West Virginia Tries To Stretch Its Taxing Authority Far And Wide

from the take-and-grab dept

Yesterday we brought attention to Baltimore’s shameless scheme to line its coffers by trying to impose a large telecom tax on VoIP providers, like Vonage. It seems that government just can’t resist putting its hands in whatever cookie jars it can find. But at least Baltimore’s scheme seems to be rooted in a legitimate law (however misguided it may be). Compare that to West Virginia, which would like to tax the profits (via Hit & Run) of any company that has customers in the state. Right now it’s going after Delaware-based credit card company MBNA, in a move that appears to be in blatant violation of the law. MBNA may take the case to the Supreme Court, but if the Supreme Court refuses to hear it, or rules in favor of of West Virginia, it could set off a major round of states trying to tax the profits of companies that sell in their state. Obviously, this would have major implications for all kinds of companies, including tech firms, whose business is often unrelated to their specific geography. The big winner in this has to be Baltimore, which looks much better in light of what its neighbor is doing.


Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “West Virginia Tries To Stretch Its Taxing Authority Far And Wide”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
24 Comments
Joe Smith says:

borders

Why stop at the border. Why not tax Nokia on the profits it makes from its cellphones being sold in the state, why not tax Hollywood on the profits it makes from movies shown in the state, why not tax Las Vegas casinos on the profit they make when state residents go to Vegas. All of those make as much sense as taxing MBNA.

Bumbling old fool (profile) says:

Re: Shiva analogy not in the best taste....

Never assume conspiracy where simple incompetence can suffice. (badly quoted).

Interesting, many americans think Shiva is a symbol of greed with many arms to reach and grab/hoard with.

The context used was not in bad taste, it was just plain incorrect.

(BTW- I don’t think Joe is incompetent, just that he made a rather common mistake)

NetJD says:

Re: Shiva analogy not in the best taste....

Susheel,

When most people hear Shiva, at least those unfamiliar with Hinduism, most would envision a multiple armed goddess, which may be why the author used Shiva as an analogy. I really dont feel the author’s intention was to slight or disrespect anyone’s beliefs or feelings, or Shiva for that matter.

May the coming year bring you Peace and Prosperity

Anonymous Coward says:

As noted above, the two tax years at issue are 1998 and 1999. In 1998, MBNA’s gross receipts attributable to West Virginia customers amounted to $8,419,431.00, and in 1999, its gross receipts amounted to $10,163,788.00. For tax year 1998, MBNA paid a West Virginia Business Franchise Tax (See footnote 1) of $32,010.00 and a West Virginia Corporation Net Income tax (See footnote 2) of $168,034.00. For tax year 1999, MBNA paid a Business Franchise Tax in the amount of $42,339.00 and a Corporation Net Income Tax in the amount of $220,897.00.

Did you read the actual case or did you did just read the rantings of the tax opponent on the Baltimore Sun. Come on. The company does substantial business in West Virginia and should pay taxes on the proceeds it gathers there. It is not like they are getting tax revenue from transactions from other states, they getting tax revenue from the income they earned and solicited in West Virginia.

Still feel the same? If so, I guess you are a bigger fan of coporate tax shelters than I am. The Commerce Clause was not to be used to prevent a state from collecting revenue earned and generated within the state, but to prevent tariffs. In this instance, they are not treating an out of state company different than they are treating a company whose HQ happens to be in West Virginia.

“in a move that appears to be in blatant violation of the law” Really? How? What precedent are they violating? What federal statute on the books are they violating? I guess it easier to make baseless accusations than actually back it up.

If you actually read the lawsuit, they will explain their reasoning. Did you consider that the company may not appeal because they think their facts are bad. From the numbers listed, they had a fairly large business going on in West Virginia.

Susheel Daswani (user link) says:

Shiva

“Death and Destruction” is but an incomplete conception of Shiva. Change is both destructive and creative:

“Shiva is responsible for change both in the form of death and destruction and in the positive sense of the shedding of old habits. In Satyam, Shivam, Sundaram or Truth, Goodness and Beauty, Shiva also represents the most essential goodness.”

From http://www.sanatansociety.org/hindu_gods_and_goddesses/shiva.htm

Susheel Daswani (user link) says:

Shiva

NetJD,
May you too have a happy holidays and good luck in the new year.

This said, regardless of the author’s intention, his use of ‘Shiva’ is based on misinformation and only serves to perpetuate this misinformation. I don’t think Joe needs to conflate Shiva with ‘take-and-grab’ tactics in order to make his point. He has every right to, of course, but it it is in bad taste and wholly unnecessary.

TonyaRashcan (user link) says:

So if I am reading this right the state wants to get taxes off of any sales that occur in that state. OK, makes sense as it helps get back some of the money that corps try to avoid paying by putting their HQ in the Bahamas. Doesn’t seem any different then a sales tax.

Question is, what happens when I go to a different state or country? Are charges that were added on while I was vacationing in Vegas taxed by the state I live in, or does what happens in Vegas stay in Vegas?

Brad says:

Taxes

The reason this is dangerous is because (at least in California, where I live) tax must be collected on any income generated by a company that has employees, service people, or equipment in the state. As I understand it, this credit card company doesn’t. That’s why this is bad.

Think of Amazon. They do millions of dollars of business every week in various states, and pay no sales tax (and charge none) because the product is shipped to you, but the actual “sale” takes place online, outside of any state’s jurisdiction.

So being able to tax a company that doesn’t have employees in your state sets a dangerous precedent for any company that conducts business online. And it opens the flood gates.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...