Basic
Framework for International Taxation.
- For federal tax purposes, all domestic U.S. entities and businesses
are taxed on all income regardless of situs, subject only to credit
or treaty limitations on income derived from foreign sources.;o>
- Foreign entities, however, are taxed only on their U.S. source
income to the extent that the income is sourced in this country.
Source
of Income Concepts. The source of income concept plays an essential
role in international taxation because the country of source generally
has a right to tax income whereas the country of residence generally
avoids double taxation through a credit system or an exemption system.
Tax
Treaties. United States tax treaties generally give the residents
country an unlimited right to tax income while limiting or eliminating
the source countrys right to tax unless the non-resident is
somehow "present" for tax purposes in the source country.
In the tax treaties, this concept of presence takes the form of
"permanent establishment." A permanent establishment is
a more or less a fixed place of business or abode which permits
the source base country to exert taxation rights over income attributable
to that business.
Sourcing
of Electronic Commerce. Electronic Commerce complicates the issue
because the nature of Electronic Commerce transactions makes it
difficult to identify the source or where the activity occurred.
For example, does telecommunications or computer equipment owned
or used by a foreign person engaged in Electronic Commerce create
a fixed place of business of the foreign person in the United States
or other tax jurisdiction? Does the fact that a foreign enterprise
is using a U.S. based Internet provider create a physical presence
for tax purposes?
Classification
of Income. Another difficulty relates to the classification of income:
What is a "sale" vs. a "license" of software
for instance? Recently proposed regulations have gone a long way
to address this issue on computer software (Proposed Treas. Reg.
Section 1.861-18, 61 Fed. Reg. 58, 152 (XIII) 1996), however they
do not fit neatly into the traditional treaty format.
Definition
of Service Income. Another significant issue is when will payments
be attributed to sales of goods as opposed to service income. The
sourcing rules are different for these types of income.
Controlled
Foreign Corporations. One danger to the U.S. revenue system is the
potential ability of controlled foreign corporations ("CFCs")
to use the Internet to shift offshore substantial income and other
activities without being subject to U.S. tax jurisdiction.
Allocation
of Income. Another profound problem is the allocation of income
among a number of jurisdictions. The problem arises when a single
activity is conducted in multiple jurisdictions (e.g. an Internet
based worldwide research and design process, engineering or consulting
contract).
Summary. The sourcing and allocation of income on a worldwide basis as to
Electronic Commerce is an extremely difficult issue that neither
the applicable law nor the treaty regimes have begun to address.
For
an excellent discussion of these issues see as a reference Selected
Tax Policy Implications of Global Electronic Commerce, Department
of the Treasury Office of Tax Policy, November 1996 (available on
the Worldwide Web at http://www.ustreas.gov.)
II.
State Taxation Issues.
State
tax considerations present much the same issues as federal tax considerations.
Two issues dominate the state tax analysis -- "nexus"
for tax purposes and "situs" of income.
- Nexus. Nexus is the threshold test that must be met before a state
may tax income or transactions. Nexus is a Latin term and means
a link or connection with the taxing state. Nexus is different for
income tax and sales and use tax purposes. Current concepts used
to establish nexus for taxation purposes do not fit in the Electronic
Commerce era. Under current case law, some sort of physical presence
is required for nexus for sales and use tax, but not for income
tax. (National Bellas Hess, Inc. v. Dept. of Revenue of Illinois
386 U.S. 753 (1967); Quill Corp. v. North Dakota 504 U.S. 298 (1992)).
- Agency. A state may have nexus to tax based on the presence of agents
or representatives of the taxpayer in the jurisdiction. (National
Geographic Society v. California Board of Equalization 430 U.S.
551 (1977); Scripto Inc. v. Carson 362 U.S. 207 (1960)).
- Presence of Intangibles. Recent cases suggest presence of intangibles
may give rise to nexus. (Geoffrey, Inc. v. South Carolina Tax Commissioner
437 S.E.2d 13 (S.C., 1993)) [license of trade name to an in-state
user creates income tax nexus for the non-resident].
- Internet and Nexus. The states may seek to exploit the agency concept
to find that use of an Internet provider may create physical presence
and nexus in a state where the provider has a physical location.
- Situs Issues. States typically require multistate service providers
to source receipts to the state having the greatest proportion of
income-producing activity, as measured by costs of performance.
This will not be an easy calculus for a vendor of services over
the Internet. Does a seller of information services source its sales
to the state where its headquarters is located, its database is
located, or where its Internet Service Provider is located? Because
the costs of performance method for sourcing receipts relates back
to the industrial age, it is not readily adaptable to the sale of
services. Thus, an increasing number of states might be expected
to develop "market sourcing" regimes for such sales.
- Public Law 86-272. An intriguing income tax concern is the effect
of Electronic Commerce on the protections offered by Public Law
86-272 15 U.S.C. § 381 et seq. The law limits a states power
to impose income taxes on out-of-state sellers of tangible personal
property which confine their in-state activities to solicitation
of sales. Taxpayers that accept orders within the state exceed the
protection granted by the statute. The use of electronic data interchange
(EDI), a means of processing orders between commercial enterprises,
may be construed as an in-state acceptance of orders. A state may
contend that the posting of a home page with an Internet Service
Provider having an in-state presence, the instantaneous acceptance
of orders provided by EDI, and the receipt of immediate payment
is the equivalent of accepting an order in the state of the customers
location.
- ITAA. An excellent source of information regarding state and local
tax issues applying to Electronic Commerce and to information technology
generally is the Information Technology Association of America.
The contact there is Ms. Carol Cayo. The address is Suite 1300,
1616 N. Fort Myer Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22209-3106. Phone (703) 284-5352.
Fax (703) 525-2279. E-mail address: ccayo@itaa.org. ITAA has recently
released an extremely important report titled Straight Talk: Internet,
Tax and Interstate Commerce on December 17, 1996. This report is
available from the ITAA.
- The State of the Law. The law is extremely unsettled in this area.
- General Rule. Probably a majority of the states (including Georgia),
do not tax electronic services because they are regarded as tangible
personal property and state statutes do not extend to services
that would include on-line and Internet access. Creeping moves
in this direction continue, however.
- States Which Tax Electronic Commerce. Some states have a specific
tax on information services or treat Internet service providers
as subject to existing telecommunications tax. Notably these include
Connecticut, Florida, New Jersey, South Carolina, the District
of Columbia, Ohio and Texas which tax Internet service providers
or various ancillary functions.
- Expanded Nexus. Some states are asserting expanded income tax
nexus based on licensing of software into the state (e.g. Iowa).
- Cities get into the Act. Recently, cities such as Chicago and
Spokane have threatened to tax Internet service providers and
others engaged in Electronic Commerce.
- Federal Legislation Proposed. Representatives Cox and Wyden have
recently proposed legislation which would pre-empt state and local
power to tax in all these areas.
|
|
 |
|
| |
|

Copyright © 2010
Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP.
All rights reserved.
|
|