Commission on State Taxation and Financing Publishes Minutes from December 2nd Meeting

MEETING MINUTES1

Meeting Date: December 2, 2013

Meeting Time: 9:00 A.M.

Meeting Place: State House, 200 W. Washington St., Senate Chambers

Meeting City: Indianapolis, Indiana

Meeting Number: 3

Members Present: Sen. Brandt Hershman, Chairperson; Sen. Edward Charbonneau; Sen. Timothy Skinner; Rep. Eric Turner; Rep. Greg Porter.

Members Absent: None.

Sen. Brandt Hershman called to order a joint meeting of the Commission on State Tax and Financing Policy (Commission) and the Indiana Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (IACIR) at 9:07 a.m..

Local Tax and Budget Issues

Rep. Michael Karickhoff, Chairperson, IACIR, and Mr. John Krauss, Director, IACIR, described the local government finance issues that the IACIR has been studying.

Mr. David Reynolds, Senior Fiscal Analyst, Indiana State Senate, presented the Report of the Local Tax Collection and Distribution Working Group, which analyzes the distribution of tax revenue to local governments (Exhibit A).

Mr. Andrew Berger, Association of Indiana Counties (AIC), noted the AIC's support for the working group's analysis and discussed various local option income tax issues.

Ms. Rhonda Cook, Indiana Association of Cities and Towns (IACT), addressed local option income tax distribution from the municipal perspective.

Mr. Bob Sigalow, Senior Fiscal Analyst, Legislative Services Agency, presented the following reports:

(1) 2013 Budget, Appropriations, Levies, and Tax Rates (Exhibit B).

(2) 2013 Budget, Appropriations, Levies, and Tax Rates Sorted by Advertised Levy over Certified Levy Percentage (Exhibit C).

(3) Publication of Local Government Budgets (Exhibit D).

Rep. Karickhoff noted that local units advertise proposed levies that are higher than the Department of Local Government Finance (DLGF) is likely to certify because the units fear being caught short if they ask for too little.

Mr. Micah Vincent, Commissioner, DLGF, agreed with Rep. Karickhoff's assessment of the situation and discussed the policy implications of changing the law that currently prevents the DLGF from approving a levy that is higher than the advertised levy. Mr. Vincent also proposed replacing the requirement that proposed levies and budgets be advertised in newspapers with online publication.

\

Mr. Larry Hesson, IACIR and Hendricks County Council, stated that the counties would welcome the opportunity to replace newspaper publication with online publication.

Mr. Steve Key, Hoosier State Press Association, presented the Association's case for retaining the newspaper publication requirement (Exhibit E).

Mr. Bill Waltz, Indiana Chamber of Commerce, Mr. David Holt, Indiana Association of School Business Officials (IASBO), and Mr. Mike Shafer, IASBO, testified in favor of converting to online publication.

Mr. Holt and Mr. Shafer also requested more flexibility in the use of school funds.

Tax Increment Financing

Sen. Jim Smith described the following concerns about tax increment financing, particularly as used in Clark County:

(1) Increased usage.

(2) Increased burden on taxpayers and local governments.

(3) The life span of TIF districts.

(4) The reduced role of the fiscal body.

Ms. Kelly Khuri, Clark County Council, expressed her opposition to the use of tax increment financing and her concern that local governments are going to be unable to pay for basic services because of the property tax revenue lost to TIF districts.

Ms. Martina Webster, a Clark County resident, objected to government intervening in the economy through tax increment financing. Ms. Webster expressed her skepticism of claims that development would not occur "but for" the use of tax increment financing and that property values are increased in the proximity of a TIF district.

Mr. Jason Dudich, Controller, City of Indianapolis, described the role of tax increment financing in the economic development of Indianapolis and the ways in which the city attempts to mitigate the impact on other units of local government (Exhibit F).

Former State Representative Bill Crawford noted that he generally agrees with Mr. Dudich's positive assessment of the role of tax increment financing in Indianapolis.

However, he urged city leaders to implement the recommendations of the recent Marion County study of tax increment financing in writing, preferably in ordinance form, and to make the policies available and accessible to the public.

Ms. Cook described tax increment financing as a very important tool for cities and towns. Ms. Cook submitted the following reports:

(1) Tax Increment Finance: A Highlight of Successful TIF projects in the State of Indiana (Exhibit G).

(2) IACT Legislative Briefing Regarding Tax Increment (Exhibit H).

Mr. David Bottorff, Executive Director, AIC, noted that everyone can identify a successful TIF project and suggested that the economic development target company ultimately pays for improvements itself through the captured tax increment. Mr. Bottorff discussed a number of possible changes to the tax increment financing law.

Local Governments and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)

Mr. Walter Kelly, a Fishers resident, urged the state to implement financial reporting requirements for local government that are more GAAP compliant.

Mr. Paul Joyce, State Examiner, State Board of Accounts, cautioned the Commission that implementing a more GAAP compliant approach could be costly. He estimated that the annual costs to implement GAAP compliant reporting would range from $10,000 to $30,000 per unit. He also noted that doing so would result in more accountability and greater transparency.

Mr. Kent Williams, Indiana CPA Society, testified that the Society supports GAAP compliance on the grounds that financial reporting would be more transparent and comprehensive while allowing taxpayers to better compare units.

Mr. Berger expressed AIC's concerns about the cost of implementation.

Mr. Mike Galliher, Boyce Systems, described some of the challenges that a transition to GAAP reporting might pose with respect to time, software systems, and staff training.

Mr. Shafer noted that IASBO is not opposed to GAAP reporting, but suggested that schools could not implement it in a reasonable time and at a reasonable cost.

Sen. Hershman adjourned the meeting at approximately 2:20 p.m..

http://www.in.gov/legislative/interim/committee/minutes/STFPGC2.pdf

Revenue Finds Penalty Justified Where Terms of Settlement Required Pyament of FIT By October and Payment Was Not Made Until December

Excerpts of Revenue's Determination follow:

The Indiana Department of Revenue ("Department") issued a proposed assessment for 2011 Financial Institution Tax ("FIT"), which included a proposed penalty.
...

Turning to Taxpayer's protest, Taxpayer's protest letter states in relevant part:

[Taxpayer] did not file a return in Indiana until late 2011 when it was audited and tax was assessed. Part of the audit agreement was that any penalties due for late payment of the 2009-2011 returns which were not under audit would be abated. I have attached a copy of the agreement.
 

Once an agreement was signed, [Taxpayer] began filing outstanding returns and timely paying estimated tax payments. There was no liability in 2011 until the audit was settled and payments were timely made the next quarter. Every effort was made to follow the agreement and make adequate payments with the information available at that time. Due to extenuating circumstances, I ask that you abate the penalty of $81,093.
 

Taxpayer references a settlement agreement that Taxpayer entered into with the Department. Since Taxpayer invokes the settlement agreement in its protest, the Department will address it to the extent necessary in this Letter of Findings.
 

The settlement agreement states that in order to avoid penalty for 2011 that Taxpayer has to pay all estimated Financial Institution Tax on or before a specific date–October 15, 2011. Taxpayer did not make its first estimated payment for FIT until almost two months after the due date. Taxpayer did not receive approval for electronic fund transfer ("EFT") payments until ten days after the due date (October 25, 2011), and did not make the actual payment until December 14, 2011.
...
 

Taxpayer has not demonstrated reasonable cause for the payment not being made until December. Consequently, the penalty will not be waived.

 

http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/20131127-IR-045130518NRA.xml.html

Hayden: Indiana Mayors Will Fight to Keep Business Tax

By Maureen Hayden in the Terre Haute Tribune Star:

Mayors from across Indiana are gearing up for a fight to preserve a state business tax that produces nearly $1 billion in annual revenue for local governments, libraries and schools.

Republican leaders in the Statehouse say getting rid of the business personal property tax would lure manufacturers and other big job-creators to the state. But a chorus of mayors say the loss of revenue would hit communities already struggling with the impact of state-imposed property tax caps.

“We’re still discovering the consequences of the tax caps, and now they want to throw another disaster at us,” said Goshen Mayor Allan Kauffman. Goshen and other local governments units in Elkhart County would lose more than $7.5 million a year in revenue if the tax was repealed.

“It’s a crazy idea,” said Batesville Mayor Richard Fledderman, who lives in a small rural county that would lose more than $560,000 in tax revenue. “I find it hard to believe that they would even consider doing this, with the impact that tax caps have already had on communities.”

Indiana companies pay nearly $1 billion a year to local governments, including school and library districts, through a tax on machinery, computers, furniture and other equipment.

A bipartisan group of mayors, meeting in Indianapolis Wednesday to talk about their legislative priorities for the next session, were vehement in opposing a proposal to eliminate the tax that’s been identified as a top priority for GOP leaders who control the Statehouse.

Since the General Assembly passed legislation in 2008 capping local property taxes, Indianaís cities and towns have lost about $250 million annually in revenue. Many communities have cut services in response.

The word “crazy” was used by several mayors at the meeting to describe their sentiment about the tax cut proposal, which has strong backing from the Indiana Chamber of Commerce. While no bill has been drafted, legislation is expected to be filed early in the 2014 session.

A study last year for the Regional Chamber of Commerce of Northeast Indiana found that eliminating the tax would impact almost all Indiana communities, but would cause significant stress in those with large manufacturing bases. In Whiting, for example, where a BP oil refinery is located, 60 percent of the city’s revenue stream comes from the business personal property tax.

Both the Association of Indiana Counties and the Indiana Association of Cities and Towns have come out against the wholesale repeal of the tax unless there is replacement revenue, saying it would force local communities to further cut services. They also worry about impact of the tax repeal on homeowners and other property owners.

Purdue University economist Larry DeBoer estimates that property owners across Indiana would see an automatic increase of more than $450 million in property taxes, because of the way Indiana’s complicated property tax cap system works.

“This is a bigger issue than the property tax caps, from the financial impact on local communities,” said IACT executive director Matt Greller.
...

See the full article here:

http://www.tribstar.com/local/x1566989284/Indiana-mayors-will-fight-to-keep-business-tax

Waltz: Keep Personal Property Tax Discussion in Proper Perspective

By Bill Waltz in the Fort Wayne News-Sentinel:

Reducing the state’s dependence on the taxation of business machinery and equipment came into the spotlight recently with legislative leaders and the Indiana Chamber of Commerce announcing it was a top priority for 2014.

Since then, some attention has focused on the approximately $1 billion in revenue that local governments would have to do without if a full elimination were to take place.

But absolutely no one has called for that money to be taken away without some type of replacement revenue stream. What’s more, there is no way that all personal property tax can be eliminated overnight – that is not going to be the proposal. So those fears can be calmed.

With that aspect clarified, let’s look at why the matter is being brought up in the first place.
Indiana is the only state in the Midwest other than Kentucky that taxes machinery and equipment (personal property) – and Kentucky taxes it at a much lower rate. In fact, only a handful of states tax personal property at a higher rate than Indiana.

In fact, the effective property tax rate for our business commercial and industrial property taxpayers is near the top in every category (big, small, urban or rural), and this is largely due to the state’s tax on business equipment. Numerous studies clearly support that fact. Tax policy experts, economists and academics all acknowledge that personal property tax deters investment in new capital.

And new investment in the capital – machines and equipment – that is necessary for a business to expand and thrive should not be discouraged, but encouraged. New investments mean the business is growing. This means workers are being added and the company is spending money on the services and products of other local businesses.

In other words, the businesses that local communities depend on to employ their residents are more motivated to invest in the community.

All true economic growth comes from a strong business community. Without it, the government will have nobody to serve.
...

See the full article here:

http://www.news-sentinel.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20131205/EDITORIAL/131209842/0/SEARCH

Revenue Finds Exemption Certificates from 2012 Could Not Support Taxpayer's Argument Regarding 2009-2011 Sales Tax Liability

Excerpts of Revenue's Determination follow:

Taxpayer is an out-of-state corporation in the paint business with Indiana sales and operations. As the result of an audit, the Indiana Department of Revenue ("Department") determined that Taxpayer had not collected and remitted the proper amount of Indiana sales tax as a retail merchant for the tax years 2009, 2010, and 2011. The Department therefore issued proposed assessments for sales tax, ten percent negligence penalty, and interest for all three tax years. Taxpayer protested that the Department's proposed assessments of sales tax were too high. Taxpayer also protested the imposition of the ten percent penalties.
...

Taxpayer protests a portion of the Department's proposed assessments of sales tax for the years 2009-11. The Department determined that additional sales tax was due after conducting a sample and projection calculation of Taxpayer's total sales. The Department compared Taxpayer's taxable sales and total sales to arrive at an "error percentage" which was applied to total sales for all three tax years at issue. The resulting number was determined to be taxable sales which were underreported. The Department therefore imposed sales tax on those amounts to arrive at sales tax which should have been collected and remitted. Taxpayer states that several of its customers listed as taxable were actually exempt and should be removed from the Department's error percentage calculations. Also, Taxpayer states that three accounts were internal tracking accounts which did not reflect actual sales to customers. Taxpayer therefore believes that those amounts should also be removed from the Department's error percentage calculations.
...

In this case, Taxpayer states that the Department included sales found in its records as taxable which were actually to exempt customers. In support of this position, Taxpayer provided exemption certificates for three customers. The Department refers to IC § 6-2.5-3-7, which states:

(a) A person who acquires tangible personal property from a retail merchant for delivery in Indiana is presumed to have acquired the property for storage, use, or consumption in Indiana, unless the person or the retail merchant can produce evidence to rebut that presumption.

(b) A retail merchant is not required to produce evidence of nontaxability under subsection (a) if the retail merchant receives from the person who acquired the property an exemption certificate which certifies, in the form prescribed by the department, that the acquisition is exempt from the use tax.

(Emphasis added).

Therefore, a retail merchant is not required to collect and remit sales tax on sales to resellers if the retail merchant receives exemption certificates from their customers, as provided by IC § 6-2.5-3-7.

After review of the three exemption certificates provided in the course of the hearing process, the Department is unable to agree that these documents support Taxpayer's position. As provided by IC § 6-2.5-3-7(b), a retail merchant is not required to produce evidence of nontaxability if the retail merchant receives and exemption certificate which certifies that the purchaser is exempt from tax. In this case, the three exemption certificates provided during the protest process are all dated in the year 2012, which is after the audit years. Therefore, Taxpayer, as a retail merchant, did not receive these exemption certificates at the time of the sales and so these exemption certificates do not support Taxpayer's position.

Regarding the three accounts which Taxpayer states reflect internal inventory tracking, Taxpayer has provided additional explanation of the nature of these accounts. The accounts were internal tracking of components which were incorporated into Taxpayer's products and were not sales to Taxpayer's customers. Therefore, the amounts listed in these accounts were not retail transactions subject to sales tax under IC § 6-2.5-2-1.

In conclusion, Taxpayer's protest regarding the three exemption certificates is denied. Those certificates were not received until after the audit period and cannot be accepted. Taxpayer's protest regarding the three internal inventory tracking accounts is sustained. The Department will remove the amounts found in those accounts and will recalculate the error percentage. The recalculated error percentage will be applied to Taxpayer's total sales and revised billings will be sent to Taxpayer reflecting these adjustments.
...

In this case, Taxpayer incurred a deficiency which the Department determined was due to negligence under 45 IAC 15-11-2(b), and so was subject to a penalty under IC § 6-8.1-10-2.1(a). Taxpayer has affirmatively established that its failure to pay the deficiency was due to reasonable cause and not due to negligence, as required by 45 IAC 15-11-2(c).

http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/20131127-IR-045130515NRA.xml.html

Commission on State Taxation and Financing Publishes Documents from December 3rd Meeting

Library Budget Growth

Tax Sale Summary

http://www.in.gov/legislative/interim/committee/stfp.html

DLGF Publishes Guidance on Manufactured Home VIN Assignment and Title Application Requirements

Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV)

Memorandum

 

To: Indiana County Assessors and Treasurer’s Offices

 

C: Department of Local Government Finance (DLGF)

 

From: Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV)

 

Date: 11/27/2013

 

Re: Manufactured (Mobile) Home VIN Assignment and Title Application Requirements

 

The BMV is providing the below information to assist customers with obtaining a vehicle identification number to satisfy the requirements as enacted in Indiana Code 6-1.1-7-16.

 

•         All manufactured homes are required to have a valid VIN/Serial Number attached and be titled.

•         If an owner wishes to apply for a title and/or needs a VIN for the home and does not have a properly executed certificate of title or certificate of origin, a Court Order is required before the BMV can issue a state assigned VIN or a title.

 

For information on VIN and title application requirements with a court order as the ownership document please visit the myBMV.com website. Applications can be obtained from any local license branch as well but must be mailed with all required documents to the BMV Central Office in Indianapolis for processing:

 

http://www.in.gov/bmv/2664.htm - Instructions for an Application for a Vehicle Identification Number.

http://www.in.gov/bmv/3096.htm - Instructions for Application for Certificate of Title from Court Order ownership document.

 

 

Herald-Times Reports Monroe County Treasurer Handed Deadlines for Tardy Reports

From the Bloomington Herald-Times:

The Monroe County Treasurer has a deadline for completing treasurer’s reports which are months late.

Wednesday morning, treasurer Cathy Smith presented the treasurer’s reports for June and July to the board of commissioners during their weekly staff time meeting

http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/news/local/monroe-county-treasurer-handed-deadlines-for-tardy-reports/article_742d6d9a-51c3-5f80-b40f-b8ae9087f854.html

Leader Reports Washington County to Put Tax Certificates Up for Sale

From the Salem Leader:

The Washington County Commissioners recently learned they are the proud owners of 25 tax sale certificates.

Joe Edwards, with SRI, the company that conducts tax sales for the county, met with the commissioners during their Nov. 19 meeting and explained the certificates are what is left from a recent tax sale. He said they represent about $50,0000 in property taxes that are owed the county.

Edwards explained that some of the certificates have been through several sales. The property owners are not those who are only a payment behind, but owners who are at least a year and a half behind.

He added that many are vacant lots which attract little interest except perhaps from a neighboring property owner who might be interested in purchasing the lot at a reduced price.

Edwards said the commissioners could sell the parcels for whatever they want in an effort to get the property back on the tax roles.

"(It's) an assignment process," Edwards said. "It allows you folks to assign this certificate you hold to a buyer."

Commissioner Phil Marshall asked how important it was to hold a sale. Edwards explained the certificates represents money that didn't make it into the budget. Returning that money to the county benefits other taxpayers, whose taxes might go up otherwise. Getting property back on the tax role also helps prevent the property from appearing blighted and abandoned which doesn't help the community's image.
...

http://www.salemleader.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=7891&SectionID=2&SubSectionID=20&S=1

Daily Journal Reports Nachi America Seeks Tax Breaks on Investment in Greedwood

From the Johnson County Daily Journal:


A Greenwood company has asked the city for tax breaks on new equipment and a building project.

Nachi America subsidiaries Nachi Tool America and Nachi Technology are both expanding. Together, the companies plan to spend about $50 million on new equipment and a new building, and create 17 new jobs.

Nachi Technology’s new equipment will go into its 80,000-square-foot addition, which was completed this year.

http://www.dailyjournal.net/view/local_story/Nachi-seeks-tax-breaks-on-50-m_1386126663/#.Up_fzJV3uP8

Daily Journal Reports Attraction Owners Tout Hotel Tax's Benefit in Johnson County

From the Johnson County Daily Journal:

Visitors to Kelsay Farms who want to visit more local attractions when they come to the farm near Whiteland often don’t know what else there is to see in Johnson County.

Farm tourism director Amy Kelsay gives them lists of some local staples, such as the Mallow Run Winery or The Apple Works. But she believes the county needs a tourism website she can direct visitors to, since she isn’t sure she knows all the the county has to offer.

More than 15 local business owners and residents spoke at the county council meeting Monday in support of an innkeeper’s tax that would fund a county tourism board. The board would be good for the community and local businesses because it would help bring more visitors and potential customers, they said.

http://www.dailyjournal.net/view/local_story/Attraction-owners-tout-hotel-m_1386126846/#.Up_fNpV3uP8

Daily Journal Reports Greenwood Asks Legislature to Put Restaurant Tax on Menu

From the Johnson County Daily Journal:

Greenwood might tax your dinner date or take-out lunch an extra 1 percent to help fund its police and parks departments.

City council members gave a first approval to asking the legislature for permission to approve the tax, a decision that was rushed onto the city council agenda for Monday night. Notice wasn’t given to the public about the vote, which, if approved, could allow the city to implement a 1 percent local tax on every restaurant bill. People buying a sandwich at a grocery deli counter or gas station also would pay the tax.

The city council hasn’t decide if it wants the tax yet. And before any decision can be made, the city has to get the approval of state lawmakers to be allowed to charge a local food and beverage tax.

http://www.dailyjournal.net/view/local_story/Greenwood-to-legislature-Put-r_1386127192/#.Up_eupV3uP8

Herald-Argus Reports Tax Bill Delayed in LaPorte

From the LaPorte Herald-Argus:

The county's first non-provisional property tax bill in more than six years has been delayed until January 2014.

And county officials say it's due to the actions of one property owner.

On Tuesday, La Porte County Auditor Joie Winski said the state recalled all commercial and industrial property values at the end of October after someone raised concerns about the depreciation schedule used on his property.

Now officials are working to get the bills out by the end of January.

Originally, bills were scheduled for release in November after a law initiated by State Rep. Tom Dermody, R-La Porte, allowed the county to send out one tax bill for the 2012-pay-2013 year, instead of the two provisional bills previously sent, essentially ending the county's property tax situation which has caused area municipalities financial trouble due to late and missing tax payments.

The provisional bills are based on earlier tax years and the county has been sending out reconciled bills to make up for the differences in valuations over the billings. But the bills have not been arriving on a regular schedule, necessitating some municipalities to take out loans.

On Monday, La Porte Mayor Blair Milo said the city of La Porte is now expecting to pay almost $1 million on interest by the end of 2014 due to all the loans it's taken out to meet operational expenses. She noted that it has already paid almost $786,196 in interest, money that has gone to nothing tangible for city residents.

City treasurer Teresa Ludlow said the city basically won't be getting any of its 2012-pay-2013 tax money until 2014. Before the countywide tax situation, the city would have received most of its payments by the end of 2013.
...

http://www.heraldargus.com/articles/2013/12/04/news/local/doc529e896a17751514025512.txt

Board's AEL Financial Decision: Taxpayer Failed to Amend Personal Property Tax Return; Thus Despite Error Assessment Must Stand

Excerpts of the Board's Determination follow:

The Petitioner is not entitled to relief. The Board reaches that conclusion for the following reasons:

a) The Petitioner may have made a mistake when it reported the Equipment for assessment and taxation in 2006-2008. Unfortunately, the Petitioner did not take the statutorily required steps to correct that mistake.

b) Indiana’s personal property tax system is based on taxpayers’ self-assessments. Every person owning, holding, possessing, or controlling personal property that has an Indiana tax situs on March 1 of a year must file a personal property tax return. 50 IAC 4.2-2-2; see also, I.C. § 6-1.1-3-7.

c) If an assessing official believes that a taxpayer’s return is inaccurate, the official must notify the taxpayer of his changes, and the taxpayer can then seek review of that determination. See I.C. § 6-1.1-3-20 (requiring an assessing official to give notice if he changes the valuation on a taxpayer’s return); I.C. § 6-1.1-15-1(a)-(c) (providing that a taxpayer may seek review of an assessor’s action within 45 days of being given notice of that action).

d) By contrast, if a taxpayer wants to correct errors in its own self-reported assessment, it must file an amended return. At the times relevant to these appeals, the statute governing amended returns provided, in relevant part:

(a) A taxpayer may file an amended personal property tax return, in conformity with the rules adopted by the department of local government finance, not more than six (6) months after the later of the following:

(1) The filing date for the original personal property tax return, if the taxpayer is not granted and extension in which to file under section 7 of this chapter.

(2) The extension date for the original personal property tax return, if the taxpayer is granted an extension under section 7 of this chapter.

….

(c) If a taxpayer wishes to correct an error made by the taxpayer on the taxpayer’s original personal property tax return, the taxpayer must file an amended personal property tax return under this section within the time required by subsection (a). A taxpayer may claim on an amended personal property tax return any adjustment or exemption that would have been allowable under any statute or rule adopted by the department of local government finance if the adjustment or exemption had been claimed on the original personal property tax return.

I.C. § 6-1.1-3-7.5 (repl. vol. 2006) (emphasis added). The requirement for filing an amended return applies even where, as the Petitioner has alleged happened in this case, an error in the original return leads to double taxation. See I.C. § 6-1.1-15-12(a) and (g).1

e) The undisputed evidence shows that the Petitioner reported the Equipment for assessment on its personal property returns. No assessing official changed the Petitioner’s self-reported assessments. Thus, to the extent the Petitioner believes that it erred in filing its returns, its remedy was not to file appeals under Ind. Code § 6-1.1-15-1, but rather to file amended returns. Unfortunately, the Petitioner failed to do so. Under those circumstances, the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

http://www.in.gov/ibtr/2536.htm

Star Reports Greenwood Considering Food and Beverage Tax

From the Indianapolis Star:

Greenwood officials are considering levying a 1 percent tax on restaurants.

The city council voted 8-0 Monday in favor of a resolution asking state lawmakers to give the city permission to levy the food and beverage tax, which would bring in about $700,000 a year.

A second and final vote on the measure is scheduled for Dec. 16.

The resolution, introduced by council member Thom Hord, notes the city has seen revenue drop $3.4 million since 2009.

The city’s parks budget dropped 36 percent since 2009, according to the resolution.

…

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/local/johnson-county/2013/12/03/greenwood-weighing-food-and-beverage-tax/3852771/

IBJ Reports AppealTrack Offered Incentives for Expansion in Indianapolis

From the Indianapolis Business Journal:

Software startup AppealTrack plans to double its staff in the next few years after securing a commitment for $70,000 in incentives from the Indiana Economic Development Corp.

The 3-year-old company, which develops software that tracks tax appeals, plans to hire seven people by 2016, company officials said last week.

It’s a relatively large leap forward for a small startup that has seven full- and part-time employees working out of Developer Town, a design and development firm in a warehouse space south of Broad Ripple.

...

The Indiana Economic Development Corp. has agreed to provide AppealTrack with $50,000 in tax credits and $20,000 in training grants, contingent on the company's meeting its hiring commitments.

http://www.ibj.com/software-startup-lands-state-incentives-plans-growth/PARAMS/article/44908

Times Reports Online Shoppers Might Owe State Use Tax on Cyber Deals

From the Northwest Indiana Times:

The Indiana Department of Revenue is reminding Hoosiers who scored Cyber Monday deals that state tax must be paid for online purchases, even if the merchant doesn't charge it.

"If you make a purchase and the online or catalog retailer does not collect Indiana's 7 percent sales tax, you are required by law to pay that same 7 percent as a use tax," said Bob Dittmer, spokesman for the tax collection agency.

Use tax is reported on the individual income tax form due in April. Dittmer said Hoosiers should total their online purchases for 2013, calculate 7 percent of that amount and pay the tax owed.

Last year, 28,853 of the state's 3.1 million individual income tax filers paid use tax. Collections totaled $1.9 million.

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/online-shoppers-might-owe-state-use-tax-on-cyber-deals/article_7c3a94c7-a7e8-5fe8-95a8-09efadd09d01.html

Herald-Argus Reports Property Tax Mess in LaPorte Expected to Cost $1 Million in Interest

From the LaPorte Herald-Argus:

City of La Porte officials are expecting to pay nearly $1 million in interest payments by the time the county-wide tax situation is resolved.

During the La Porte City Council's Monday night meeting, Mayor Blair Milo expressed frustration that 2012-pay-2013 county property tax bills won't be released until next year.

At the meeting, board members approved motions to attain tax anticipation warrants (loans from the Indiana Bond Bank) for 2014, and to extend the loans already attained in 2013. This is because the county hasn't billed residents for their 2012 property taxes yet.

Milo said the city has already paid $786,196 in interest on those loans.

"All to pay off interest on money we had to borrow to keep the city operating," she said, "(money) spent toward nothing. When all is said and done that's $1 million of tax payer money that went to nothing."

City of La Porte Treasurer Teresa Ludlow said the interest amount is expected to reach beyond $900,000 when the county's tax situation finally resolves itself in the end of 2014 or beginning of 2015.

Ludlow said the bills aren't expected to go out until February or March of 2014, and with the six month extension allowed for taxpayers, the city won't get most of its money until July or August of that year.

She did point out that the city has an interest rate of less than 3 percent because it uses the Indiana Bond Bank. She said interest rates could have been double that amount.

The county's first non-provisional tax bill in years was supposed to have been sent out in November, but delays have caused it to be pushed into next year.

Milo said she has only heard rumors in regards to why there's a delay. But she noted that the city's problems are only the tip of the iceberg. She said residents trying to sell their homes are also having trouble because they can't tell prospective buyers what the taxes are on their properties. They can only give estimates.

Milo said the city is also in the dark regarding the effects of tax cap, because it still doesn't know what its real taxes are.

http://www.heraldargus.com/articles/2013/12/03/news/local/doc529d511cace89563229446.txt

Journal & Courier Reports Adkev Offered Incentives for Expansion in Monticello

From the Lafayette Journal & Courier:

Adkev Inc., an injection and insert molding manufacturer, announced plans Tuesday to expand its Monticello plant and create up to 60 jobs by 2016. Currently 85 people work there.

The company will invest $11 million at its 183,000-square-foot plant to add 40,000 square feet and renovate and equip the facility, the Indiana Economic Development Corp. said in a press release.

Jeremy Kyser, plant manager, said the company was regularly asked to consider opening facilities in Tennessee, Alabama and Mexico but chose to expand at the plant on North Sixth Street.
...

Indiana Economic Development Corp., the state’s economic development agency, offered Adkev up to $300,000 in conditional tax credits and up to $50,000 in training grants, based on job creation plans.

The tax credits are performance-based, and until Hoosiers are hired, the company is not eligible to claim any incentive money, according to the press release. White County approved additional tax abatement at the request of the White County Economic Development Organization Inc.
...

http://www.jconline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013312030026

Times Reports Calumet Township Official Claims it's "Impossible" to Cut Tax Rate

From the Northwest Indiana Times:

A Calumet Township official told a legislative panel Tuesday it is "impossible" for the township to reduce its tax rate enough to avoid new state sanctions.

Curtis Whittaker, the township's financial manager, explained to the General Assembly's Commission on State Tax and Financing Policy that low property values in Gary, Griffith and unincorporated areas of the township, poor tax collections and the effects of property tax caps force the township to request, or levy, more money than it needs because it only will get about half.

"If we don't ask for $11 million and ask for what we'll spend, we know we'll get even less than that," Whittaker said. "We have been trying to do more with less."

The township last year spent $5.8 million on poor relief, though only $2.2 million was paid to vendors to support needy township residents. The rest — $3.6 million — was spent on administrative costs, according to the state's Department of Local Government Finance.

Total township spending in 2012 was $7.5 million.

Whittaker said nearly all the administrative expense goes toward staff, equipment and supplies that support direct poor relief.

He said if the township's finances were accounted similar to nonprofit organizations, the township's administrative costs would be a much smaller share of its spending.

The commission chairman, state Sen. Brandt Hershman, R-Buck Creek, wasn't persuaded.

He said other Indiana townships with similar populations, income levels and property values as Calumet Township spend far less.

A Hershman-sponsored law enacted earlier this year requires Calumet Township reduce its township assistance tax rate below 12 times the statewide average. The rate is calculated by dividing the township's levy by the assessed value of property in the township.

Calumet Township's rate currently stands at 22.6 times the state average, according to the Legislative Services Agency.

The law authorizes the state to take over township finances next year if the township does not reduce its tax rate.

In addition, the town of Griffith could leave Calumet Township and join another in 2015 if state intervention fails to bring down the rate.

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/lake/gary/impossible-to-cut-calumet-twp-tax-rate-officials-say/article_fe2ab561-b7c6-5e49-8a8a-bd618f5e79cf.html