Stay up to date with sales tax: Join our mailing list!


A Maryland Tax Court ruled that a company was responsible for taxes on 900-number communications services it provided because the services were taxable and the provider was a vendor or an agent. The taxpayer provided a customer with a number, reviewed the customer’s advertisements prior to publication, reviewed federally mandated preambles that were received by consumers over the phone, and reviewed the content of the message for categorization purposes. The taxpayer also received a portion of the total revenue produced by the services. The taxpayer argued that they were nontaxable as a common carrier; however, the Court ruled that the taxpayer provided significantly more than the basic services of a common carrier and was responsible for collecting the tax. (AT&T Communications of Maryland, Inc. v. Maryland Comptroller of the Treasury, Maryland Tax Court, No. 01-SU-OO-0509, Jan. 3, 2005)

(02/15/2005)

In order for the termination payment to be exempt the original agreement must be cancelled and a separate termination agreement created between the lessor and lessee. In addition, the property must be returned with the cancellation of the original agreement. (Maryland Tax Court, Citicorp International Communications, Inc. v. Comptroller of the Treasury, February 23, 2004.)

(04/15/2004)

An amended regulation states that tangible personal property including certain computers and software used for raw material testing or end product testing for quality control purposes is now exempt from sales tax. (Reg. Sec. 03.06.01 32-2, Maryland Comptroller of the Treasury, effective October 1, 2001)

(10/15/2001)

Both a North Carolina furniture retailer and the delivery company it financed had to pay sales tax on the furniture it sold in Maryland because they had sufficient nexus there. The delivery company set up, installed, repaired the furniture of the retailer, as well as, facilitated any returns and made approximately 100 deliveries per month into the state from the retailer. (Comptroller v. Furnitureland South, Inc. and Royal Transport, Inc., Maryland ReveNews, Autumn, 1999)

(06/15/2000)

Pages

Scroll to Top