Tag Archives: Mississippi Supreme Court

Downstream Consequences Coming Into Focus A Year After Mississippi’s AT&T Dividend Decision

In October 2016, the Mississippi Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Mississippi Department of Revenue v. AT&T Corporation, concluding the state’s dividend exclusion statute violated the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. The statute, Miss. Code Ann. Section 27-7-15(4)(i), unconstitutionally discriminated against interstate commerce by excluding from Mississippi gross income any dividends received … Continue Reading

UPDATE – Mississippi Use Tax Remote Seller Bill Advances; Jones Walker Attends Public Hearing on Related DOR Proposed Regulation

Remote use tax collection legislation advances. A Mississippi bill to require use tax collection by remote sellers passed the House of Representatives and was transmitted to the Senate on February 7. The bill, H.B. 480, would require out-of-state sellers lacking a physical presence in Mississippi to register and begin collecting use tax if their prior-year … Continue Reading

It Slices, It Dices: the Equifax Blade Cuts Both Ways.

The Hinds County Chancery Court recently ruled that the Mississippi Supreme Court’s widely-discussed decision in Equifax, Inc. v. Mississippi Department of Revenue is a double-edged blade and, much to the Department of Revenue’s chagrin, cuts sharply in both directions.  Miss. Dept. of Rev. v. Hotel and Restaurant Supply, Civil Action No. G2013-820 S/2, Hinds County Chancery … Continue Reading

Mississippi Supreme Court Invalidates Restrictive Regulation on Pollution Control Equipment Sales Tax Exemption

Mississippi taxpayers are seeing green! On August 7, 2014, the Mississippi Supreme Court invalidated a sales and use tax regulation in Mississippi Department of Revenue v. Mississippi Power Company, No. 2013-CA-01234-SCT (Miss. Aug. 7, 2014). In that case, the Mississippi Department of Revenue (the “MDOR”) attempted to impose more restrictive requirements in the regulation,  Miss. Reg. 35.IV.7.03(302), than the terms … Continue Reading