Taxpayer is an out-of-state corporation with an office
located in Indiana. Taxpayer provides computer hardware, software, and
technical assistance to its customers.
The Indiana Department of Revenue (Department) conducted a
sales and use tax audit for the 2008, 2009, and 2010 tax years (Tax Years). The
Department's audit examination resulted in sales tax assessments on some of
Taxpayer's sales of software and on some of Taxpayer's sales of maintenance
agreements.
...
During the Tax Years, Taxpayer sold software, as well as
software maintenance agreements that included software updates and computer
hardware. Taxpayer protested the Department's assessment of sales tax based
upon the audit's citation to 45 IAC
2.2-5-26, but does not provide more details to support its argument.
The Department is not required to discern whether Taxpayer's
maintenance agreement customers received computer software updates or whether
the underlying agreements guaranteed that updates would be provided. The
Department presumes that updates were provided pursuant to the agreements.
In this case, the audit found that Taxpayer should have
collected sales tax on the software purchased by Taxpayer's customers. The
audit also assessed sales tax on Taxpayer's transactions involving software
maintenance agreements. Taxpayer has not presented any documents or other
evidence showing that Taxpayer's software sales fall outside IC § 6-2.5-1-27's
definition of tangible personal property. Neither has Taxpayer presented any
documents or evidence to rebut the Department's presumption regarding
application of sales tax on sales of software maintenance agreements.
Taxpayer also based its protest on its reliance on the
accuracy of information provided by a third party sales tax collection service
provider. Information provided by Taxpayer indicates the third party sales tax
collection service provider's certification under the Streamlined Sales and Use
Tax Agreement.
...
In Taxpayer's protest, and also in the administrative
hearing, Taxpayer conceded that Taxpayer was "not registered with
SS[UTP]." Taxpayer did not provide any additional materials to support its
argument for exemption from sales or use tax under either the Agreement or
Taxpayer's contract with the CSP as a non-registered Model 1 Seller.
