Search Blogs
Search by date
Choose From Date
Choose To Date

These Cases Tried to Go to the U.S. Supreme Court, But the Court said "No...No...Oh?"

In shocking similarity to the once-popular Amy Winehouse song “Rehab,” the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in two nexus cases:

In shocking similarity to the once-popular Amy Winehouse song “Rehab,” the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in two nexus cases: KFC Corp. v. Iowa, 792 N.W.2d 308 (Iowa Dec. 30, 2010) and Lamtec Corp. v. Wash. Dep’t of Revenue, Docket No. 83579-9, en banc (Wash. Jan. 20, 2011) but left open the possibility to hear DIRECTV, Inc. v. Levin, 128 Ohio St.3d 68 (Ohio Dec. 27, 2010).

KFC is an economic nexus case involving the license of intangibles. KFC did not have any employees or property within Iowa; KFC licensed the use of trademarks and other intangibles to independent franchisees in the state in exchange for royalties. The Iowa Supreme Court held that KFC’s license of the intangibles was the “functional equivalent” of physical presence under Quill and that, in the alternative, physical presence was not required to find substantial nexus for corporate income tax purposes.

The Court also denied certiorari in Lamtec, where the taxpayer’s sole presence in the state was irregular employee visits to customers. The Washington Supreme Court determined that Lamtec had nexus with Washington for Business and Occupation (B&O) tax purposes and raised additional questions regarding how Washington views the physical presence test relating to the B&O tax, stating: “We conclude that to the extent there is a physical presence requirement, it can be satisfied by the presence of activities within the state.” (emphasis added).

The Court’s decision to deny certiorari in KFC and Lamtec is not surprising in light of the long line of nexus cases that the Court has declined to review in recent years (Capital One Bank v. Comm'n of Rev., 899 N.E.2d 76 (2009), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 2827 (2009); Geoffrey, Inc. v. Comm'n of Rev., 899 N.E.2d 87 (2009), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 2853 (2009);. Tax Comm'r v. MBNA Amer. Bank, N.A., 640 S.E.2d 226 (2007), cert. denied sub nom, FIA Card Services N.A. v. Tax Comm'r, 551 U.S. 1141 (2007); Lanco, Inc. v. Director, Div. of Tax., 879 A.2d 1234 (2005), aff'd, 908 A.2d 176 (2006), cert. denied, 551 U.S. 1131 (2007); A & F Trademark, Inc. v. Tolson, 605 S.E.2d 187 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 821 (2005)). However, the Court’s decision is a disappointment, and we remain hopeful that the Court will provide additional guidance in this area, which so desperately is in need of clarity.

Although the Court dashed our hopes in the nexus arena, it invited the U.S. Solicitor General to submit a brief in DIRECTV v. Levin, rather than ruling on whether to accept the case. This case follows a string of defeats of DIRECTV’s claim that the satellite industry is discriminated against (e.g., DIRECTV v. Treesh, 487 F.3d 471, 480 (6th Cir. 2007) and DIRECTV, Inc. v. Tolson, 513 F.3d 119 (4th Cir. 2008)). Courts have rejected DIRECTV’s Commerce Clause claim by holding that sales tax statutes that apply to satellite television providers, but not cable television providers, do not discriminate. For instance, the Ohio Supreme Court reasoned that Ohio’s basis for differentiating between satellite and cable was not based on favoring an in-state enterprise over an out-of-state one. Stay tuned….

Our Story

Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP is an international law firm helping the Fortune 100, industry leaders, sector innovators and business entrepreneurs solve their biggest challenges and reach their business goals. Dedicated to unfaltering excellence in client service, we are known for our business savvy and industry intelligence, providing creative and custom solutions for each of our clients. Industry and business experience makes the difference for our clients.

click to watch Videocast: DOL Fiduciary Rule Litigation Impacts
Videocast: DOL Fiduciary Rule Litigation Impacts
Atlanta, GA
Washington, DC
© 2017 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP / Sutherland (Europe) LLP
Add this page to MYBRIEFCASE
News/Commentary - These Cases Tried to Go to the U.S. Supreme Court, But the Court said "No...No...Oh?"
Save ChangesDownload MYBRIEFCASEClear All