Transaction Tax Update Q4

Transaction Tax Update November 2015
2
Agenda
National Developments
– InternetTax Freedom Act
– Marketplace Fairness Act
– Mobile Workforce State Income Tax Simplification Act
State Developments
– Nexus
– Miscellaneous
– Sales Tax Holiday Overview
Industry-Specific Developments
– Software/Cloud Computing
– Manufacturing
– Online Travel Companies
– Looking Forward: Emerging Industries
Q&A

3
National Development: Internet Tax Freedom Act
Brief History
– Part of Public Law 105-277
– Original version of the bill was drafted by Representative
Christopher Cox (R-CA) and Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) in 1997
– Ultimately introduced by Representative Frank R. Wolf (R-VA)
– Signed into law by President Clinton on October 21, 1998

4
Purpose?
– Keep the Internet free from taxes
How?
– Imposes a moratorium on the state and local taxation of
Internet access and on multiple and discriminatory taxes on
electronic commerce
Moratorium?
– Moratoriums, unlike exemptions, are imposed for a limited
period of time
– To keep the moratorium in place, Congress must extend it
– Since its passage in 1998, the moratorium has been extended
three times:
 2001
 2004
 2007
 2014

5
Recent Activity
– On September 18, 2014, President Obama signed House Joint
Resolution 124, which includes provisions extending the
InternetTax Freedom Act through December 11
– On December 10, 2014, Congress passed an omnibus spending
bill which included a provision to extend the moratorium for
one year
– On September 30, 2015, Congress passed and the President
signed a spending bill which includes a provision to extend the
InternetTax Freedom Act through December 11, 2015
 Now Congress, once again, has the opportunity to either extend
the moratorium before it expires in December or make it final once
and for all. We’ll have to wait and see.

6
National Development: Marketplace Fairness
Historical Perspective
– Supreme Court held that only businesses with nexus via
physical presence in a state can be required to collect sales tax
for that state. The rationale behind this opinion was that it
would be too burdensome for a remote business to collect tax
for another state in which it has no physical presence
– Why Marketplace Fairness?
 Even playing field between online and brick-and-mortar retailers
 Reduce burden on retailers
 Make compliance easier

7
National Development: Marketplace Fairness Act
Activity
– May 2013: Senate votes 69-27 to approve the Marketplace
Fairness Act, but Act stalls in the House
– September 2013: Seven Basic Principles on Remote Sales Tax
released by House Judiciary Committee
1. Tax Relief – Using the Internet should not create new or
discriminatory taxes not faced in the offline world. Nor should
any fresh precedent be created for other areas of interstate
taxation by states.
2. Tech Neutrality – Brick-and-Mortar, Exclusive Online, and Brick-
and-Click businesses should all be on equal footing. The sales tax
compliance should not be less, but neither should it be greater.
3. Privacy Rights – Sensitive customer data must be protected.

8
Activity
– (Seven Principles Continued)
4. No Regulation Without Representation – Those who bear state
taxation, regulation, and compliance burdens should have direct
recourse to protest unfair, unwise, or discriminatory rates and
enforcement.
5. Simplicity – Governments should not stifle businesses by shifting
onerous compliance requirements onto them; laws should be so
simple and compliance so inexpensive and reliable as to render a
small business exemption unnecessary.
6. Tax Competition – Governments should be encouraged to
compete with one another to keep tax rates low, and American
businesses should not be disadvantaged vis-a-vis their foreign
competitors.
7. States' Rights – States should be sovereign within their physical
boundaries. In addition, the federal government should not
mandate that states impose any sales tax compliance burdens.

9
Activity
– July 15, 2014: The Marketplace and Internet Tax Fairness Act
(MITFA) was introduced in the Senate but gained no traction
 Key features
» Includes the Marketplace Fairness Act as passed by the Senate in
2013 with a few minor technical corrections
» Provides a ten-year extension of the Internet Tax Freedom Act
(ITFA)
– January 2015: House Judiciary Chair Goodlatte released
discussion draft of the Online Sales Simplification Act
 Unlike the Marketplace Fairness Act, this act adopts an origin-
based tax collection model and provides for a commission that
oversees a distribution agreement addressing how tax is collected
and distributed among the states
» Discussion draft excludes commission based click-through nexus
from the definition of physical presence

10
Recent Activity
– There has been little to no new activity since the bill was
introduced into the Senate back in March. In March, it was read
twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
 March 10, 2015, Marketplace Fairness Act of 2015 (S. 698),
introduced in the U.S. Senate.
 Would allow states meeting certain criteria to require out-of-state
sellers to collect state and local sales and use taxes on sales made
to customers in the state.
» Sellers meeting a “small seller exception” would be excluded.
 Legislation is similar to the federal Marketplace Fairness Act of
2013 (S. 743) which was passed by the U.S. Senate on May 6, 2013.

11
Workforce Sate Income Tax Simplification Act of 2015
H.R. 2315
– Would establish national rules that limit the authority of states
to tax certain income of employees for duties performed in
other states.
– Bill states an employee is not subject to income tax in a
nonresident state unless they have worked at least 30 days in
that state.
 Approved by the House Judiciary Committee on June 17, 2015
– Senate introduced a companion bill, S. 386, on February 5, 2015,
and it has been referred to the Senate Finance Committee.

12
State Developments: Nexus
Michigan – Enacted
– Michigan Revenue Administrative Bulletin 2015-22 (Nov. 3,
2015)
– Legislature passed Senate Bills 658 and 659
– Click-through nexus provision became effective October 1st
– Creates a presumption that a seller is engaged in business, if
they or an affiliate engages in any of the following activities:
 Selling a similar line of products under the same or similar business
name;
 Using the same or substantially similar trademarks, service marks,
or trade names;
 Delivering, installing, assembling, or performing maintenance or
repair services for the seller’s in-state customers;
 Allowing returns;
 Having shared management, business systems, business practices,
or employees.

13
(Michigan Cont.)
– Also, creates a rebuttable presumption that a person is
“engaged in business”in Michigan, if they enter into an
agreement with an out-of-state seller whereby they receive
compensation for referring potential customers by website link,
oral presentations, etc., provided the seller:
 Earns at least $10,000 in sales through such agreements, and
 Has at least $50,000 in Michigan sales by any means in the prior 12
months

14
Tennessee - Enacted
– Effective July 1, 2015
 Creates rebuttable presumption that out-of-state and online
retailers have nexus, if the seller enters into an agreement with a
Tennessee resident to refer potential customers via a website link
on the Tennessee resident’s website
» Online retailer’s cumulative gross receipts from traffic routed to the
their website must exceed $10,000 in the preceding calendar year
» Presumption may be rebutted by “clear and convincing evidence”
that the resident in agreement with the online retailer did not
engage in any activities that would substantially contribute to the
online retailer’s ability to establish and maintain a market

15
Washington – B&O Nexus
– The activities of a nonresident independent sales representative
established nexus for purposes of B&O tax for a non-resident
retailer. The independent sales representative performed the
following activities:
 Solicit Sales;
 Drove a truck within a state bearing the retailer’s logo;
 Delivered goods within the state.
Washington Department of Revenue Determination No. 14-0417,
September 30, 2015.

16
Vermont
– Click-through nexus provision was passed in 2011 but was not
set to take effect until similar nexus provisions were adopted
by one-third of states imposing a sales and use tax
– The Attorney General must make the determination of whether
the one-third trigger has been met
 No such opinion by the Attorney General has been provided
 Something to keep an eye on in light of all the recent nexus
activity
– UPDATE: The Department of Taxes issued a statement
explaining its timeline for implementing click-through nexus
 Department will provide notice before beginning enforcement of
the law
 Department will provide at least 30 days notice once the Attorney
General issues the determination
» Statement of Vermont Department of Taxes on Vermont Click
Through Nexus Law, Vermont Department of Taxes, August 2015

17
Nevada – Effective July 1, 2015
– Creates a presumption that nexus exists for a remote seller if
the remote seller is (1) part of a controlled group of business
entities that has a component member who has physical
presence in the state and (2) the component member engages
in any of the following activities:
 Sells a similar line of products or services as the retailer and does so
under a business name that is the same or similar to that of the
retailer;
 Maintains an office, distribution facility, warehouse or storage
place, or similar place of business in the state to facilitate delivery
of tangible personal property sold by the retailer to the retailer’s
customers;
 Uses trademarks, service marks, or trade names in the state that are
the same or substantially similar to those used by the retailer;
 Delivers, installs, assembles, or performs maintenance services for
the retailer’s customers within the state;

18
Activities cont.
 Facilitates the retailer’s delivery of tangible personal property to
customers in the state by allowing the retailer’s customers to pick
up tangible personal property sold by the retailer at an office,
distribution facility, warehouse, storage place or similar place of
business maintained by the component member in the state; or
 Conducts any other activities in the state that are significantly
associated with the retailer’s ability to establish and maintain a
market in the state for the retailer’s products or services.
– Presumption may be rebutted by providing proof satisfactory to
the Department that during the calendar year in question, the
activities of the component member are not significantly
associated with the retailer’s ability to establish or maintain a
market in Nevada.

19
Alabama: Effective January 1, 2016
– Issued new rule that states out-of-state retailers who do not
have physical presence in Alabama will be required to register
for a license with the department and collect and remit sales
and use tax when:
 The seller’s retail sales of tangible personal property sold into the
state exceed $250,000 per year based on the prior calendar year’s
sales; and
 The seller conducts one or more of the following activities set out
in Ala. Code §40-23-68, which includes, but is not limited to:
» making delivery of retail sales of property within Alabama by
means of a vehicle owned by the selling entity;
» soliciting and receiving orders for the sale of tangible personal
property or taxable services by a representative, agent, salesman,
canvasser, solicitor, or installer within the state;
Ala. Admin. r 810-6-2-.90.03

20
New Jersey (Technical Bulletin TB-79, July 30, 2015)
– The New Jersey Department of Revenue released Technical Bulletin
providing guidelines for determining whether the activities of a
person or business create Sales and Use Tax Nexus.
 Traditional nexus creating activities include, but are not limited to:
» Selling, leasing, or renting tangible personal property or specified digital
products or services;
» Selling, storing, delivering, or transporting energy to users or customers;
» Parking, storing, or garaging motor vehicles.
 Click-through nexus is established if:
» The seller enters into an agreement with a New Jersey independent
contractor or other representative for compensation in exchange for
referring customers via a link on their website, or otherwise, to that out-
of-State seller; and
» The seller has sales from these referrals to customers in New Jersey in
excess of $10,000 for the prior four quarterly periods ending on the last
day of March, June, September, and December.

21
State Developments: Miscellaneous
Virtual Currency
– New Jersey
 The New Jersey Department of Taxation updated its guidance
regarding the treatment of virtual currency.
» Convertible virtual currency is treated as intangible property;
therefore, the use of such currency in a transaction is not subject to
tax.
» Sales and Use tax does apply when a person transfers virtual
currency for taxable goods or services.
» TAM-2015-1(R), July 28, 2015.

22
Virtual Currency
– Michigan
 Taxpayers are required to remit sales and use tax based on the
dollar value of the consideration exchanged for the property.
 If the consideration given in exchange for the property is not USD,
the taxpayer must convert the value of the consideration to USD as
of the date and at the time of the transaction;
» When the consideration is given in the format of virtual currency,
the taxpayer accepting virtual currency must also maintain
documentation demonstrating the value of the virtual currency on
the day and at the exact time of the transaction.
» Treasury Update Volume 1, Issue 1 (November 2015).

23
State Developments: State Amnesty
Missouri
– Time Period: September 1, 2015 – November 30, 2015
 Waives penalties and interest if outstanding tax liabilities are paid
by November 30, 2015.
 Qualifying taxes include : Income Tax, Consumer’s Use Tax,
Corporation Franchise Tax, Employer Withholding Tax, Sales Tax
and Vendor’s Use Tax.
Alabama
– Alabama Tax Delinquency Amnesty Act of 2016
– Dates TBA
 Will take place in 2016, but before August 31, 2016 and will apply
to all taxes administered by the department except for motor fuel
taxes.
» Taxes due prior to January 1, 2015; or
» Taxes for taxable periods beginning before January 1, 2015.

24
State Developments: State Amnesty
Louisiana
– November 13, 2015 – December 15, 2015
– Installment 3 of 3
– The following taxes and tax periods are eligible:
 Taxes due prior to January 1, 2015, for which the Department of
Revenue has issued an individual or a business proposed
assessment, notice of assessment, bill, notice, or demand for
payment not later than May 31, 2015; or
 Taxes for taxable periods that began before January 1, 2015; or
 Taxes for which the taxpayer and the Department of Revenue have
entered into an agreement to interrupt the running of prescription
pursuant to La. R.S. 47:1580 and said agreement suspends the
running of prescription until December 31, 2015.

25
Industry-Specific Developments: Software
California
– Lucent Technologies, Inc. v. State Board of Equalization
 Decision issued October 8, 2015
 California Court of Appeals affirmed the state’s sales tax exclusion
applicable to technology transfer agreements and affirmed more
than $2.5 million in attorney’s fees to the taxpayer due to the Board
of Equalization’s failure to pay“a refund to which it was
undisputedly entitled under controlling law”
» Background: Like Nortel, the Lucent case involved a
manufacturer’s sale of tangible personal property (TPP) to a
communications company and its transfer to the company of a
right to use software needed to operate the TPP. The BOE
maintained that the software was taxable. The taxpayer, citing the
state’s TTA statute and the decision in Nortel, maintained that the
software was exempt.
» BOE has the right to appeal the decision to the California Supreme
Court.

26
Utah
– Company’s purchase of software interfaces is not subject to
sales and use tax.
 Diagnostic testing company developed a software suite of
connectivity solutions to assent in receiving timely results, share
clinical information and prescribe drugs by means of an interface
that allows multiple systems to exchange data.
 The company’s purchase of the interface was found to be exempt
custom software because the interface was designed and
developed to the specifications of the personal use of the
purchaser.
» Utah Private letter Ruling 15-004 (September 28, 2015)

27
Kansas
– Fact pattern the same as Utah. Likely same Taxpayer.
– Taxpayer’s purchase on an interface system which allows them
to access medical records and test results stored on a remote
computer system was nontaxable information or database
access services.
 Kansas does not tax an“information”service or“database access
service”that consists of a collection of records or data that is stored
in a remote computer system and contains software that allows the
purchaser of the service to access the system electronically to
answer queries or extract desired information.
» Kansas Private Letter Ruling P-2015-003, September 28, 2015

28
Utah
– Use of online database held taxable.
 Taxpayer appealed an audit assessment, finding that their
purchase of SaaS and online database access was subject to sales
and use tax.
 Formal Hearing took place on October 28, 2015, and the Tax
Commission upheld the audit finding.
 The Utah Tax Commission applied the essence of the transaction
test and determined that while the Taxpayer’s purchase of software
access (SaaS) and online database access included nontaxable
services in addition to the taxable use of prewritten software, the
primary object or essence of the transaction was the use of the
taxable software.
» Utah State Tax Commission Decision Appeal No. 10-2086 (October
14, 2015).

29
Pennsylvania
– Taxpayer’s provision of services and infrastructure to an Internet
service provider (ISP) was not subject to tax.
 Taxpayer sells various services including the provision of
infrastructure to Internet service providers who choose to
outsource the creation and management of the infrastructure
required for remote access to their Internet network to work.
 In a Nutshell: Internet service providers sell Internet access to their
end users and outsource the creating and management of physical
infrastructure to the Taxpayer.
 Court held the Taxpayer’s service to be exempt as Internet access.
» Level 3 Communications, LLC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
October 15, 2015.

30
Missouri
– Taxpayer is a general contractor and construction management
company that maintains a professional engineering license and
uses“design build”computer software to perform engineering
services.
– Mo. Rev. Stat. §144.615(3) provides an exemption from sales
and use tax for computers, computer software, and computer
security systems purchased for use by architectural or
engineering firms headquartered in the state.
 To qualify for the exemption, an engineering firm must have four
separately integrated facilities.
» Separate buildings within a single complex at one location are not
considered separately integrated facilities for purposes of the
exemption.
– Taxpayer was found to not have the requisite integrated
facilities and was therefore liable for tax.
 Missouri Letter Ruling No. LR 7600 (July 10, 2015).

31
New York TSB-A-15(34)S (August 17, 2015)
– Computer Server Co-locating services not subject to tax.
 Petitioner operates a facility in NY, where it provides secure and
temperature controlled storage for computer servers.
 Petitioner has no interaction with the computer applications that
run on the servers it stores.
 Separately stated charges for storage space were found to be the
exempt lease of real property based on the following factors:
» Customers are permitted to supply their own racks, equipment
and cabinets
» Customer and its employees have 24-hour access to stored
equipment
 Petitioner’s charges to its customers for power were also exempt
because they are part of the overall exempt lease of real property.
However, if a separately stated charge based on an accurate
measurement of the customer’s consumption of electricity is
provided, that charge would be subject to tax.

32
New York TSB-A-15(36)S (September 18, 2015)
– Petitioner sells a hosted service that integrates with its
customer’s systems to collect data that helps customers
analyze, manage and communicate the cost, quality, and value
of information technology.
 The Department concluded that the Petitioner’s line item IT billing
product was an information service. However, the exclusion for
information services applied because the information provided
was personal and individual in nature, was obtained exclusively
from that specific customer and not from a common source, and it
was not made available or furnished to others.
» As a result, the separately itemized charge for line item IT billing
was not subject to tax.
» However, if a lump sum is charged for the line item IT billing
services and the taxable sale of software, the entire charge will be
subject to tax.

33
Vermont
– The Department of Taxes issued an update on cloud computing
 Vermont Fact Sheet No. FS-1084 (August 2015)
» Charges for computer software accessed solely on a cloud
platform do not fall within the definition of tangible personal
property and are therefore not subject to Vermont Sales and Use
tax.

34
Michigan
– Auto Owners Insurance Company v. Department of Treasury,
Michigan Court of Appeals, (October 27, 2015)
 Michigan Treasury Department conducted a use-tax audit and
determined a use tax deficiency existed and issued a bill for taxes
due.
 Auto Owners paid the tax under protest and filed a complaint,
seeking a refund tax and interest it paid.
 The Court of Claims held in Auto Owners favor finding that the
transactions were not subject to use tax because the software was
never“delivered by any means”and ordered the Department to
issue a refund.
 The Department appealed and the Appellate Court, applying the
incident to the service test, found that the transactions were not
taxable because any tangible personal property was incidental to
the exempt service provided.

35
Chicago
– This past summer, the City of Chicago Department of Finance
ruled that fees to stream television and movies as well as the
electronic delivery of music and games are subject to the
Amusement Tax, if delivered to customers in the city.
 Ruling essentially applies the nonpossessory computer lease tax
onto content delivered through a cloud-based environment.
» City of Chicago Amusement Tax Ruling #5 (June 9, 2015).

36
Industry-Specific Developments: Manufacturing
New Jersey
– J&J Snack Food Sales Corp., v. Director, Division of Taxation
 J & J Snack Foods (“J&J”) manufactures pretzels and developed a
pretzel warmer that it loans to customers who purchase large
volumes of pretzels.
 J&J was determined to owe use tax on the parts it purchased and
sent to the NJ recipients of loaner pretzel warmers.
 The current audit determined use tax applied to the parts.
However, an earlier1992 audit determined that the replacement
parts were not subject to tax.
» Among other things, J&J argued that the Division should be
prohibited from assessing tax on the parts because such a
conclusion contradicted the 1992 audit.
» The court ultimately upheld the audit assessment concluding:
» The 1992 determination was an erroneous application of the law;
and
» J&J did not prove detrimental reliance or extreme circumstances
that would overcome the public’s interest in tax assessments or
require equitable estoppel.

37
Industry-Specific Developments: Manufacturing
Indiana
– Taxpayer denied exemption on the purchase of beer kegs.
– Taxpayer was a beer manufacturer who used kegs to store,
transport, and serve beer.
 The taxpayer charged customers a deposit for the kegs, and this
led to the Department determining the kegs were subject to use
tax as returnable containers which contain a finished product sold
for consumption.
 Taxpayer argued that the kegs should not be considered
returnable because customers are not required to return them.
 The Indiana Tax Court upheld the assessment citing a prior court
finding that a container need not be returned to the party it was
immediately acquired from in order to be considered“returned”
and furthermore, the fact that the Taxpayer routinely received the
kegs back was evidence that they were returnable containers.
 Indiana Letter of Finding No. 04-20140089 (July 29, 2015).
» See Brambles Industries, Inc., v. Indiana Dept. of State Revenue, 892
N.E.2d 1287, 1290

38
Industry-Specific Developments: Travel
New York
– Hotel operator was not allowed a credit for New York sales tax it
paid on the purchase of continental breakfasts provided to
guests.
 The continental breakfast was furnished as part of the hotel’s
overall service.
 An exclusion from sales tax is provided for purchases of tangible
personal property used in performing certain services. However,
hotel services are not enumerated as one of the services to be
excluded.
 Therefore, the Division concluded that the hotel operator was not
entitled to resale treatment of its purchase of continental
breakfasts.
» Washington Square Hotel LLC, New York Division of Tax Appeals,
Administrative Law Judge Unit, DTA Nos. 825405, 825505, and
825821, September 10, 2015.

39
Oklahoma
– The Oklahoma tax commission determined a taxpayer’s rental
of equipment that it intended to re-rent was exempt from sales
tax as a resale transaction.
 Oklahoma Letter Ruling 15-004, September 25, 2015
Alabama
– A scaffold rental companies' labor charge for erecting,
maintaining and dismantling were not subject to the rental tax.
 General rule: if the lessor also performs a separate service that is apart
from and not incidental to the leasing of the property, the fee for that
service is not derived from the lease, and thus is not subject to lease
tax.”
» The above applies regardless of whether the separate labor
services are included in the rental agreement or in a separate
contract.
» BROCK SERVICES, LLC 1670 E. CARDINAL DRIVE BEAUMONT, TX 77705-
6623, Taxpayer, v. STATE OF ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE.

40
Kentucky
– Streaming services not subject to tax.
 NETFLIX, INC. APPELLANT V. FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION
CABINET DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE APPELLEE ORDER NO. K-24900
New York
– Petitioner’s sale of unlimited facility use or participation based
memberships are exempt from state sales and use tax, but
subject to local sales and use tax because the Petitioner’s
facilities qualify as weight control salons, health salons or
gymnasiums.
 TSB-A-15(35)S

41
Ohio
– The irrigation system installed in a newly constructed golf
course was found to be a taxable business fixture
 In its analysis, the court focused on the difference between a
fixture and a business fixture:
» The definition of a “fixture” among other things specifies that it
primarily benefits the realty and not the business.
» A “business fixture” primarily benefits the business conducted by
the occupant on the premises and not the realty.”
 The court noted:
» The removal of the irrigation system would cause injury to the
land rather than permanent fabrication and construction to the
property; and
» The record indicated that installation of the irrigation system was
separate from construction of the golf course with the primary
intent of benefiting the business.
» Hoffman Properties, L.P. v. Testa, 2015-Ohio-3931

42
Industry-Specific Developments: Travel
Rhode Island
– Room Resellers conducting business with hotels in Rhode
Island are now required to register with the Rhode Island
Division of Taxation, pay an annual $10 permit fee, and charge
and remit sales, use and hotel taxes.
 Room Reseller is defined as“any person, except a tour operator (as
defined in RI Gen. Laws Section 42-63.1-2), that has any right,
permission, license, or other authority from or through a hotel, to
reserve or arrange the transfer or occupancy of, accommodations
the reservation or transfer of which is subject to this chapter, such
that the occupant pays all or a portion of the rental and other fees
to the Room Reseller or Reseller.”
» Rhode Island Notice 2015-14 (September 1, 2015)

43
Looking Forward – Emerging Industries
Technology is constantly changing, and tax laws are playing
catch-up. Here are just some of the things we’re thinking
about:
– Shared Service Economy
 Uber
 Lyft
 BlackJet (Uber for airplanes)
 Swifto (Uber for dog walking)
– Online Travel Companies
 Air BNB
– Non-traditional Delivery Methods
 Drone Delivery
– Fantasy Sports
 Draft Kings
 Fanduel
» Amusement service or gambling??

44
Looking Forward – Emerging Industries
Cloud Computing and Software - Data Centers
– As e-commerce and cloud-based software/services continue to
grow, so does the need for dedicated equipment and even
locations to manage these activities; many states offer tax
exemptions, incentives and credits.
– The following states have a data center exemption in place:
 Alabama
 Arizona
 Georgia
 Iowa
 Kentucky
 Maine
 Minnesota
 Mississippi
 Missouri
 Nebraska
 New York
 North Dakota
 Ohio
 South Carolina
 South Dakota
 Tennessee
 Texas
 Virginia
 Washington
 Wyoming

45
Contact Information
Jeremiah T. Lynch
Principal and Practice Leader
National Tax
jeremiah.lynch@ryan.com
212.871.3901
Christopher Potter
Director
National Tax
christopher.potter@ryan.com
781.359.3800
Andrea Piersma
Manager
National Tax
andrea.piersma@ryan.com
425.440.2333

46
© 2015 Ryan, LLC. All rights reserved. All logos and trademarks are the property of their respective companies and are used with permission.
This document is presented by Ryan, LLC for general informational purposes only, and is not intended as specific or personalized recommendations or
advice. The application and effect of certain laws can vary significantly based on specific facts, and professional advice of any nature should be sought
only from appropriate professional advisors. This document is not intended, and shall not be deemed, to constitute legal, accounting or other
professional advice.

Transaction Tax Update Q4

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Transaction Tax Update Q4

Similar to Transaction Tax Update Q4 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Transaction Tax Update Q4