Weaver’s Post

What does this Tennessee Department of Revenue notice about my liquor bond mean?   "Public Chapter 1069, effective July 1, 2024, requires that tax bonds for liquor-by-the-drink accounts be no less than $10,000. This includes both full-service licensees and wine-only licensees. Please review your bond to ensure you meet this new requirement. The department will conduct a bond review in September using the new $10,000 bond requirement."   Will Cheek has the answers at #LastCall >> https://lnkd.in/eZbqsdGR   #LiquorLaw #LiquorLicenses #AlcoholLaw #Tennessee #TaxBonds   

Question: So when's the best time to get in and meet with your local representative or senator to tell them what's important to you in the coming 2025 tax debates? Answer: Now. Right now. Question: But are legislators really thinking about all this stuff yet? Answer: They will be if you talk to them now. Question: Shouldn't I wait until the next Congress settles in? Answer: Do it now. Do it then too. And then do it a couple months later. Even in my first year of working on Capitol Hill, which was 2017 and I didn't know all that I was doing -- I equate that to being called up to the majors just as your team goes to the World Series -- I was with-it enough to see the foolishness of stakeholders asking us for first meetings in the weeks and days before finalizing major legislation. That's a bad idea.

Taxes can be a SPOOKY topic but don't let this be you... Message us today, we are here to help with all your tax needs!✨ #thefinancegirls #halloween #spooky #foryoupage

Michel, Gray & Rogers L.L.P Update: Can a taxpayer lose a Chapter 41 protest and later bring a Section 25.25(c) motion to correct raising essentially the same complaint? The recent Supreme Court of Texas ruling in J-W Power Company v. Sterling County Appraisal District confirms that the answer is yes. In this case, J-W Power protested the taxable situs of its natural-gas compressors under Chapter 41 of the Texas Property Tax Code. After their protests were denied—and without appealing to the district court—they subsequently filed motions to correct the appraisal roll under Section 25.25(c). Their Section 25.25(c) argument? Essentially the same as their Chapter 41 protest: the property is dealer’s heavy equipment inventory and must be taxed in the county where JWP maintains its inventory, not at the location where the equipment might otherwise be physically located, i.e., no taxable situs. The key question to SCOTEX was whether JWP’s Section 25.25(c) motions were precluded by the doctrine of res judicata due to their earlier Chapter 41 protests. The appraisal districts contended that JWP was attempting to relitigate issues already denied. But JWP argued that Subsection (l) of 25.25 permits a motion to be filed regardless of any prior protests. SCOTEX honed in on the language of Section 25.25(l): “A motion may be filed . . . regardless of whether . . . the owner of the property protested under Chapter 41 an action relating to the value of the property.” This wording was critical. According to SCOTEX, it clearly establishes that prior protests do not prevent a taxpayer from filing a Section 25.25(c) motion, regardless of the nature of those protests. In the end, the court sided with JWP, reversing the lower courts’ decisions and remanding the case for further consideration. Takeaway: A taxpayer can lose a Chapter 41 protest and still bring a Section 25.25(c) motion to correct on essentially the same issues. This important clarification empowers taxpayers and emphasizes the need to navigate the complexities of property tax litigation. Stay informed and vigilant in your representation! https://lnkd.in/gCQU4_m8 (subscribe here for email updates on future property tax news)

Three important takeaways for Leaf Fans (sigh...) ….everyone else: 1) Generally, bonuses, signing or otherwise, are subject to full taxation - and very often at the top tax rate (and for that matter most salary deferral arrangements as well). Advance planning and good advice is key. 2) CRA Views and interpretation are not law: While its surprising that CRA is challenging the the Treatment of the bonus under the US-Tax Treaty and their own long-held position - its not overly surprising when there are millions of dollars involved. 3) Individuals claiming exemption under tax treaties must exercise extra caution. The rules are extremely complex. Get in touch https://lnkd.in/e2tW5P9Q

Indiana--SB 183 (if signed by governor, will be effective July 1, 2024) "Provides that a county fiscal body may adopt an ordinance to exempt mobile homes and manufactured homes located in the county from property taxation (exemption ordinance). Provides that for an annual assessment date in which an exemption ordinance is in effect, a county assessor shall not assess a mobile home or a manufactured home granted the property tax exemption. Specifies that the discretionary adoption of an exemption ordinance does not apply to mobile homes and manufactured homes that are assessed as: (1) inventory; or (2) real property; under the property tax laws and administrative rules. Makes conforming changes." SB 183; Indiana; 2024 https://lnkd.in/gD9pKJeD

Do you know what needs to be included in All-In-Price advertising? Some examples include: Freight PDI-PDE (pre-delivery inspection/expense) Admin fees and OMVIC transaction fees Government levies (air tax, Ontario green levy, luxury tax, etc.) Pre-installed products/services like warranties or theft deterrents What if a dealer tries to add fees later? Walk away, find another dealer, and report them to OMVIC’s consumer support team. Learn more at https://lnkd.in/eD5-k2ZK

By now, there is quite a bit of market experience of Pillar 2 (P2) and it’s clear that the easiest and least painful way out of the rules is through the Transitional CbCR Safe Harbours (TCSH). Of course, you need to ensure that your CbC Report is Qualified, but after that, it is relatively light compliance exercise that avoids the need to get the hundreds of data points required for the full GloBE rules. After all, MNEs like to keep it simple (https://lnkd.in/eskdfqCK) and many of them are hopeful that TCSH will end up becoming permanent safe harbours in some shape or form. Of course, if operations in a jurisdiction are reasonably profitable and not small, the only way to qualify for TCSH is to meet the Simplified ETR Test. And that requires paying 15% tax in 2024, 16% in 2025 and 17% in 2027. So there are good reasons why TCSH treats such jurisdiction as low risk. But then again, most MNEs don’t seem to be in the business of racing to the bottom and a 17% tax rate is generally considered acceptable. The conventional wisdom after the P2 rules came out was that it would push everyone to adopt a QDMTT, so that each country would collect the minimum tax they needed for that jurisdiction to be outside the scope of that rules. And indeed, many countries adopted or are in the process of adopting a QDMTT, including countries with tax rates below 15% (meaning that QDMTT almost always applies for in scope MNEs). But that strategy means that MNEs still have to do full GloBE calculations for your country, creating a lot of compliance burden. So, are those countries really winning? Or would they be better off with a corporate tax regime with a slightly higher rate that means MNEs can benefit from TCSH? In the end, a lower compliance burden could be more appealing than the lowest possible tax burden. Obvious disclaimers: this is not advice. These views are my own and do not necessarily represent my employer.

Check out this video on taxes. #IncomeTax

🎃While today’s Tax Return Deadline might sound spookier than Halloween, there’s no need to fear tax time when you’re well-prepared. If you have any last-minute questions or need assistance, don’t hesitate to reach out. Let’s ensure you meet your deadlines with confidence! #Halloween #TaxTime #BusinessSupport #TaxReturn #RetinueAccounting