Posts tagged "1000416"

Regency Transportation, Inc. v. Commissioner of Revenue (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-004-16)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.  If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557-1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us   SJC-11873   REGENCY TRANSPORTATION, INC.  vs.  COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.       Suffolk.     November 5, 2015. – January 6, 2016.   Present:  Gants, C.J., Spina, Cordy, Botsford, Duffly, Lenk, & Hines, JJ.     Taxation, Sales and use tax, Abatement.  Constitutional Law, Taxation, Commerce clause, Interstate commerce.  Interstate Commerce.       Appeal from a decision of the Appellate Tax Board.   The Supreme Judicial Court granted an application for direct appellate review.     Matthew A. Morris (Richard L. Jones with him) for the taxpayer. Marikae G. Toye (Joseph J. Tierney with her) for the Commissioner of Revenue. Elizabeth J. Atkinson, of Virginia, & Andrew J. Fay & Patrick E. McDonough, for Massachusetts Motor Transportation Association & others, amici curiae, submitted a brief.     CORDY, J.  Regency Transportation, Inc. (Regency), appeals from a decision of the Appellate Tax Board affirming in part the denial of an abatement of the motor vehicle use tax assessed against it under G. L. c. 64I, § 2.  We granted Regency’s application for direct appellate review to decide whether an unapportioned use tax imposed on Regency’s interstate fleet of vehicles violates the commerce clause of the United States Constitution. For the reasons discussed herein, we conclude it does not.[1] 1.  Background.  The essential facts are not disputed.  Regency is a Massachusetts S corporation that operates a freight business with terminals in Massachusetts and New Jersey.  Regency is licensed by the Interstate Commerce Commission as an interstate carrier to operate a fleet of tractors and trailers.  The Regency fleet carries and delivers goods throughout the eastern United States. Throughout the tax periods at issue, Regency maintained its corporate headquarters in Massachusetts, as well as four warehouses and a combined maintenance facility and terminal location which it used for repairing and storing vehicles in its fleet.  Regency also operated five warehouses in New Jersey and two combined maintenance facility and terminal locations there.  Regency performed thirty-five per cent of the maintenance and repair work on its fleet at its Massachusetts locations and thirty-five per cent of the work at its New Jersey locations, with the remainder being performed by third parties.  All vehicles in the Regency fleet entered into Massachusetts at some point during the tax periods at issue, and during these same periods Regency employed between sixty-three and eighty-three per cent of its workforce in the Commonwealth.      […]

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - January 6, 2016 at 3:38 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , , , , ,