Lunch Links: Louisiana to Analyze Film Credit Program; Treasury Reg Comments Due; New Jersey Transportation Options

July 7, 2016

Today is July 7, the date in 1846 when a U.S. force landed in Monterey, California, and proclaimed California’s annexation to the United States. The settler-proclaimed California Republic would formally come to end two days later, after lasting 25 days. Check out California’s tax system here.

Here are some interesting links I came across:

  • Treasury International Tax Regulation Comments Due Today: The proposed overhaul of section 385 remains a top topic, with more entities filing comments calling the proposed regulations overbroad and likely to harm legitimate transactions. (Politico)
  • Mexico Junk Food Tax Cuts Purchases A Bit: “Mexico’s 8 percent tax on high-calorie snacks has been successful in reducing junk food purchases, but only by a small amount and only among poor and middle-class households, a study said Tuesday.” (The New York Times)
  • Puerto Rico Downgraded: Fitch now rates the island’s general obligation bonds at D.
  • Louisiana Governor Begins Review of Film Tax Credit Program: The state will conduct an independent examination of the program’s economic impact in Louisiana. Every independent analysis of state film tax credits has found that their costs exceed their benefits, although industry-sponsored studies have found net benefits. The state pays out up to $180 million a year to film studios to cover their costs, and is one of the handful of remaining states spending large sums on such a program. (The Times-Picayune)
  • New Jersey Can Achieve Something Out of Transportation Impasse: My colleague Matthew Crumb reviews where New Jersey is at with transportation funding and what it could do. (Tax Foundation)
  • Illinois Appeals Court Rejects Taxpayer Claim, Saying Pizza Not Necessity: To challenge a tax in Illinois, you have to pay it under protest and then sue. If you don’t pay under protest, you have to show you either didn’t know you were supposed to protest or that the payment was so necessary that it amounted to duress. The Illinois Appellate Court, Fifth District, rejected an argument that the sale of pizza was necessary because pizza is food, although they previously held that feminine hygiene products are necessary and qualifies for the exemption. They should just let the taxpayers make their case about the tax. (State Tax Notes)

Related Articles