NYC Resources 311 Office of the Mayor

Tax Appeals Tribunal Home
About Tax Appeals Tribunal
Rules of practice & Procedure
Pending Exceptions
Determinations & Orders
Recent Decisions, Determinations & Orders
Search Decisions, Determinations & Orders
Forms
Annual Report
Contact Tax Appeals Tribunal


Get Adobe PDF ReaderAdobe Acrobat Reader
(required to view PDFs)




Recent Decisions, Determinations & Orders

Appeals Division
Administrative Law Judge Division


(When you click on the name of the Decision, Determination or Order, a PDF file for that item will be displayed)

APPEALS DIVISION


In the Matter of JONIS REALTY/E. 29TH STREET, LLC.
TAT (E) 09-9 (RP)MR – ORDER 

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION 

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX – RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO REARGUE AN OCTOBER 24, 2011 ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL WAS DENIED.
SEPTEMBER 28, 2012


In the Matter of JONIS REALTY/E. 29TH STREET, LLC.
TAT (E) 09-9 (RP) - ORDER

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE EXCEPTION WAS GRANTED INSOFAR AS THE MATTER WAS REMANDED WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ANY CLAIM OR ARGUMENT THAT MAY BE PRESENTED BY THE PARTIES AND THE PETITION WAS REINSTATED.
OCTOBER 24, 2011


In the Matter of 1 WORLD TRADE CENTER LLC, ET AL.
TAT (E) 07-34 (CR), et al. - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

COMMERCIAL RENT TAX - PETITIONERS' PAYMENTS TO THE PORT AUTHORITY FOR THE PERIOD AFTER SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE COMMERCIAL RENT TAX (THE "CRT").  PETITIONERS' PAYMENTS TO THE PORT AUTHORITY FOR THE PERIOD ENDING SEPTEMBER 10, 2001, ARE SUBJECT TO THE CRT.  PETITIONERS CORRECTLY REPORTED THE INITIAL RENT PAYMENTS ON THEIR CRT RETURNS AS RENT FOR THE FIRST TAX YEAR ATTRIBUTABLE SOLELY TO THE PERIOD PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, AND CANNOT PRORATE SUCH PAYMENTS OVER THE ENTIRE 99-YEAR TERM OF THE LEASE OR ON A DAILY BASIS OVER THE PERIOD BEGINNING JULY 16, 2001, AND ENDING MAY 31, 2002.  BUSINESS INTERRUPTION INSURANCE PAYMENTS CANNOT BE DEDUCTED IN COMPUTING BASE RENT AS EQUIVALENT TO SUBTENANT RENTS.  ALL PENALTIES ARE CANCELLED.
OCTOBER 12, 2011

In the Matter of MURPHY & O'CONNELL
TAT (E) 06-18 (UB) – DECISION 

 

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX – A PARTNERSHIP'S PAYMENTS TO A PENSION PLAN ON BEHALF OF ITS PARTNERS ARE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF §11-507(3) OF THE NEW YORK CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AND ARE NOT DEDUCTIBLE FOR PURPOSES OF THE NEW YORK CITY UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX.  PETITIONER IS DUE A REFUND IN THE AMOUNT OF THE PENALTIES AND IS ENTITLED TO INTEREST ON THE REFUND OF THE PENALTIES.
JULY 26, 2011

In the Matter of AMERICAN BANKNOTE CORPORATION; AMERICAN BANK NOTE CORP.; AMERICAN BANK NOTE CO., INC. AND COMBINED AFFILIATES
TAT (E) 03-31 (GC) - ORDER
TAT (E) 03-32 (GC)
TAT (E) 03-33 (GC)

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

GENERAL CORPORATION TAX - IN RESPONSE TO AN EXCEPTION TAKEN BY PETITIONERS, THE TRIBUNAL COMMISSIONERS ISSUED A DECISION DATED NOVEMBER 14, 2008.  ON THE PARTIES' POST-DECISION MOTIONS, THE TRIBUNAL COMMISSIONERS CLARIFIED THE LAST SENTENCE OF THE DECISION TO PROVIDE THAT THE NOTICES OF DETERMINATION ARE CANCELLED IN FULL.  IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS, THE MOTIONS WERE DENIED.
DECEMBER 3, 2010

In the Matter of BANKERS TRUST CORPORATION (f/k/a BANKERS TRUST NEW YORK CORPORATION) AND ITS AFFILIATED ENTITIES
TAT (E) 04-36 (BT) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

BANK TAX - PETITIONERS DID NOT PROVE THAT BANKERS TRUST COMPANY WAS THE ACTUAL BENEFICIAL OWNER OF THE VOTING STOCK OF TWO INDIRECT SUBSIDIARIES DURING THE TAX YEARS FOR PURPOSES OF THE NEW YORK CITY BANKING CORPORATION TAX AND, THUS, PETITIONERS WERE NOT ENTITLED TO A DEDUCTION FOR 17% OF THE INTEREST INCOME PAID BY THE TWO INDIRECT SUBSIDIARIES TO BANKERS TRUST COMPANY IN THE TAX YEARS.
APRIL 8, 2010

In the Matter of AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.
TAT (E) 05-29 (HO) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

HOTEL ROOM OCCUPANCY TAX - THE HOTEL ROOM OCCUPANCY TAX ("HROT") EXEMPTION FOR A PERMANENT RESIDENT DOES NOT APPLY TO ADDITIONAL ROOMS RENTED BY PETITIONER ON A TEMPORARY BASIS UNTIL SUCH ROOMS HAVE BEEN OCCUPIED FOR AT LEAST 180 CONSECUTIVE DAYS.  IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SEPARATE TAXATION OF EACH OCCUPANCY FOR PURPOSES OF THE HROT FOR A PERSON TO BE A PERMANENT RESIDENT WITH RESPECT TO ONE OCCUPANCY FOR 180 CONSECUTIVE DAYS WITHOUT BEING A PERMANENT RESIDENT WITH RESPECT TO ANOTHER OCCUPANCY OF A SHORTER DURATION IN THE SAME HOTEL.  THEREFORE, THE LAST SENTENCE OF SUBDIVISION (2) AND ILLUSTRATION (ii) OF SUBDIVISION (3) OF HROT RULE §12-01 "PERMANENT RESIDENT", WHICH LIMIT THE EXEMPTION TO THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF ROOMS OCCUPIED CONTINUOUSLY FOR AT LEAST 180 CONSECUTIVE DAYS, ARE VALID. 
JUNE 29, 2009

In the Matter of AMERICAN BANKNOTE CORPORATION;
AMERICAN BANK NOTE CORP.;
AMERICAN BANK NOTE CO., INC.
AND COMBINED AFFILIATES

TAT (E) 03-31 (GC) - DECISION
TAT (E) 03-32 (GC)
TAT (E) 03-33 (GC)

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

GENERAL CORPORATION TAX - PETITIONERS (THE "HOLDING COMPANIES" AND THE "OPERATING COMPANIES") SHOULD HAVE BEEN PERMITTED TO FILE A COMBINED GCT RETURN FOR THE TAX YEARS.  THE MERGER WAS ESSENTIAL TO THE FUTURE OF THE BUSINESS AND RESULTED IN SUBSTANTIAL ECONOMIES OF SCALE FOR ALL PARTICIPANTS.  ON THIS RECORD, THE CORPORATE STRUCTURE AND THE REPLACEMENT OF PRE-MERGER DEBT, BOTH REQUIRED BY A THIRD PARTY LENDER, SUPPORT THE FINDINGS THAT THE HOLDING COMPANIES WERE PART OF THE UNITARY BUSINESS CONDUCTED BY THE OPERATING COMPANIES AND SEPARATE GCT FILING WOULD RESULT IN A DISTORTION.
NOVEMBER 14, 2008

In the Matter of JUNGIL SONG
TAT (E) 06-12 (RP) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX – A TRANSFER OF PROPERTY SUBJECT TO A MORTGAGE IS TAXABLE, REGARDLESS OF THE PERSONAL LIABILITY OF THE PARTIES TO THE TRANSFER.  ONE-HALF THE MORTGAGE IS TAXABLE CONSIDERATION FOR THE TRANSFER OF THE PROPERTY FROM PETITIONER TO PETITIONER AND HIS WIFE BECAUSE THE MORTGAGE WAS A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME OF THE TRANSFER, REGARDLESS OF THE FACT THAT PETITIONER'S WIFE GUARANTEED THE MORTGAGE PRIOR TO THE TRANSFER, AND REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ANY ADDITIONAL PURCHASE PRICE WAS PAID FOR THE PROPERTY PURSUANT TO THE TRANSFER.
SEPTEMBER 29, 2008

 

In the Matter of CASTLE POWER LLC
TAT (E) 04-32 (UT) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

UTILITY TAX - SALES OF NATURAL GAS BY MARKETER TO CUSTOMERS IN NEW YORK CITY WERE NOT SUBJECT TO THE NEW YORK CITY UTILITY TAX BECAUSE THE SALES TOOK PLACE OUTSIDE THE CITY.  HOWEVER, THE TRIBUNAL CONCLUDED THAT SECTION 172.b OF THE CITY CHARTER DID NOT ENTITLE PETITIONER TO RECOVER ITS COSTS IN LITIGATING THIS CASE BEFORE THE ALJ OR THE TRIBUNAL COMMISSIONERS.
DECEMBER 5, 2007

In the Matter of NATIONAL BULK CARRIERS, INC. AND AFFILIATES
TAT (E) 04-33 (GC) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

GENERAL CORPORATION TAX - UNDER THE CAPITAL METHOD OF COMPUTING ITS GCT LIABILITY, PETITIONER SHOULD INCLUDE IN ITS BUSINESS CAPITAL A RATABLE PORTION OF THE REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY PARTNERSHIPS IN WHICH PETITIONER OWNED INTERESTS.  THAT PORTION OF PETITIONER'S BUSINESS CAPITAL SHOULD BE VALUED USING THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF PETITIONER'S RATABLE SHARE OF THE PARTNERSHIPS' REAL PROPERTY.
NOVEMBER 30, 2007

In the Matter of PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
TAT (E) 01-19 (UB), ET AL. - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX – PAYMENTS MADE BY PETITIONER TO RETIRED PARTNERS THAT WERE ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY A FUNCTION OF SERVICES RENDERED TO PETITIONER BY THE RETIRED PARTNERS HAD TO BE ADDED BACK IN COMPUTING PETITIONER'S UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAXABLE INCOME FOR THE TAX YEARS AS PAYMENTS FOR SERVICES PURSUANT TO CODE §11-507(3). THE TRIBUNAL REJECTED PETITIONER'S ARGUMENT THAT, NOTWITHSTANDING A PROHIBITION AGAINST PAYMENT FOR GOODWILL IN SECTION 13 OF THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT, THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE FOR THE RETIRED PARTNERS' SHARES OF PETITIONER'S GOODWILL. IN ADDITION, PETITIONER DID NOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT A FINDING THAT THE PAYMENTS WERE NOT FOR "SERVICES" OF RETIRED PARTNERS. AS A SEPARATE ISSUE, PETITIONER'S CONTRIBUTIONS TO RETIREMENT PLANS IN EACH OF THE TAX YEARS REPRESENTED PAYMENTS MADE BY PETITIONER ON BEHALF OF ITS PARTNERS FOR "SERVICES" UNDER CODE §11-507(3) THAT MUST BE ADDED BACK IN DETERMINING PETITIONER'S UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAXABLE INCOME FOR THE TAX YEARS.
NOVEMBER 5, 2007

In the Matter of CITRIN COOPERMAN & COMPANY, LLP
TAT (E) 01-17 (UB) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX - PAYMENTS MADE BY PETITIONER TO RETIRED PARTNERS AND IDENTIFIED IN THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT AND OTHER RELEVANT AGREEMENTS AS "PAST SERVICE COMPENSATION" HAD TO BE ADDED BACK IN COMPUTING PETITIONER'S UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAXABLE INCOME FOR THE TAX YEARS AS PAYMENTS FOR SERVICES PURSUANT TO CODE §11-507(3). THE TRIBUNAL REJECTED PETITIONER'S ARGUMENT THAT, NOTWITHSTANDING IDENTIFICATION OF THE PAYMENTS IN PETITIONER'S AGREEMENTS AS "PAST SERVICE COMPENSATION", THE PAYMENTS WERE ACTUALLY PAYMENTS FOR GOODWILL AND NOT PAST SERVICES. THE TRIBUNAL HELD PETITIONER TO THE TERMS OF ITS FREELY ADOPTED AND UNAMBIGUOUS AGREEMENTS.
SEPTEMBER 10, 2007

In the Matter of RAYMOND AND ALICE MARQUEZ
TAT (E) 97-107 (UB) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX - PETITIONER RAYMOND MARQUEZ WAS ENGAGED IN AN UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS IN THE CITY DURING EACH OF THE TAX YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1990 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1993 (THE "TAX YEARS"), HOWEVER, THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT PETITIONER ALICE MARQUEZ WAS ENGAGED IN THAT SAME UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS IN THE CITY DURING THE TAX YEARS. RESPONDENT'S ADOPTION OF A STATE AUDIT OF PETITIONER RAYMOND MARQUEZ FOR 1993 TO SUPPORT THE UBT DEFICIENCY AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE CITY HEARING CONSTITUTED A NEW FACTUAL ISSUE PREJUDICIAL TO PETITIONERS. WHILE RESPONDENT WAS PRECLUDED FROM ADOPTING THE STATE AUDIT METHODOLOGY, RESPONDENT WAS FOUND TO HAVE MODIFIED THE NOTICE OF DETERMINATION TO REDUCE THE DEFICIENCY ASSERTED. RESPONDENT ADEQUATELY DESCRIBED THE METHODOLOGY USED IN THE ORIGINAL CITY AUDIT AND THE RECORD SUPPORTED THE REDUCED UBT DEFICIENCY ASSERTED IN THE MODIFIED NOTICE. THE RECORD ALSO SUPPORTED THE IMPOSITION OF FRAUD PENALTIES AND A SUBSTANTIAL UNDERSTATEMENT PENALTY FOR THE TAX YEARS.
MAY 16, 2007

In the Matter of SAMUEL D. FRIEDMAN
TAT (E) 03-21 (UB) - ORDER
TAT (E) 03-22 (UB)
TAT (E) 03-23 (UB)

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX - THE TRIBUNAL ISSUED AN ORDER PLACING THIS MATTER ON HOLD SINE DIE.
APRIL 30, 2007

In the Matter of ASSOCIATED BUSINESS TELEPHONE SYSTEMS CORPORATION
TAT (E) 99-65 (UT) - DECISION
TAT (E) 99-66 (UT)

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

UTILITY TAX - RESPONDENT PROVED THAT THE NOTICES OF DETERMINATION (THE "NOTICES") WERE MAILED TO PETITIONER ON APRIL 7, 1999 BY (1) OFFERING PROOF OF A STANDARD PROCEDURE USED REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICES OF DETERMINATION BY AN INDIVIDUAL WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THAT PROCEDURE AND (2) OFFERING PROOF THAT THE STANDARD PROCEDURE WAS FOLLOWED IN THIS CASE. THUS, THE PETITIONS FOR HEARING WERE UNTIMELY AS THEY WERE MAILED ON SEPTEMBER 1, 1999, MORE THAN NINETY DAYS FROM THE DATE THE NOTICES WERE MAILED.
APRIL 12, 2007

In the Matter of ASSOCIATED BUSINESS TELEPHONE SYSTEMS CORPORATION
TAT (E) 93-1053 (UT) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

UTILITY TAX - PETITIONER IS LIABLE FOR UTILITY TAX AS A VENDOR OF UTILITY SERVICES. PETITIONER, AS A CONCESSIONAIRE, PROVIDED TELEPHONE SERVICE TO THE HOTEL AND TO THE HOTEL'S GUESTS ALL OF WHOM WERE THE END USERS OF THE SERVICE. UNDER THE FACTS OF THIS CASE, THERE WAS NO SALE OF UTILITY SERVICES TO THE HOTEL FOR RESALE AND THUS PETITIONER WAS NOT ENTITLED TO REDUCE ITS GROSS OPERATING INCOME BY RECEIPTS FOR SALES OF TELEPHONE SERVICE FOR RESALE.
APRIL 12, 2007

In the Matter of RHM-88, LLC
TAT (E) 01-23 (RP) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE ASSESSMENT OF REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX ("RPTT") ON A TRANSACTION INVOLVING A SUBLEASE BETWEEN PETITIONER AND THE UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR ALL PORTIONS OF TWO U.N. PLAZA CONSTITUTING THE UNITED NATIONS PLAZA HOTEL (THE "SUBLEASE") WAS TIME-BARRED. THE NOTICE OF DETERMINATION WAS ISSUED AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF THE THREE-YEAR LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR ASSESSING RPTT AND THE WAIVERS DID NOT COVER THE SUBLEASE. THERE WAS NO MUTUAL MISTAKE OF THE PARTIES THAT WOULD REQUIRE REFORMATION OF THE WAIVERS TO INCLUDE THE SUBLEASE. FURTHERMORE, AS THERE WAS NO AFFIRMATIVE WRONGDOING ON PETITIONER'S PART IN THE FORM OF FALSE STATEMENTS OR MISLEADING SILENCES, PETITIONER WAS NOT ESTOPPED FROM ASSERTING THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS TIME-BARRED.
JANUARY 4, 2007



In the Matter of DAVID GRUBER
TAT (E) 03-7 (RP) - DECISION
TAT (E) 03-8 (RP)
TAT (E) 03-9 (RP)

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE SALE OF THREE CONTIGUOUS RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS WAS SUBJECT TO NEW YORK CITY REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX ("RPTT") AT THE LOWER TAX RATE SCHEDULE ACCORDED TO THE CONVEYANCES OF ONE, TWO OR THREE FAMILY HOUSES AND INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS PURSUANT TO SECTION 11-2102.a(9)(i) OF THE NEW YORK CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE (THE "CODE"). UNDER THE FACTS PRESENTED IN THE RECORD, THE TRANSFERS OF THE THREE UNITS DID NOT COMPRISE THE CONVEYANCE OF MORE THAN ONE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNIT. THUS, THE THREE NOTICES OF DETERMINATION ASSESSING RPTT AT THE HIGHER TAX RATES ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT WERE DISMISSED. HOWEVER, UNDER THE FACTS OF THIS CASE IT WAS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE TRIBUNAL COMMISSIONERS TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF WHETHER ANY SALE OF MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS FROM THE SAME SELLER TO THE SAME BUYER COULD EVER BE SUBJECT TO THE HIGHER TAX RATE SCHEDULE ACCORDED "ALL OTHER CONVEYANCES" PURSUANT TO SECTION 11-2102.a(9)(ii) OF THE CODE. PETITIONER'S MOTION TO RECUSE A TRIBUNAL COMMISSIONER WAS RENDERED MOOT BECAUSE PURSUANT TO THE RULE OF NECESSITY THAT COMMISSIONER WILL HAVE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE REVIEW OF THE APPEAL. OTHERWISE, THE TRIBUNAL, HAVING ONLY ONE NON-DISQUALIFIED COMMISSIONER, WOULD BE UNABLE TO ISSUE A DECISION.
SEPTEMBER 12, 2006



In the Matter of DANIEL AND SHEILA ROSENBLUM
TAT (E) 01-31 (RP) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE SALE OF A DUPLEX CONDOMINIUM UNIT (THE "RESIDENTIAL UNIT") AND A NONCONTIGUOUS SUITE UNIT LOCATED ON A SEPARATE FLOOR OF THE SAME BUILDING AND RESTRICTED TO USE AS A RESIDENCE FOR A NONPAYING GUEST OR DOMESTIC EMPLOYEE OF THE OWNER OF THE RESIDENTIAL UNIT WAS SUBJECT TO THE NEW YORK CITY REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX ("RPTT") AT THE LOWER TAX RATE SCHEDULE ACCORDED TO THE CONVEYANCES OF ONE, TWO OR THREE FAMILY HOUSES AND INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS PURSUANT TO SECTION 11-2102.a(9)(i) OF THE NEW YORK CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE (THE "CODE"). THE SUITE UNIT WAS NOT A SEPARATE INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNIT BUT WAS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE SAME RESIDENCE AS THE RESIDENTIAL UNIT. THE APPROPRIATE TAX RATE APPLICABLE TO THE SALE OF A STORAGE UNIT AND A WINE CELLAR UNIT AS PART OF THE SAME TRANSACTION WAS NOT AT ISSUE IN THE CASE. THUS, PETITIONERS' REFUND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL RPTT PAID WITH RESPECT TO THE RESIDENTIAL UNIT AT THE HIGHER TAX RATE SCHEDULE PURSUANT TO SECTION 11-2102.a(9)(ii) OF THE CODE WAS GRANTED WITHOUT INTEREST. UNDER THE FACTS OF THIS CASE IT WAS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE TRIBUNAL COMMISSIONERS TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF WHETHER ANY SALE OF MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS FROM THE SAME SELLER TO THE SAME BUYER COULD EVER BE SUBJECT TO THE HIGHER TAX RATE SCHEDULE ACCORDED "ALL OTHER CONVEYANCES" PURSUANT TO SECTION 11-2102.a(9)(ii) OF THE CODE. WHILE A TRIBUNAL COMMISSIONER WOULD HAVE DISQUALIFIED HERSELF FROM PARTICIPATING IN THE REVIEW OF THIS CASE BECAUSE OF HER PARTICIPATION IN THE ISSUANCE OF A LETTER RULING TO PETITIONERS WHILE THE COMMISSIONER SERVED AS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR TAX LAW AND CONCILIATIONS FOR THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE PRIOR TO HER APPOINTMENT TO THE TRIBUNAL, SHE MUST, PURSUANT TO THE RULE OF NECESSITY, PARTICIPATE IN THE REVIEW. OTHERWISE, THE TRIBUNAL, HAVING ONLY ONE NON-DISQUALIFIED COMMISSIONER, WOULD BE UNABLE TO ISSUE A DECISION.
SEPTEMBER 12, 2006



In the Matter of CAMBRIDGE LEASING CORPORATION
TAT (E) 03-11 (RP) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE SALE OF A DUPLEX APARTMENT COMPRISING TWO CONDOMINIUM UNITS THAT WERE PHYSICALLY COMBINED PRIOR TO THE SALE AND A NONCONTIGUOUS MAID'S ROOM LOCATED ON A SEPARATE FLOOR OF THE SAME BUILDING WAS SUBJECT TO THE NEW YORK CITY REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX ("RPTT") AT THE LOWER TAX RATE SCHEDULE ACCORDED TO THE CONVEYANCES OF ONE, TWO OR THREE FAMILY HOUSES AND INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS PURSUANT TO SECTION 11-2102.a(9)(i) OF THE NEW YORK CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE (THE "CODE"). THE MAID'S ROOM WAS NOT A SEPARATE INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNIT BUT WAS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE SAME RESIDENCE AS THE DUPLEX APARTMENT. THUS, PETITIONER'S REFUND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL RPTT PAID AT THE HIGHER TAX RATE SCHEDULE PURSUANT TO SECTION 11-2102.a(9)(ii) OF THE CODE WAS GRANTED. UNDER THE FACTS OF THIS CASE IT WAS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE TRIBUNAL COMMISSIONERS TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF WHETHER ANY SALE OF MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS FROM THE SAME SELLER TO THE SAME BUYER COULD EVER BE SUBJECT TO THE HIGHER TAX RATE SCHEDULE ACCORDED "ALL OTHER CONVEYANCES" PURSUANT TO SECTION 11-2102.a(9)(ii) OF THE CODE.
SEPTEMBER 12, 2006



In the Matter of PATTERSON, BELKNAP, WEBB & TYLER, LLP
TAT (E) 00-8 (CR) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

COMMERCIAL RENT TAX - PETITIONER COULD NOT REDUCE ITS BASE RENT FOR COMMERCIAL RENT TAX PURPOSES FOR THE PERIOD JUNE 1, 1996 THROUGH MAY 31, 1997 BY ITS SHARE OF A REAL PROPERTY TAX REFUND THAT PETITIONER RECEIVED IN 1996 BUT THAT WAS RELATED TO PAYMENTS INVOLVING ANOTHER LEASE WITH ANOTHER LANDLORD FOR A DIFFERENT PREMISES FOR EARLIER TAX PERIODS. PETITIONER FAILED TO FILE PROTECTIVE REFUND CLAIMS WITHIN THE APPLICABLE LIMITATIONS PERIODS. HOWEVER, PETITIONER IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE NEGLIGENCE PENALTIES UNDER CODE SECTION 11-715(d) AS THE BASE RENT REDUCTION WHILE WRONG, WAS NOT NEGLIGENT NOR WAS THERE AN INTENTIONAL DISREGARD OF THE LAW OR RULES.
JULY 7, 2006

 

In the Matter of CREDIT INDUSTRIEL ET COMMERCIAL
TAT (E) 02-19 (BT) - DECISION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
APPEALS DIVISION

BANK TAX - IN COMPUTING ITS BANK TAX LIABILITY FOR THE TAX YEAR 1994, PETITIONER ELECTED TO USE THE FORMULA ALLOCATION MODIFICATION WITH RESPECT TO THE INTERNATIONAL BANKING FACILITY ("IBF") ESTABLISHED BY PETITIONER'S BRANCH IN NEW YORK CITY. THUS, PETITIONER INCLUDED IN ITS ENTIRE NET INCOME THE INCOME OR LOSS OF THE IBF BUT TREATED CERTAIN PAYROLL, RECEIPTS AND DEPOSITS AS DERIVED FROM OUTSIDE NEW YORK CITY FOR PURPOSES OF CALCULATING THE ALLOCATION FACTORS. PETITIONER WAS NOT ENTITLED TO EXCLUDE FROM THE NUMERATOR OF ITS DEPOSITS FACTOR ALL OF THE DEPOSITS INCLUDED ON THE BOOKS OF THE IBF BECAUSE CERTAIN DEPOSITS FROM FOREIGN PERSONS RECORDED IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE IBF WERE NOT PROPERLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PRODUCTION OF ELIGIBLE GROSS INCOME.
JUNE 30, 2006

CORWOOD ENTERPRISES, INC. ET AL. - DECISION - 06/02/06
TAT (E) 00-39 (RP),et al

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE DENIALS OF REFUNDS OF REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX ("RPTT") CLAIMED BY FIVE FOREIGN CORPORATIONS ON THE TRANSFER OF ALL THE STOCK IN FIVE SUBSIDIARY FOREIGN CORPORATIONS WERE AFFIRMED. EACH OF THE FIVE FOREIGN SUBSIDIARY CORPORATIONS OWNED ONE OF FIVE DELAWARE CORPORATIONS WHICH TOGETHER HELD THE ENTIRE OWNERSHIP INTERESTS IN A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY THAT OWNED THE FOUR SEASONS HOTEL IN THE CITY. IN DETERMINING WHETHER THIS MULTI-TIER TRANSACTION IS A TRANSFER OF A CONTROLLING ECONOMIC INTEREST IN AN ENTITY THAT OWNS REAL PROPERTY, THE DEPARTMENT IS PERMITTED TO LOOK THROUGH LAYERS OF PASSIVE, SINGLE-PURPOSE ENTITIES TO TREAT THE TRANSFER AS A TRANSFER OF A CONTROLLING ECONOMIC INTEREST IN AN ENTITY THAT OWNS REAL PROPERTY. THE ENABLING LEGISLATION DOES NOT PRECLUDE THE IMPOSITION OF THE RPTT ON TRANSFERS THAT CLOSE OUTSIDE THE CITY WHERE THE REAL PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE CITY. IN ADDITION, THE IMPOSITION OF THE RPTT ON THE TRANSFERS DOES NOT VIOLATE THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION OR THE DUE PROCESS OR COMMERCE CLAUSES OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
JUNE 2, 2006

 

LEONARD I. HOROWITZ - DECISION - 09/01/05
TAT (E) 99-3 (UB) et al.

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX - PAYMENTS MADE BY THE UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS OF AN ATTORNEY ENGAGED IN THE PRACTICE OF LAW AS A SOLE PROPRIETOR FOR ONE-HALF OF THE PROPRIETOR'S SELF-EMPLOYMENT TAX; THE COST OF THE PROPRIETOR'S HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO A DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN FOR THE PROPRIETOR ARE NOT DEDUCTIBLE FROM UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS GROSS INCOME PURSUANT TO THE NEW YORK CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE (THE "CODE"). SECTION 11-507(3) OF THE CODE PROVIDES, IN RELEVANT PART, THAT "[N]O DEDUCTION SHALL BE ALLOWED . . . FOR AMOUNTS PAID OR INCURRED TO A PROPRIETOR OR PARTNER FOR SERVICES OR FOR USE OF CAPITAL." THE PAYMENTS AT ISSUE WHILE MADE TO THIRD PARTIES WERE MADE BY THE UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS AND WERE REMUNERATION FOR SERVICES RENDERED BY THE PROPRIETOR TO HIS UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS.
SEPTEMBER 1, 2005

 

GOLDMAN & GOLDMAN, P.C. - DECISION - 03/24/05
TAT (E) 02-12 (CR)

COMMERCIAL RENT TAX - SINCE THERE WERE NO UNRESOLVED ISSUES OF MATERIAL FACT, THE COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK (THE "COMMISSIONER") WAS ENTITLED TO SUMMARY DETERMINATION THAT THE PETITION FILED ON FEBRUARY 27, 2002 BY THE PETITIONER WAS NOT TIMELY FILED WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE NOTICE OF DETERMINATION (THE "NOTICE") BEING PROTESTED. THE COMMISSIONER PROVED THAT THE NOTICE WAS PROPERLY ADDRESSED AND ESTABLISHED WHEN THE NOTICE WAS MAILED BY (1) OFFERING PROOF OF A STANDARD PROCEDURE USED REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICES OF DETERMINATION BY AN INDIVIDUAL WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THAT PROCEDURE AND (2) OFFERING PROOF THAT THE STANDARD PROCEDURE WAS FOLLOWED IN THIS CASE. PETITIONER WAS UNABLE TO REBUT THE PRESUMPTION OF RECEIPT
MARCH 24, 2005

 

AIR PEGASUS CORPORATION - DECISION - 02/04/05
TAT (E) 00-23 (CR), TAT (E) 00-24 (CR)

COMMERCIAL RENT TAX - PETITIONER WAS SUBJECT TO THE COMMERCIAL RENT OR OCCUPANCY TAX ("CRT") AS THE PETITIONER PAID RENT TO THE PORT AUTHORITY OF THE STATES OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY (THE "PORT AUTHORITY") FOR THE USE AND OCCUPANCY OF TAXABLE PREMISES, THE WEST 30TH STREET HELIPORT (THE "HELIPORT"). PETITIONER WAS NOT THE AGENT OF THE PORT AUTHORITY FOR PURPOSES OF PETITIONER'S OPERATIONS AT THE HELIPORT. IN ADDITION, THERE IS NO PROVISION IN THE CRT OR ANY OTHER STATUTE EXEMPTING PETITIONER FROM THE CRT.
FEBRUARY 4, 2005

 

 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

In the Matter of MEHRAB RASUL
TAT(H)12-2(CT) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

CIGARETTE TAX – PETITIONER WAS NOT IN POSSESSION OR CONTROL OF UNTAXED CIGARETTES FOR THE PURPOSE OF EITHER ADMINISTRATIVE CODE § 11-1302 OR ADMINISTRATIVE CODE § 11-1317 AND IS NOT LIABLE FOR THE CIGARETTE TAX OR THE PENALTIES ASSERTED BY RESPONDENT.
JUNE 27, 2014


In the Matter of TOCQUEVILLE ASSET MANAGEMENT L.P.
TAT(H)10-37(UB) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX – THE PORTION OF THE MANAGEMENT FEE PETITIONER PAID TO ITS CORPORATE GENERAL PARTNER THAT REPRESENTS COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES RENDERED TO PETITIONER BY EMPLOYEES OF THE CORPORATE GENERAL PARTNER WHO ARE ALSO PETITIONER'S PARTNERS IS NOT DEDUCTIBLE BY PETITIONER FOR PURPOSES OF THE UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX.
JUNE 17, 2014


In the Matter of SECURITIES INDUSTRY AUTOMATION CORP.
TAT(H)12-9(UT) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

UTILITY TAX – PETITIONER FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT ITS REVENUES FROM PER END USER FEES WERE FROM SALES FOR RESALE OF TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES.  PETITIONER'S COLLOCATION SERVICES ARE USED FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF FACILITATING CONNECTIVITY TO PETITIONER'S TELECOMMUNICATIONS NETWORK AND ARE SUBJECT TO UTILITY TAX.
JUNE 17, 2014


In the Matter of YORK AVENUE TENNIS, LLC.
TAT(H)11-20(CR) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

COMMERCIAL RENT TAX – WHERE PETITIONER'S RENT WAS THE GREATER OF A FIXED ANNUAL MINIMUM OR A PERCENTAGE OF GROSS RECEIPTS AND IT PAID THE FIXED ANNUAL MINIMUM, BASE RENT WAS THE FIXED ANNUAL MINIMUM RATHER THAN 15% OF GROSS RECEIPTS.  PENALTIES WERE ABATED BECAUSE PETITIONER ACTED REASONABLY AND IN GOOD FAITH.
JUNE 3, 2014


In the Matter of KEYPORT, INC.
TAT(H)13-28 (RP) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE PETITION WAS DISMISSED AS IT WAS FILED MORE THAN 90 DAYS AFTER THE MAILING OF THE CONCILIATION DECISION.
APRIL 17, 2014


In the Matter of THE MCGRAW-HILL COMPANIES, INC.
TAT(H)10-19(GC)ET AL. - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

GENERAL CORPORATION TAX - PETITIONER, IN COMPUTING ITS BUSINESS ALLOCATION PERCENTAGE FOR THE 2003-2008 TAX YEARS, MAY ALLOCATE RECEIPTS FROM THE PUBLIC CREDIT RATINGS OF ITS STANDARD & POOR'S DIVISION ACCORDING TO AN AUDIENCE-BASED OR CIRCULATION-BASED METHODOLOGY.  FOR THE 2006 TAX YEAR, PETITIONER CANNOT ELECT TO USE A DOUBLE-WEIGHTED RECEIPTS FACTOR IN COMPUTING ITS BUSINESS ALLOCATION PERCENTAGE BECAUSE LESS THAN FIFTY PERCENT OF PETITIONER'S INCOME CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO MANUFACTURING ACTIVITIES.
FEBRUARY 24, 2014


In the Matter of TRUMP VILLAGE SECTION 4, INC.
TAT(H)10-34(RP) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

 

 

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX – THE DISSOLUTION OF A MITCHELL-LAMA HOUSING CORPORATION PURSUANT TO THE PRIVATE HOUSING FINANCE LAW AND ITS RECONSTITUTION BY MEANS OF AN AMENDED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION AS A COOPERATIVE HOUSING CORPORATION UNDER THE BUSINESS CORPORATION LAW IS NOT SUBJECT TO REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX BECAUSE SUCH DISSOLUTION-RECONSTITUTION INVOLVES NEITHER A CONVEYANCE BY DEED NOR A TAXABLE TRANSFER OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS IN REAL PROPERTY.
JULY 11, 2013

In the Matter of DOROS RESTAURANT, INC. 
TAT(H)13-3(GC) - DETERMINATION

 

 

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

GENERAL CORPORATION TAX – THE TRIBUNAL LACKED JURISDICTION TO CONSIDER A PETITION THAT PROTESTED PENALTIES AND INTEREST ASSERTED IN A NOTICE OF TAX DUE BECAUSE SUCH NOTICE IS NOT A STATUTORY NOTICE THAT GIVES THE TAXPAYER A RIGHT TO A HEARING.
JUNE 28, 2013

In the Matter of SEBCO LAUNDRY SYSTEMS, INC.
TAT(H)11-8(GC) - DETERMINATION
 

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

 

 

GENERAL CORPORATION TAX – THE PETITION WAS DISMISSED AS IT WAS FILED MORE THAN NINETY DAYS AFTER THE MAILING OF THE CONCILIATION DECISION.
JUNE 28, 2013

In the Matter of STEPHEN O. HURLEY
TAT(H)12-14(RP) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX – NEW YORK CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE § 11-2116.f.1 TREATS THE DATE OF DELIVERY BY A DESIGNATED PRIVATE DELIVERY SERVICE AS THE DATE RECORDED OR MARKED BY SUCH DELIVERY SERVICE IN THE MANNER DESCRIBED IN 26 USCA § 7502. BECAUSE THE DATE APPEARING ON THE DESIGNATED PRIVATE DELIVERY SERVICE’S LABEL WAS MORE THAN 90 DAYS AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF THE NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, THE PETITION WAS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.
JUNE 11, 2013


In the Matter of GEORGE S. WIGGAN
TAT(H)10-14 (RP) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX – A TRANSFER OF A FOUR-FAMILY DWELLING FROM PETITIONER’S WIFE TO PETITIONER AND HIS WIFE WAS SUBJECT TO REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX WHERE PETITIONER WAS UNABLE TO ESTABLISH EITHER THAT: (1) HE HAD A LEGAL OR BENEFICIAL INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY, OR (2) HIS WIFE ACTED AS AGENT FOR HERSELF AND PETITIONER IN CONNECTION WITH THE ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY.
MAY 20, 2013

In the Matter of RONALD MAGRO, LLC AND VIVCO EQUITIES, LLC
TAT(H)10-24 (RP) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX – WHERE LOT ENCUMBERED BY MORTGAGE WAS DIVIDED INTO TWO LOTS PRIOR TO TRANSFER, CONTINUING LIEN EXCLUSION DID NOT APPLY BECAUSE ONLY ONE OF THE NEW LOTS TRANSFERRED CONTAINED A ONE, TWO OR THREE-FAMILY HOUSE AND THE MORTGAGE REMAINED A LIEN ON BOTH LOTS. THE GRANTEE IS LIABLE FOR UNPAID REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX IF THE GRANTOR FAILS TO PAY THE TAX, EVEN IF THE GRANTOR HAS A CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION TO PAY THE TAX.
MAY 20, 2013

In the Matter of DEUTSCHE BANK AG
TAT(H)10-7 (BT) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

BANK TAX - WHERE TAXPAYER CLAIMS THAT IT DID NOT RECEIVE ORIGINAL REFUND CHECK IN 2005 AND THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE ISSUED A REPLACEMENT CHECK IN 2008 (APPROXIMATELY THREE AND A HALF YEARS LATER) THE TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO CONSIDER PETITION SEEKING INTEREST ON AN OVERPAYMENT OF TAX UNDER ADMINISTRATIVE CODE SECTION 11-679 AS NEITHER THE CITY CHARTER NOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE GIVES THE TRIBUNAL THE AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER SUCH PETITIONS.
FEBRUARY 19, 2013

In the Matter of MASSEY KNAKAL REALTY SERVICES OF MANHATTAN, LLC, ET AL.
TAT(H)09-37(UB) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION
 

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX – PAYMENTS TO MEMBERS OF LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES (LLCS) FOR BROKERAGE SERVICES THAT THE MEMBERS PERFORMED FOR THE LLCS UNDER INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AGREEMENTS ARE PAYMENTS TO PARTNERS FOR SERVICES OR FOR THE USE OF CAPITAL UNDER CITY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE §11-507(3) AND ARE NOT ALLOWED AS DEDUCTIONS FOR UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX (UBT) PURPOSES.  IN ADDITION, AN LLC IS NOT ALLOWED A CREDIT FOR UBT PAID BY ONE OF ITS MEMBERS AS AN INDIVIDUAL.
OCTOBER 25, 2012.

In the Matter of ALANTE SECURITY GROUP, INC.
TAT(H)09-40(GC) - DETERMINATION


NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

GENERAL CORPORATION TAX – INCOME RECEIVED BY A PRIVATE NON-GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY FROM PROVIDING SECURITY GUARD SERVICES TO FEDERAL AGENCIES IS NOT EXEMPT FROM GENERAL CORPORATION TAX. PETITIONER'S GENERAL CORPORATION TAX LIABILITY IS DETERMINED BY APPLYING A CITY BUSINESS ALLOCATION PERCENTAGE TO PETITIONER'S ENTIRE NET INCOME.
FEBRUARY 10, 2012.

In the Matter of SPIRIT CRUISES, INC.
TAT(H)09-18(CR) - DETERMINATION

 

 

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION 

COMMERCIAL RENT TAX – PAYMENTS OF DOCK RENT WERE NOT FOR WATER AREAS BUT WERE FOR LAND, IMPROVEMENTS AND AN APPURTENANT RIGHT OF ACCESS, WHICH ARE TAXABLE PREMISES SUBJECT TO THE COMMERCIAL RENT TAX.  THE RESULTS OF PRIOR AUDITS ALONE DO NOT FORM THE BASIS FOR COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL AGAINST THE CITY.  PENALTIES ASSERTED AGAINST THE PETITIONER WERE ABATED.
JUNE 2, 2011

 

In the Matter of JUAN ABREU
TAT(H)09-10(CT) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

CIGARETTE TAX - A NEWLY-HIRED, PART-TIME SALES CLERK WHO DID NOT POSSESS UNSTAMPED OR UNLAWFULLY STAMPED CIGARETTES THAT WERE SEIZED AT HIS EMPLOYER'S PREMISES WAS NOT LIABLE FOR CITY CIGARETTE TAX PENALTIES.
APRIL 13, 2011

In the Matter of VINCENT G. PIAZZA
TAT(H)10-10(RP) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - A CLAIM FOR REFUND OF REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX THAT WAS MADE MORE THAN ONE YEAR AFTER THE DATE THAT THE TAX WAS PAID WAS PROPERLY DENIED BECAUSE THE CLAIM FOR REFUND WAS NOT TIMELY FILED.
APRIL 5, 2011

In the Matter of H-RUN REALTY CORP.
TAT(H)09-6 (RP) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE GRANTOR IS LIABLE FOR THE REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX ON THE TRANSFER OF REAL PROPERTY.  A PROVISION IN THE CONTRACT OF SALE REQUIRING THE GRANTEE TO PAY ANY TRANSFER TAX THAT IS DUE AS A RESULT OF THE SALE IS NOT BINDING ON RESPONDENT.
MARCH 17, 2011

In the Matter of E-LO SPORTSWEAR, LLC
TAT(H)09-23(UB) – DETERMINATION/ORDER

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX – THE PETITION WAS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION AS IT WAS FILED MORE THAN NINETY DAYS AFTER THE MAILING OF THE CONCILIATION BUREAU DECISION.
DECEMBER 13, 2010

In the Matter of JONIS REALTY/E. 29TH STREET, LLC
TAT(H)09-9 (RP) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - PETITION SIGNED BY AN ATTORNEY WITHOUT A PROPERLY EXECUTED POWER OF ATTORNEY WAS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.
JULY 21, 2010 

In the Matter of MURPHY & O'CONNELL
TAT(H)06-18(UB) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX – PETITIONER'S PAYMENT TO A PENSION PLAN ON BEHALF OF A PARTNER OR PARTNERS IS AN AMOUNT "PAID OR INCURRED TO A PROPRIETOR OR PARTNER FOR SERVICES OR FOR USE OF CAPITAL" WHICH MUST BE ADDED BACK TO UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAXABLE INCOME UNDER CODE §11-507(3).
MAY 10, 2010

In the Matter of MOHAMMED F. FOKHOR
TAT(H)08-14 (RP) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY CLASSIFIED AS A FOUR-FAMILY DWELLING FOR REAL PROPERTY TAX PURPOSES WAS PROPERLY TAXED AT THE 2.625% RATE FOR REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX PURPOSES SINCE PETITIONER FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT THE PROPERTY WAS A THREE-FAMILY DWELLING TAXABLE AT THE 1.425% RATE.
APRIL 27, 2010

In the Matter of CIRCLE LINE STATUE OF LIBERTY FERRY, INC.
TAT(H)08-82 (CR) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

COMMERCIAL RENT TAX - LESSEE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO DEDUCT FROM BASE RENT AMOUNTS ATTRIBUTABLE TO ITS OWN USE OF PREMISES AS "PIERS" IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE SINCE THE LANDING SLIPS IT LEASED WERE NOT STRUCTURES THAT EXTENDED FROM THE SHORE LINE WITH WATER ON BOTH SIDES AND THUS WERE NOT "PIERS" UNDER THE STATUTORY DEDUCTION.
APRIL 27, 2010

In the Matter of 1 WORLD TRADE CENTER LLC, ET AL.
TAT(H)07-34 (CR), ET AL. - DETERMINATION


NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION


COMMERCIAL RENT TAX – THE LESSEES' PAYMENTS TO THE PORT AUTHORITY AFTER SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 DID NOT CONSTITUTE BASE RENT PAID FOR TAXABLE PREMISES BECAUSE THE LESSEES NO LONGER HAD THE RIGHT TO OCCUPY SPECIFIC SPACE AFTER THE GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF THE WORLD TRADE CENTER SITE ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001. THUS, THE COMMERCIAL RENT TAX DOES NOT APPLY TO THOSE PAYMENTS.
DECEMBER 3, 2009

In the Matter of ISLAND EQUITIES REALTY & ASSET MANAGEMENT, LLC
TAT(H) 06-27(RP)- DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE TRANSFER OF A FOUR-FAMILY DWELLING WAS SUBJECT TO THE REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX AS A TRANSFER OF REAL PROPERTY BY A DEED FOR CONSIDERATION SINCE PETITIONER FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT THE GRANTOR WAS AN AGENT, STRAW MAN, DUMMY OR CONDUIT OF THE GRANTEE.  THE EXCLUDIBLE LIEN PROVISION DOES NOT APPLY TO THE TRANSFER OF A FOUR-FAMILY DWELLING.
AUGUST 19, 2009

In the Matter of WM. E. MARTIN & SONS CO., INC.
TAT(H) 07-16(GC)- DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

GENERAL CORPORATION TAX - THE TRUST THAT PETITIONER'S PRESIDENT ESTABLISHED WAS BOTH THE BENEFICIAL OWNER AND RECORD HOLDER OF SHARES OF PETITIONER AND, THEREFORE, PETITIONER'S PRESIDENT'S COMPENSATION IS NOT INCLUDABLE IN THE ALTERNATIVE TAX BASE.  PETITIONER'S BUSINESS ALLOCATION PERCENTAGE FOR EACH OF THE TAX YEARS IS ACCEPTED AS FILED SINCE PETITIONER ESTABLISHED THAT IT HAD INVENTORY OUTSIDE OF THE CITY IN THE AMOUNTS CLAIMED.  THE ISSUE OF WHETHER A SPECIFIED AMOUNT OF THE COMPENSATION PAID TO PETITIONER'S PRESIDENT WAS REASONABLE WAS A NEW FACTUAL ISSUE WHICH MAY NOT BE RAISED AFTER THE RECORD WAS CLOSED AS IT WOULD PREJUDICE PETITIONER.
JULY 20, 2009

In the Matter of GEORGETTE MOYE
TAT(H) 07-15(RP)– DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX – PETITIONER IS NOT ENTITLED TO THE EXEMPTION FROM THE REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX FOR TRANSFERS TO OR FROM A MERE AGENT, DUMMY, STRAW MAN OR CONDUIT TO HER PRINCIPAL BECAUSE PETITIONER DID NOT KNOW WHO HER PURPORTED PRINCIPAL WAS BEFORE SHE ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY AND THEREFORE COULD NOT HAVE CONSENTED TO ACT AT HIS DIRECTION AND ON HIS BEHALF AS IS REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH AN AGENCY RELATIONSHIP.  THE RECORD ALSO INDICATED THAT PETITIONER SIGNED THE DEED AT ISSUE AND EFFECTUATED A TRANSFER OF THE PROPERTY DESPITE HER CONTRARY ASSERTIONS.
APRIL 14, 2009

In the Matter of IMPERIAL RENTAL INVESTMENTS, INC.
TAT(H) 06-20(GC)- DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

GENERAL CORPORATION TAX - THE COMMISSIONER MAY NOT CONSTITUTIONALLY REQUIRE PETITIONER'S SHARE OF INCOME FROM THE SALE OF CALIFORNIA REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP IN WHICH IT HAD A 30% INTEREST TO BE INCLUDED IN PETITIONER'S ALLOCATED CITY INCOME SUBJECT TO THE GENERAL CORPORATION TAX, AS THAT WOULD RESULT IN A TAX WHICH IS OUT OF ALL APPROPRIATE PROPORTION TO PETITIONER'S ACTIVITIES IN THE CITY.
APRIL 1, 2009

In the Matter of ISLAND EQUITIES REALTY & ASSET MANAGEMENT, LLC
TAT(H) 07-19(RP)- DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - SINCE PETITIONER SERVED A PETITION MORE THAN NINETY DAYS AFTER THE CONCILIATION DECISION WAS MAILED, AND DID NOT TIMELY FILE A PETITION PROTESTING THAT DECISION, THE TRIBUNAL DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO HEAR THE MATTER.
DECEMBER 4, 2008

In the Matter of BANKERS TRUST CORPORATION (f/k/a BANKERS TRUST NEW YORK CORPORATION) AND ITS AFFILIATED ENTITIES
TAT(H) 04-36(BT)– DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

BANKING CORPORATION TAX – SINCE PETITIONER DID NOT PROVE THAT IT WAS THE TAX BENEFICIAL OWNER OF THE VOTING STOCK OF INDIRECTLY-OWNED, LOWER-TIER SUBSIDIARIES UNDER A SUBSTANCE OVER FORM ANALYSIS, IT DID NOT HAVE ACTUAL BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP OF THAT STOCK.  THEREFORE, THE INDIRECTLY-OWNED SUBSIDIARIES WERE NOT PETITIONER'S SUBSIDIARIES AND PETITIONER WAS NOT ENTITLED TO EXCLUDE 17% OF THE INTEREST PAID TO IT BY THOSE CORPORATIONS UNDER ADMINISTRATIVE CODE SECTION 11-641(e)(11)(i).
DECEMBER 23, 2008

 

In the Matter of THE WEEKS-LERMAN GROUP, LLC
TAT(H) 05-54(UB)- DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX – COMPENSATION PAID TO A MANAGER OF A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY WHO WAS NOT A PARTNER OR MEMBER OF THE COMPANY, BUT WAS A CONTINGENT BENEFICIARY OF A TRUST THAT OWNED A FIFTY PER CENT INTEREST IN THE COMPANY, WAS A DEDUCTIBLE BUSINESS EXPENSE NOT REQUIRED TO BE ADDED BACK TO THE COMPANY'S UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS INCOME UNDER CODE §11-507(3) WHICH DISALLOWS DEDUCTIONS FOR PAYMENTS TO PARTNERS OR PROPRIETORS.
JUNE 10, 2008

In the Matter of AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.
TAT(H) 05-29(HO)- DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

HOTEL ROOM OCCUPANCY TAX - AN OCCUPANT OF AT LEAST ONE ROOM IN A HOTEL FOR 180 CONSECUTIVE DAYS OR MORE IS A PERMANENT RESIDENT OF THAT HOTEL AND IS EXEMPT FROM THE HOTEL ROOM OCCUPANCY TAX WITH REGARD TO THE OCCUPANCY OF ANY ROOM IN THAT HOTEL WHILE IT IS A PERMANENT RESIDENT.  THE LAST SENTENCE OF PARAGRAPH (2) AND ILLUSTRATION (ii) IN PARAGRAPH (3) OF HOTEL ROOM OCCUPANCY TAX RULE §12-01(c), WHICH LIMIT THE EXEMPTION TO THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF ROOMS OCCUPIED CONTINUOUSLY FOR AT LEAST 180 CONSECUTIVE DAYS, ARE INVALID.
MAY 29, 2008

In the Matter of LOUIS M. HUBRECHT
TAT(H) 05-10(RP)- DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE PAYMENT AT COMMENCEMENT OF A LONG-TERM TRIPLE NET LEASE OF THE ENTIRE RENT PAYABLE TO THE LESSOR WAS RENT FOR THE USE OR OCCUPANCY OF THE PREMISES RATHER THAN CONSIDERATION FOR THE GRANT OF A LEASEHOLD AND THUS WAS NOT SUBJECT TO THE REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX.
FEBRUARY 21, 2008

 

In the Matter of JUNGIL SONG
TAT(H) 06-12(RP)- DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE TRANSFER OF TITLE IN REAL PROPERTY SUBJECT TO A MORTGAGE FROM A HUSBAND TO HIMSELF AND HIS WIFE FOR NO ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION IS SUBJECT TO REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX. THE CONSIDERATION IS ONE HALF THE AMOUNT OF THE MORTGAGE DEBT.
JANUARY 15, 2008

In the Matter of AMERICAN BANKNOTE CORPORATION;
AMERICAN BANK NOTE CORP.;
AMERICAN BANK NOTE CO., INC. AND
COMBINED AFFILIATES
TAT(H) 03-31(GC)- DETERMINATION
TAT(H) 03-32(GC)
TAT(H) 03-33(GC)

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

GENERAL CORPORATION TAX - HOLDING COMPANIES AND RELATED OPERATING COMPANIES NOT ENGAGED IN A UNITARY BUSINESS WERE PROPERLY DENIED PERMISSION TO FILE GENERAL CORPORATION TAX RETURNS ON A COMBINED BASIS.
MAY 30, 2007

In the Matter of SADP CORP.
TAT(H) 07-5(GC) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

GENERAL CORPORATION TAX - A PETITION FILED COMTEMPORANEOUSLY WITH A REQUEST FOR CONCILIATION CONFERENCE WAS TREATED AS PREMATURELY FILED AND DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.
MAY 22, 2007

In the Matter of CASTLE POWER, LLC
TAT(H) 04-32(UT)- DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

UTILITY TAX - A GAS MARKETER'S SALES OF GAS WERE NOT SUBJECT TO THE UTILITY TAX AS THE SALES TOOK PLACE OUTSIDE THE CITY. THE CONTRACT PROVISIONS DETERMINING WHERE THE SALES OCCURRED COULD NOT BE RECHARACTERIZED UNDER THE "SUBSTANCE OVER FORM" DOCTRINE AS REGULATORY AND BUSINESS CONCERNS DICTATED THE FORM OF THOSE PROVISIONS. PETITIONER COULD NOT RECOVER COSTS BECAUSE TAX LAW §3030 DOES NOT APPLY TO PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE CITY COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE.
OCTOBER 6, 2006

In the Matter of CITRIN COOPERMAN & COMPANY, LLP
TAT(H) 01-17 (UB)- DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX - A PARTNERSHIP'S PAYMENTS TO RETIRED PARTNERS FOR PRIOR SERVICES AND ITS ADVANCE PAYMENTS TO A PARTNER FOR PRIOR SERVICES WERE PAYMENTS FOR SERVICES WHICH WERE REQUIRED TO BE ADDED BACK TO UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAXABLE INCOME UNDER CODE §11-507(3).
JULY 21, 2006

In the Matter of PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
TAT(H) 01-19 (UB), et al.- DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX - A PARTNERSHIP'S PAYMENTS TO RETIRED PARTNERS AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO QUALIFIED RETIREMENT PLANS FOR THE BENEFIT OF ITS PARTNERS WERE PAYMENTS FOR SERVICES OR FOR THE USE OF CAPITAL, WHICH WERE REQUIRED TO BE ADDED BACK TO UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAXABLE INCOME UNDER CODE §11-507(3).
JULY 11, 2006


SAMUEL D. FRIEDMAN - DETERMINATION - 06/08/06
TAT(H) 03-21 (UB), et al.

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX - AS AN AGENT FOR AN INSURANCE COMPANY, PETITIONER WAS AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR WHOSE INCOME WAS SUBJECT TO THE UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX.
JUNE 8, 2006


NATIONAL BULK CARRIERS, INC. AND AFFILIATES - DETERMINATION - 05/03/06
TAT(H) 04-33(GC) - DETERMINATION

NEW YORK CITY TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DIVISION

GENERAL CORPORATION TAX - FOR PURPOSES OF COMPUTING THE TAX MEASURED BY CAPITAL, UNDER THE AGGREGATE APPROACH TO PARTNERSHIP TAXATION, THE ASSETS TO BE VALUED WITH RESPECT TO PETITIONERS’ PARTNERSHIP INTERESTS ARE THEIR RATABLE SHARES OF THE PARTNERSHIPS' REAL PROPERTY.
MAY 3, 2006


RAYMOND AND ALICE MARQUEZ - DETERMINATION - 03/08/06
TAT(H) 97-107(UB)

UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX - ONLY ONE OF THE PETITIONERS WAS A PRINCIPAL IN AN UNINCORPORATED GAMBLING BUSINESS AND THEREFORE LIABLE FOR UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS TAX AND PENALTIES.
MARCH 8, 2006


ALLIED PROPERTIES, LLC - DETERMINATION/ORDER - 01/18/06
TAT(H) 04-42(RP)

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE PETITION WAS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION AS IT WAS FILED MORE THAN NINETY DAYS AFTER THE MAILING OF THE CONCILIATION BUREAU DECISION.
JANUARY 18, 2006


ABE BERKOWITZ - ORDER - 01/12/06
TAT(H) 00-8(CR)

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - PETITIONER'S REQUEST TO DISMISS THE CITY'S REPLY TO A REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS AND/OR STIPULATED FACTS WAS DENIED AS THE REQUEST SOUGHT THE ADMISSION OF THE UNDERLYING FACTS IN DISPUTE. PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY DETERMINATION WAS DENIED AS MATERIAL ISSUES OF FACT EXISTED.
JANUARY 12, 2006


RHM-88, LLC - DETERMINATION - 01/11/06
TAT(H) 01-23(RP)

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - A LUMP SUM PAYMENT MADE IN EXCHANGE FOR AN 82-YEAR "SUBLEASE" WAS NOT RENT BUT CONSIDERATION SUBJECT TO THE REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX. THE ASSESSMENT WAS NOT TIME BARRED AS THE CONSENTS TO EXTEND THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS APPLIED WITH RESPECT TO THE TRANSFER AT ISSUE.
JANUARY 11, 2006


PATTERSON, BELKNAP, WEBB & TYLER LLP
- DETERMINATION - 09/13/05
TAT(H) 00-8(CR)

COMMERCIAL RENT TAX - A TENANT MAY NOT REDUCE ITS CURRENT BASE RENT FOR COMMERCIAL RENT TAX ("CRT") PURPOSES BY THE AMOUNT OF ITS PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF A REAL PROPERTY TAX ("RPT") REFUND THAT ITS FORMER LANDLORD RECEIVED FOR AN EARLIER YEAR. ALTHOUGH THE TIME TO FILE A CRT REFUND CLAIM FOR THE EARLIER YEAR HAD RUN, PETITIONER WAS NOT DEPRIVED OF DUE PROCESS SINCE IT COULD HAVE FILED A PROTECTIVE REFUND CLAIM.
SEPTEMBER 13, 2005


ASSOCIATED BUSINESS TELEPHONE SYSTEMS CORPORATION - DETERMINATION - 07/21/05
TAT(H) 93-1053(UT)

UTILITY TAX - PETITIONER IS A VENDOR OF UTILITY SERVICES BECAUSE IT PROVIDED A TELEPHONE SYSTEM AND TELEPHONE SERVICES TO A HOTEL'S GUESTS, WITH THE HOTEL (ACTING AS ITS AGENT) COLLECTING ALL CHARGES IN EXCHANGE FOR A FEE. HOWEVER, SINCE THE COMMISSIONER, PRIOR TO THE END OF THE TAX YEARS, HAD NOT PUBLISHED HER CHANGE OF POLICY TO INCLUDE RECEIPTS FROM SURCHARGES ATTRIBUTABLE TO LONG DISTANCE CALLS IN THE UTILITY TAX BASE, PETITIONER IS LIABLE FOR UTILITY TAX ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT ITS GROSS OPERATING INCOME IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO SURCHARGES COMPUTED ON LOCAL TELEPHONE CALLS.
JULY 21, 2005

 

ASSOCIATED BUSINESS TELEPHONE SYSTEMS CORPORATION - DETERMINATION/ORDER - 05/31/05
TAT(H) 99-65(UT), TAT(H) 99-66(UT)

UTILITY TAX - THE COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE ESTABLISHED THAT THE PETITIONS FOR HEARING WERE NOT TIMELY FILED BY OFFERING (1) A COMPLETED UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE MAIL MANIFOLD; (2) PROOF OF A STANDARD PROCEDURE USED REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICES OF DETERMINATION BY AN INDIVIDUAL WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THAT PROCEDURE; AND (3) PROOF THAT THE STANDARD PROCEDURE WAS FOLLOWED IN THIS INSTANCE.
MAY 31, 2005

 

DAVID GRUBER - DETERMINATION - 05/05/05
TAT(H) 03-7(RP), TAT(H) 03-8(RP), TAT(H) 03-9(RP)

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE TRANSFERS OF MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS BY ONE GRANTOR TO ONE GRANTEE ARE SUBJECT TO THE LOWER TAX RATE ACCORDED THE TRANSFERS OF ONE, TWO AND THREE FAMILY HOUSES AND INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY), RATHER THAN THE HIGHER TAX RATE THAT APPLIES TO TRANSFERS OF "OTHER" PROPERTY. EVEN IF TRANSFERS OF MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS BY ONE GRANTOR TO ONE GRANTEE WERE TRANSFERS OF "OTHER" PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THE HIGHER TAX RATE, THE TRANSFERRED UNITS EFFECTIVELY CONSTITUTED A SINGLE RESIDENCE AND, UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE'S BULK SALE POLICY, WERE SUBJECT TO THE LOWER TAX RATE.
MAY 5, 2005

 

CREDIT INDUSTRIEL ET COMMERCIAL - DETERMINATION - 04/13/05
TAT(H)02-19(BT)


BANK TAX - PETITIONER WAS NOT ENTITLED TO THE 22.5% DEDUCTION ALLOWED UNDER CODE §11-641(e)(12) WITH RESPECT TO THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED FROM U.S. GOVERNMENT OBLIGATIONS PETITIONER HELD AS A TRADER, EVEN THOUGH PETITIONER HAD NO CUSTOMERS AND WAS NOT A BROKER/DEALER WITH RESPECT TO THOSE SECURITIES.


WHERE DEPOSITS FROM FOREIGN PERSONS WERE RECORDED ON THE BOOKS OF PETITIONER'S INTERNATIONAL BANKING FACILITY AS A LIABILITY, BUT THE PROCEEDS OF WHICH WERE ADVANCED TO PETITIONER'S CITY BRANCH WHICH USED THEM, ON AN INTEREST FREE BASIS, TO PURCHASE U.S. GOVERNMENT OBLIGATIONS WHICH GENERATED CITY INCOME, THOSE DEPOSITS WERE NOT PROPERLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PRODUCTION OF ELIGIBLE GROSS INCOME, UNDER BOTH THE CODE AND THE COMMISSIONER'S RULES, AND THUS COULD NOT BE EXCLUDED FROM THE NUMERATOR OF PETITIONER'S DEPOSITS FACTOR.
APRIL 13, 2005

 

THE CHASE MANHATTAN CORPORATION (F/K/A CHEMICAL BANKING CORPORATION) AND SHAREHOLDERS OF THE CHASE MANHATTAN CORPORATION - DETERMINATION - 02/04/05
TAT(H) 99- 99(RP), TAT(H) 99-100(RP)

REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX - THE REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX ("RPTT") APPLIED TO THE STATUTORY MERGER OF A BANK HOLDING COMPANY (WHOSE SUBSIDIARIES OWNED REAL PROPERTY IN NEW YORK CITY) INTO ANOTHER DELAWARE CORPORATION (WHICH WAS THE GRANTEE FOR RPTT PURPOSES) EVEN THOUGH THE MERGER WAS CONSUMMATED IN DELAWARE. A TRANSFER OF A CONTROLLING ECONOMIC INTEREST IN A CORPORATION THAT OWNS AN INTEREST IN REAL PROPERTY OCCURRED BECAUSE THE MERE CHANGE IN FORM EXEMPTION IS APPLIED AFTER DETERMINING WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN A TRANSFER OF A CONTROLLING ECONOMIC INTEREST. IN APPORTIONING THE AMOUNT OF THE CONSIDERATION SUBJECT TO THE RPTT, THE COMMISSIONER WAS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE FORMULA IN HER RULES THAT APPORTIONED CONSIDERATION BASED ON A RATIO OF THE VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY REDUCED BY MORTGAGE LIABILITIES TO THE VALUE OF ALL ASSETS REDUCED BY MORTGAGE LIABILITIES ONLY (AND NOT REDUCED BY ALL LIABILITIES BOTH SECURED AND UNSECURED). THE VALUE OF THE REAL PROPERTY COULD NOT BE REDUCED BY THE NEGATIVE VALUE OF A LEASEHOLD.
FEBRUARY 4, 2005

   
     
  NYC Dept. of Finance
For policies and pronouncements on NYC taxes, and information on Parking violations and the STAR Program.
 
     
  NYC Tax Commission
For information on NYC property tax protests.
 
     
  NYC.gov
The City's official Web site.
 
     
  New York State Dept. of Taxation & Finance
For information on New York State and City personal income tax and sales tax and other New York State taxes.
 
     
  New York State Appeals Tribunal
For information on the New York State Tax Appeals Tribunal
 
     
  Internal Revenue Service
For information on federal tax matters.
 
     
     
 
Copyright 2013 The City of New York Contact Us Privacy Policy Terms of Use