US Supreme Court lets Equifax tax ruling stand
Headline Legal News
The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday that it won't hear an appeal from credit bureau Equifax Inc. involving what it considered an adverse tax ruling in Mississippi.
The appeal was a reaction to a 2013 Mississippi Supreme Court decision that Equifax had to prove that it didn't earn any taxable income in the state. The state Department of Revenue examined Equifax's income and allocated some to Mississippi, ruling it owed taxes and penalties.
The Mississippi court upheld the Revenue Department's calculation of the company's taxes based on revenue earned in Mississippi, thus increasing its tax liability from zero to over $700,000, according to court documents.
The Council on State Taxation, Georgia Chamber of Commerce and The Institute for Professionals had filed "friend of the court" briefs in the case.
Lawmakers responded during the 2014 session by passing a law to change how the state collects taxes.
A key part of the law could make it harder for the state to rule that multistate corporations are paying too little in taxes to Mississippi. It says the Department of Revenue would have to present clear and convincing proof before it could reallocate how a company splits its income among states, and only do so in "limited and unique, nonrecurring circumstances."
The Department of Revenue estimates all changes in the law, including a phase-in of lower interest rates for overdue taxes, will cost Mississippi $100 million a year.
Related listings
-
Court rejects appeal of gay jury selection case
Headline Legal News 06/25/2014A federal appeals court on Tuesday refused to reconsider its ruling granting heightened legal protections to gays and lesbians, prompting three dissenting judges to warn of far-reaching implications in same-sex marriage cases in the Western United St...
-
Court: No blanket exemption for police dashcams
Headline Legal News 06/13/2014The state Supreme Court has ruled that state dashboard cameras can't be withheld from public disclosure unless they relate to pending litigation. Five of the high court's members said Thursday that the Seattle Police Department wrongly used a state s...
-
High court won't hear California's prison appeal
Headline Legal News 06/10/2014The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday let stand a lower court ruling that California bears responsibility for nearly 2,000 disabled parolees housed in county jails. The decision could leave state taxpayers liable for problems at some of the jails, said Je...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.