99-021

Response October 17, 2000

 

 

REQUEST LETTER

 

99‑021

 

February 18, 1999

 

Re: Enterprise Zone Credit

 

Dear Mr. Chapman;

 

I am a CPA working in COUNTY County and have to determine eligibility for the Utah enterprise zone credit for several 1998 income tax returns. COUNTY was first designated as an enterprise zone effective for 1998. I have had conversations with NAME of the Tax Commission and also NAME of COMPANY. Neither have been able to answer my questions, due in part evidently because of the recent legislation removing the SIC references in the tax code for eligible companies. NAME directed me to you.

 

By this letter I hope to receive direction which I can apply to the myriad of client businesses which may be impacted by the enterprise zone credit. I have the full code text and also R865-6F-28. I also have the brochure published by Economic Development. These sources do not address the questions that follow in a manner sufficient to allow me to make confident determinations in the areas mentioned below.

 

The first issue is what kind of business is now (1998) eligible for the credit. The 1998 amendment, effective January 1, 1998, eliminated Code Section 9-2-412 (2). The deleted section referred to SIC codes, which limited the credit to manufacturing establishments.

 

It appears now that the only criteria for eligibility is 9-2-412(1) which requires at least 51% of the company employees employed at facilities located in the enterprise zone be residents in the municipality or county that applied for designation. I realize an additional criteria exists under 9-2-413 (5)which excludes businesses engaged in retail trade or public utilities.

 

Does this mean that any business (other than retail and public utilities) is eligible? For example, am I eligible as an accounting office since I am a service business? What about tour companies, physicians, veterinarians, and attorneys? I have a client that installs phone/t.v.cable ‑ are they eligible? what about farmers and ranchers? What about motels/bed & breakfast inns? What about storage unit companies?

 

Is there some more definitive criteria by which to determine eligibility?


A second part of this issue is does a business have to have employees to be eligible? Can a sole proprietorship qualify for the investment credit 9-2-413(1)(g)? Can the net profits of a sole proprietorship qualify for any of the wage/payroll related credits?

 

On a similar note, do the "Guaranteed Payments" paid by a partnership or limited liability company to partners/members for services qualify as wages for purposes of the payroll related credits 9-2-413 (l)(a-d)? These payments are in lieu of wages, are deductible by the partnership/L.L.C. just like wages, and are subject to self employment tax at the individual level. 9-2-413(2)(c) refers to reporting to Workforce Service ‑ guaranteed payments to partners are not reported to Workforce Services.

 

The investment credit under 9-2-413(g) potentially could be very important to several taxpayers. The code refers to "qualifying investment in plant, equipment, or other depreciable property." R865-6F-28 adds that the property must be newly purchased or constructed.

 

R865-6F-28(B)(2) says property does not qualify until the "manufacturing concern is operational within the enterprise zone." Is this reference to manufacturing an oversight by the 98 amendment and we disregard it as an eligibility criteria, or does this effectively negate the intent of the 98 amendment and still only manufacturing concerns are eligible for the investment credit?

 

What type of property is eligible? Does this include buildings of all types, licensed motor vehicles, computers/office equipment, depreciable farm animals and other farm equipment, and motel buildings? Does the equipment have to be new, or can it just be new to the taxpayer (i.e. can the taxpayer buy used equipment as long as it had not been used by him or by any business controlled by him)?

 

If depreciable property qualifies for the credit, is there any basis adjustment similar to the old Federal investment credit basis reduction? Is there any special recapture on subsequent disposition of property upon which the credit was taken? Does depreciation for Utah purposes require adjustment? Does election for Federal Section 179 first year expensing affect eligibility for the enterprise zone investment credit?

 

Does land qualify for the credit (i.e. Aplant@)?

 

R865-6F-288 says replacement of existing assets does not qualify for the investment tax credit. Does this mean if I have four computers in my office in 1997, and in 1998, I junk two and buy two new ones, I receive no credit for the two new computers? And if so, does it mean that to get a credit I would have to end up with five computers in order for one of the new ones to be eligible? Is section C still relevant after the 98 amendment?

 

In applying section C, what guidelines are available? Does it apply literally, as in my example above? What if one of the new computers cost twice what one of the retired computers cost? How do we determine replacement versus expansion? For example, if we retire a quarter-ton pickup and purchase a half-ton pickup, are we eligible for any credit?

 


Does computer software qualify in any way?

 

How does R865-6F-28( ) fit into the payroll related credit eligibility? How can someone just filling a position created in 1998 be employed at least six months prior to December 31, 1994?

 

We have business clients that simultaneously conduct manufacturing and retail operations from the same facility. We have clients that conduct both service operations and retail sales from the same facility. Are the non-retail components of these businesses eligible for the enterprise zone credits, or are they tainted by the retail operation and not eligible in any manner?

 

R865-6F-28(A)(2) and (B)(4)( b) imply that the non-retail portions would be eligible.

 

For retail companies, can administration activities qualify if they are not involved in direct selling to the public (R865-6F-28)?

 

9-2-413(2)(d) specifically excludes construction jobs from eligibility for the payroll based credits. Does construction include electricians, plumbers and concrete contractors? Are these businesses eligible for the investment credit? Are administration wages paid by these types of companies eligible?

 

If a taxpayer does not claim the credit on a 1998 return as originally filed, and subsequently determines that he/she was eligible for either the payroll based or the investment credit, is he/she allowed to file an amended return and claim the credit? If so, do any special time limitations apply?

 

I apologize for the somewhat rambling structure of this letter. I'm trying to cover as many of the circumstances as possible in anticipation of this filing season. I have tax returns involving every example listed above waiting for a determination of eligibility for the enterprise zone credit. Please respond as soon as possible, and in any form that is convenient. Any information that you could provide would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your consideration.

 

Sincerely,

NAME

 

 

RESPONSE LETTER

 

October 17, 2000

 

 

RE: Advisory Opinion - Enterprise Zone Tax Credits


 

Dear NAME,

 

You have requested information concerning the enterprise zone tax credits that are authorized under Utah Code Ann. '9-2-413 and applied against Utah=s individual income and corporate franchise taxes. Many of your questions concern the 1998 Legislature=s amendments to the statutes governing the credits. We shall first discuss how these statutory changes affect which Abusiness firms@ qualify for the tax credits, then address your other issues.

 

Business Firm. Of primary concern is determining which Abusiness firms@ now qualify for the enterprise zone tax credits. Prior to January 1, 1998, Utah Code Ann. '9-2-412 provided that:

 

The [enterprise zone] tax incentives described in this part are available only to business firms meeting the following qualifications:

(1) at least 51% of the employees employed at facilities of the firm located in the enterprise zone are individuals who, at the time of employment, reside in the enterprise zone; and

(2) the firm operates within the enterprise zone a business whose primary activity lies within standard industrial codes 2011 through 3999, 4221 through 4231, 5093, 7371 through 7375, and codes 7379, telemarketing firms within 7389, 7629, 7692, 7694, and 7699, as set forth in the 1987 Revisions of the Standard Industrial Classification Manual.

 

The 1998 Legislature amended section 412 and completely eliminated all reference to the SIC codes. Revised section 412, effective on January 1, 1998, provides as follows:

 

The tax incentives described in this part are available only to a business firm for which at least 51% of the employees employed at facilities of the firm located in the enterprise zone are individuals who, at the time of employment, reside in the municipality or county that applied for the enterprise zone designation.[1]

 


A comparison of these prior and current statutes shows that prior to January 1, 1998, a business firm did not qualify for the enterprise zone tax credits unless it was designated under one of the enumerated SIC codes, a qualification that no longer applies. After the 1998 amendment, the only statutory guidance limiting which business firms qualify for the tax credits is found in Utah Code Ann. '9-2-413. Subsection 413(5) states that the enterprise zone tax credits are not available to retail trade or public utilities businesses.[2] In addition, subsection 413(2)(d)[3] specifies that the subsection (1)(a) through (d) tax credits for new full-time positions are not available for construction jobs. Despite this limitation, however, a construction business firm may still qualify for enterprise zone tax credits that are not related to new construction jobs.

 

In addition to these statutory limitations, Utah Admin. Rules R865-6F-28 (ARule 28") and R865-9I-37 (ARule 37") imply that only manufacturing operations can qualify as business firms receiving the tax credits. However, neither of these rules has been amended since 1993. Because the 1998 statutory amendment deleted the SIC code references, the rules now too narrowly define the business firms that qualify for the tax credit. Accordingly, the Commission will commence a procedure to amend the rules to provide a more comprehensive definition of qualifying business firms.

 

Employee Requirement. Section 412 states that the tax credits are not available unless 51% of the business firm=s employees reside in the jurisdiction that applied for the enterprise zone designation. The Internal Revenue Service (AIRS@) uses a 20-factor test to determine whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor. It has also determined that persons in business for themselves, such as physicians, lawyers, and accountants, are not employees. (Reg '31.3401(c)-1(c)). We believe these IRS guidelines are appropriate for determining whether a business firm qualifies for the enterprise zone tax credits. Accordingly, a qualifying sole proprietorship which has employees would be eligible for enterprise zone tax credits, while a sole proprietorship without employees would not. Similarly, a partnership without employees, where the partners receive payments that are subject to self-employment tax at the individual level, would not be eligible for the tax credits.

 

Tax Credit for Plant, Equipment, or Other Depreciable Property. Subsection 9-2-413(g), a specific enterprise zone tax credit related to property investment, allows for Aan annual investment tax credit of 10% of the first $250,000 in investment, and 5% of the next $1,000,000 qualifying investment in plant, equipment, or other depreciable property.@ Portions of Rule 28 and Rule 37 address this specific tax credit and provide that an investment will not qualify for the credit until the Amanufacturing concern is operational.@ As discussed earlier, the recent statutory changes deleting the SIC code references will require amendments to the rules to eliminate all Amanufacturing@ references. During the amendment process, the Commission will consider comments from all affected parties before determining exactly which investments qualify as plant, equipment, or other depreciable property. Nevertheless, you have identified several issues concerning this tax credit that we can presently address.

 


(1) Depreciable Property. Subsection 413(g) specifies that a Aqualifying investment@ must relate to Aplant, equipment, or other depreciable property.@ The statutory construction of the subsection leads us to conclude that any plant or equipment must first be depreciable before it can be considered for the tax credit. Accordingly, land would not generally qualify as Aplant@ because it is not depreciable. On the other hand, because computer software is generally considered depreciable property, it would qualify for the tax credit if all other requirements are met.

 

(2) Consequences of Qualifying for This Tax Credit. Utah does not require recapture of the subsection 413(g) tax credit if the property that qualified for the credit is later sold. Nor does the State require an adjustment to bases or depreciation schedules pertaining to property that qualifies for the tax credit. Lastly, the tax credit is still available even if the qualifying property is subjected to IRC '179 for federal tax purposes.

 

(3) Replacement Investments. Although subsection 413(g) refers to Aqualifying investments,@ it does not specifically exclude Areplacement@ investments from the credit. Nevertheless, subsection 8 in both Rule 28 and Rule 37 provides that A[t]he replacement of existing assets does not qualify for the investment tax credit.@ We find no statutory authority for the rules to narrow the availability of this tax credit in this manner. Without a legislative directive suggesting otherwise, replacement investments also qualify for this tax credit.[4] The rules will be revised to comport with the statute.

 

Employment Prior to December 31, 1994. Subsection (G) of Rule 28 and subsection (F) of Rule 37 provide that the enterprise zone tax credits are available only for employees employed for six months prior to December 31, 1994. As the tax credits are available for employees hired after these dates, these subsections are outdated and will either be removed or amended during the rule amendment process.

 

Retail Trade Operations. As previously discussed, subsection 9-2-413(5) specifies that a business engaged in retail trade does not qualify for any of the enterprise zone tax credits. When a business firm conducts both retail trade operations and non-retail operations, the business firm may still be eligible for the tax credits, but only if the retail trade operations are a de minimis portion of the business firm=s total operations. Also, if a retail trade business firm does not qualify for the enterprise zone tax credits, its Aadministration activities@ may not separately qualify. Administration activities qualify for the tax credits only if they are related to a business firm that qualifies for the tax credits.

 


Construction Activities. A number of enterprise zone tax credits are available to businesses that fill Anew positions,@ with the exception that construction jobs are not eligible for these specific credits. See '9-2-413(1)(a) - (d), (2)(d). Jobs filled by electricians, plumbers, and concrete workers are generally considered construction jobs and, accordingly, do not qualify for the Anew position@ tax credits. Nevertheless, such employees may be hired to perform facilities maintenance and repair work instead of construction work. Such employees would not be filling construction jobs, so the business filling these positions would be eligible for the tax credits. Should an employee perform duties that include both facilities maintenance and repair work and construction work, the job will be considered a Aconstruction job@ and excluded from the tax credits unless the amount of construction work performed by the worker is a de minimis amount.

 

A business firm may still qualify for enterprise zone tax credits even though some of its employees are filling construction jobs. As discussed earlier, Aadministration activities@ qualify for the tax credits if they are related to a business firm that qualifies for the tax credits. Accordingly, should a business firm qualify for enterprise zone tax credits, its administrative positions may also qualify for tax credits even though some of its employees are filling construction jobs.

 

Filing Amended Returns. If a taxpayer has not claimed an enterprise zone tax credit for a prior year and was eligible to do so, the taxpayer may file a claim for refund of the tax overpayment. The time limit for such claims is generally three years from the time the tax was paid. See Utah Code Ann. ''59-7-522(2) and 59-10-529(7)(b).

 

You will be informed of the proposed amendments to Rule 28 and Rule 37 in the near future. We welcome any comments you may have concerning them. If you have any other questions, please contact us.

For the Commission,

 

Marc B. Johnson

Commissioner

 



[1] The 1999 Legislature also amended this section so that, as of effective May 3, 1999, it provides that A[t]he tax incentives described in this part are available only to a business firm for which at least 51% of the employees employed at facilities of the firm located in the enterprise zone are individuals who, at the time of employment, reside in the county in which the enterprise zone is located.@

[2] This subsection was renumbered by the 1998 Legislature, and prior to amendment by the 1999 Legislature, effective May 3, 1999, only applied to the enterprise zone tax credits under subsections (1)(a) through (d).

[3] This subsection was not amended by either the 1998 or 1999 Legislatures.

[4] This position reverses the Commission=s prior decision in Moroni Feed Company v. Auditing Division, Utah State Tax Commission Appeal No. 96-0858.