Blog

According to an estimate by the National Conference of State Legislatures, Florida is projected to lose more than $1.4 billion in revenue in 2012 due to the online sales tax loophole. Florida policymakers are considering an “e-tax” law.

If any of the pending online sales tax bills make their way through the redistricting-focused legislative session this year, Florida would join the growing group of states that collect sales taxes on all Internet retailers.

As the law currently stands, only companies with a physical presence (a store, or warehouse) in Florida must pay the state’s 6 percent sales tax.

Trade groups representing business interests have converged on the Capitol this year to push for bills that would pressure online retailers on taxes.

At least three different e-tax bills are in play in Tallahassee — although it will be tougher to pass many laws this year, due to a budget shortfall and the once-a-decade task of redrawing the state’s political districts. There are also small-government activists who claim the bills would create a de facto tax increase on consumers at a time of high unemployment and economic hardship.

Since 1993, the department has run a program where it randomly inspects records of large trucks shipping goods along Florida’s major interstate highways. The department will then a letter to a Florida Resident Purchaser asking them to pay on their out of state purchase. Current law requires consumers to self-enforce the sales tax on their online purchases, but hardly anyone does so.

In Florida, the push to collect taxes from Internet retailers started nearly 10 years ago, but several bills have died in the Legislature. But this may change in Florida, as states across the country seek to boost local businesses and increase tax revenue by going after online retail giants like Amazon and Overstock.com.

After New York passed an online sales tax law in 2008, at least eight other states have followed suit, including five in the past year. This month, Indiana’s government inked a deal with Amazon in which the retailer will begin collecting sales tax in 2014.

Gov. Rick Scott said he could sign an e-tax bill if it included an equal-sized tax cut. One idea is an additional or expanded sales tax holiday for shoppers.

For more on this go to: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/01/16/2592761/tallahassee-battle-lines-drawn.html

The IRS recently revised Form 2848, Power of Attorney and Declaration of Representative, and instructions. While the instructions to the revised form do not preclude using the prior version of the form, it is recommended that Tax professionals familiarize themselves with the revised form and begin using it.

Part I -- Representatives/Notices and communications

The actions that require specific authorization include substituting representatives, allowing the IRS to disclose tax return information to third parties, or signing certain returns. The revised Form 2848 contains boxes a taxpayer can check to indicate the taxpayer’s authorization for the representative to perform these actions.

The representative is also required to provide in addition to his or her licensing jurisdiction, the “License/Bar or Enrollment Number” where applicable.

The updated Form 2848 and corresponding instructions are posted on the IRS website.

The Groupon and other online voucher sites have created some interesting tax consequences.

How much is the sales price and who should pay it?

Florida seems to have taken the position that the merchant is responsible for tax on the original price of the goods the purchaser of the voucher is entitled to receive.

As a secondary issue, there may be some escheat / unclaimed property issues you or your client may not be aware of or never even imagined.

For more information go to Florida Tax Law Blog

A new exception now has been added to the list.

Under final regulations issued under Section 881, the IRS can treat a disregarded entity in a financing structure as a person separate from its owner (that is, as a non-disregarded entity), in determining whether a financing arrangement exists that should be recharacterized under the multiple-party financing rules of Code §7701(l) and Treas. Regs. §1.881-3.