The key issue in Oracle was whether a purchaser of software that was to be used in more than one state was required to issue a certificate indicating it would assume responsibility for apportioning and paying the tax to Massachusetts and the other states where the software was used at the time of purchase as required under the Commissioner’s regulation, or whether the purchaser could subsequently apportion the tax based on use and seek a refund through the general abatement process.
Source: KPMG
Latest Posts in "United States"
- Louisiana Sales Tax Applies to Various Services Including Lodging, Admissions, and Telecommunications
- Missouri DOR Exempts Municipal Concession Sales from Sales Tax at Recreational Facilities
- Illinois DOR Clarifies Sales Tax Exemption for Travel Magazines in New Guidance Letter
- Colorado DOR Repeals Redundant Sales Tax Exemption Rule for School Sales
- US-Japan Agreement updated and public comment period open for Section 301 extensions
