Legislation watch
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
Capitol Building

2007 House Bill 5097: Revise sales tax “bad debt” allowance

Public Act 105 of 2007

facebook  twitter    Comments on this legislation    Post new comment    Text and Analysis    Add to Watch List 
  Previous   Next 

Most Recent Comments

1) Thanks INDEED  by jmd364 on October 3, 2007 
If these idiots would read the bills before they vote on them they might find out they left a loop hole big enough for a semi-tractor trailer.

Don't encourage them by saying thank you for doing a lousy job to begin with. We pay these people a full time wage!

If they worked for me, I would fire them. A partial shut down of the government speaks for itself. THEY ARE INCOMPETENT!
Reply

Line

2) HR 5097  by Great Laker on August 15, 2007 
Thanks, Steve Bieda, for closing a loophole in the sales tax law.

Previous legislation allowed sales tax payers to claim a deduction when they hadn't even made a payment. This legislation, putting sales tax on an accounting basis that agrees with Federal tax law, is long overdue.

What other loopholes exist in the Michigan Treasury that should be closed ?
Reply

Line

3) 2007 House Bill 5097 (Revise sales tax “bad debt” allowance )  by admin on January 1, 2001 
Introduced in the House on August 8, 2007, to limit a “bad debt” allowance that businesses can deduct from the amount of sales tax they are required to pay, so that only firms that remit taxes for the a specific transaction qualify for the deduction. Essentially the bill would retroactively change some definitions in the Sales Tax Act (related to who is a "taxpayer" for purposes of claiming a bad debt deduction) that will have the effect of reversing the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case "DaimlerChrysler Services North America, LLC v. Department of Treasury," under which the state will be required to honor $93 million in tax refund claims. The bill would also result in an additional $30 million in annual sales and use tax paid by business in the future

The vote was 57 in favor, 52 opposed and 1 not voting

(House Roll Call 392 at House Journal 95)

Click here to view bill details.
Reply

Line


View Full Conversation