August 7, 2005
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Earned Surplus Throwback Takes a Hit From the Texas Court of Appeals.
On July 28, 2005, the Third District Court of Appeals (the "Court") issued an
Opinion in Home Interiors & Gifts, Inc. v. Strayhorn, No.
03-04-00660-CV, 2005 Tex. App. LEXIS 5908 (Tex. Ct. - App. July 28, 2005)
reversing the district court's grant of
summary judgment to the Comptroller. The primary issue involved is whether the
earned surplus throwback provision of the Texas franchise tax
unconstitutionally burdens interstate commerce as a result of unfairly
apportioning the tax base.
The throwback provision in Texas Tax Code Sec. 171.1032(a)(1) includes sales of
tangible personal property shipped from Texas into other states as Texas
receipts to apportion net taxable earned surplus if the taxpayer is not subject
to any tax on, or measured by, net income in another state. The Court concluded
that the interplay of the earned surplus and taxable capital components of the
franchise tax, coupled with the workings of Public Law 86-272, resulted in a
hypothetical risk of constitutionally impermissible multiple taxation. The
Court's reasoning was that sales to another state might be included in Texas
receipts if the taxpayer is not subject to an income-based tax in the other
state due to Public Law 86-272, but was still subject to a tax on its capital
in the other state. Thus, the Court found that due to such a hypothetical
scenario, an interstate corporation could be subject to tax that an intrastate
corporation would never bear. In essence, the interstate corporation could be
subject to both the earned surplus tax in Texas and the taxable capital tax in
another state, while a purely intrastate company would never be taxed on both.
As a result, the earned surplus throwback provision was held by the Court not
to be internally consistent. As a further result, the Court held that the
earned surplus throwback provision of the Texas Tax Code did not meet Commerce
Clause fair apportionment requirements laid down by the United States Supreme
Court in the controlling case of Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady,
430 U.S. 274 (1977). The Court suggested that a prospective credit or other
curative action by the legislature could correct the flaw.
It is likely that the Comptroller will file a petition for review with the
Texas Supreme Court. Consequently, the resolution of the matter may not yet be
final. However, for any report year for which limitations may run in the
interim, a protective refund claim should be filed to preserve the issue.
If you have any questions regarding the above information, please contact Mr.
Eric Stein, Principal, Ms. Sandi Farquharson, Senior
Manager, or Ms. Sarah Stroud, Manager, of the Ryan & Company Austin, Texas
office at 512.476.0022. Mr. Stein,
Ms. Farquharson,
and Ms. Stroud can also be reached
via email.
<< Back to Tax Developments