Information Contained on this Page
This page is intended to provide recent information about state consideration or adoption of models or other uniformity guidance recommended by the Multistate Tax Commission, including important related developments, such as court cases. It is not intended to provide an exhaustive resource on state adoption of MTC models nor should the information contained here be relied upon as tax advice by taxpayers or practitioners. Note that state laws may use specific terms and definitions that require that model language or guidance be modified or restated. Also, states may choose to adopt only portions of any MTC model or guidance, may address specific issues, or may omit or vary one or more separate provisions.
Factor Presence Nexus and the Statement of Information Concerning Practices of the MTC and Supporting States Under Public Law 86-272
At its annual meeting on August 3, 2022 in Anchorage Alaska, the Multistate Tax Commission adopted resolution 2022A recommending that states that choose to follow the 2021 proposed revisions to the Statement of Information Concerning Practices of the MTC and Supporting States Under P.L. 86-272 (“Revisions to Statement on P.L. 86-272”) also adopt the MTC’s Model Factor Presence Nexus Standard for Business Activity Taxes.
- Resolution 2022A
- Statement of Information Concerning Practices of the MTC and Supporting States Under P.L. 86-272 (adopted 2021)
- Model Factor Presence Nexus Standard for Business Activity Taxes (adopted 2002)
States that have adopted a version of the MTC Factor Presence Nexus Standard for corporate or business activity tax as of September 1, 2022 are:
- Alabama – Ala. Code §40-18-31.2
- California – Cal. Rev. & Tax. Cd. §23101(b)
- Colorado – Colo. Rev. Stat. §39-22-301(1)(d)(I)
- Hawaii – Haw. Rev. Stat. §235-4.2
- Massachusetts – Mass. Regs. Code 830 CMR §63.39.1(3)(d)
- Maine – Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. 36 §5200-B(1)
- Michigan – Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §206.621(1)
- New York – N.Y. Tax Law §209(1)
- Ohio – (for the Commercial Activity Tax) – Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §5751.01(I)
- Pennsylvania – Pa. Stat. Ann. 72 §7402(a)
- Tennessee – Tenn. Code Ann. §67-4-2004(49)
- Texas – (for the Franchise Tax) Tex. Admin. Code 34 §3.591(e)
States that have indicated they are considering or will follow the Revisions to the Statement on P.L. 86-272 as of September 1, 2022 are:
- California – Franchise Tax Board Publication 1050 (Application and Interpretation of Public Law 86-272), May 2022 (available here)
- New York – Dept of Taxation and Finance corporate tax reform draft regulations. See Section 1-2.10 (Foreign corporations – Public Law 86-272), August 2022 (available here).
Article: “An Insider’s View of the MTC’s P.L. 86-272 Project”, Brian Hamer, Tax Notes State, Mar. 22, 2021
Article: “In the Wake of the MTC’s P.L. 86-272 Project” , Brian Hamer, Tax Notes State, Aug. 8, 2022
Reporting State Taxes on Federal Adjustments from Centralized Partnership Audits
Also see the Archives page for this model which contains a short video explanation of the mode.