Maines v. Comm'r
United States Tax Court
Ps received targeted economic development payments from the state of New York. New York calls these payments "credits" and treats them as refunds for "overpayments" of state tax. All the credits required Ps to make some amount of business expenditure or investment in targeted areas within the state. One of the credits, the QEZE Real Property Tax Credit, is limited to the amount of past real-property tax actually paid.
Read the full summary
Ps received targeted economic development payments from the state of New York. New York calls these payments "credits" and treats them as refunds for "overpayments" of state tax. All the credits required Ps to make some amount of business expenditure or investment in targeted areas within the state. One of the credits, the QEZE Real Property Tax Credit, is limited to the amount of past real-property tax actually paid. The other two credits, the EZ Investment Credit and the EZ Wage Credit, are not limited to past tax actually paid. All the credits first reduce a taxpayer's state income-tax…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Holmes, Judge:
New York State uses extremely targeted tax credits as an incentive for extremely targeted economic development in extremely targeted locations. Those who receive these credits may be extremely benefited — even if they do not owe any state income tax, New York calls the credits overpayments of income tax and makes them refundable. David and Tami Maines say that none of the credits should be taxable because New York labels them “overpay-ments” of past state income tax, and they never claimed prior deductions for state income tax. The Commissioner disagrees and argues that…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Aquilino v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Morgan v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- United States v. BessSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- United States v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Sunoco, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
- Agro-Jal Farming Enters. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2015
- Ginsburg v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2019
- Darr v. Internal Revenue ServiceUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · 2020
- Elbaz v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2015
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.