







 |

Overview and
Commentary:
Michigan’s New Corporate Income Tax and Individual Income Tax Changes
By B.D. Copping, CPA, MST
Three House Bills were enacted
by the Michigan Legislature and signed by Michigan Governor Rick Snyder,
CPA, to replace the Michigan Business Tax (MBT) with the new Michigan
Corporate Income Tax (CIT); make significant changes to Michigan’s
Individual Income Tax (IIT); and amend how the Multistate Tax Compact is
applied to both the MBT and CIT in the future. Where appropriate, some of
the bill summaries and analyses developed by the House and Senate Fiscal
Agencies of House Bill (HB)
4361 (now Public Act 38 of 2011), HB
4362 (PA 39 of 2011) & HB
4479 (PA 40 of 2011) are used in this article.
(Jump to the
Individual Income Tax portion of this article.)
Corporate Income Tax Provisions
These new laws create a new Income Tax
Act, which is segmented into the existing Individual Income Tax
provisions, Part 1, and adds a Part 2 for the provisions of the new
Corporation (or Corporate) Income Tax. The new corporate provisions
essentially mirror those found in the business income tax section of the MBT
and become effective with a hard cutoff date beginning January 1, 2012.
The new CIT consists of three separate taxes:
-
The corporate income tax,
which applies to C corporations and entities that have elected to be
taxed as C corporations for federal income tax purposes;
-
A gross premiums tax on
insurance companies; and
-
A net capital tax on
financial institutions.
CIT Nexus Standards: Again,
the new law carries over the nexus standards that were included in the MBT
and may subject out-state corporations to the CIT, if any of the following
conditions are met:
-
The corporate income tax,
which applies to C corporations and entities that have elected to be
taxed as C corporations for federal income tax purposes;
-
A gross premiums tax on
insurance companies; and
-
A net capital tax on
financial institutions.
Standards 1 and 2 above, of
course, do not apply to corporations that are protected from having to file
the CIT by federal law, P.L. 86-272, which states, in part, that if a
corporation limits its activities in a state to the “solicitation of orders”
for sale of tangible personal property and said orders are approved and
shipped from outside the state where the solicitation occurred, then that
state is precluded from imposing a net income tax on that business. However,
all of these standards do apply in cases where the taxpayer is soliciting
sales other than tangible personal property, e.g., services or intangible
personal property.
CIT Tax Rate: The corporate income tax rate remains at 6.0% (the
approximate rate under the MBT including the surcharge) and corporations
with a tax liability of less than $100 will not be required to file a tax
return. Corporations with less than $350,000 of apportioned Michigan gross
receipts are not required to file a CIT return.
Apportionment: Like the MBT, the CIT requires apportionment of the
tax base using single sales factor apportionment, Michigan sales
divided by total sales everywhere.
Unitary Filing: The CIT continues to require unitary filing for C
corporations that meet both the control and relationship tests; however,
non-C corporate income appears to be flowed through to the respective owners
on a post apportionment basis, even if the flow-through entities have a
unitary relationship with their owners. Most other states with unitary
filing regimes require flow-through entities to flow through both the
owner’s proportionate share of income and apportionment factors
(in Michigan’s case this would be sales) to the respective owners.
This point was raised in the SFA-BA, as follows:
While the CIT also will retain the MBT's unitary filing requirements for
businesses under common control, House Bill 4361 (H-1) is unclear about how
members of a unitary group that are not C corporations would be treated.
Absent a unitary filing requirement, such entities will be exempt from the
tax. If the provisions of the bill were interpreted to exempt non-C
corporation entities from unitary groups, the bill likely would create a
substantial incentive to reorganize business activity in order to evade
taxation. It is unknown what treatment these unitary groups are assumed to
receive under the estimates for the CIT or how their behavior might change
under the bills.
CIT Tax Base: The CIT defines “Business Income” as Federal taxable income,
as if IRC Sections 168(k) and 199 were not in effect and subject to the
following modifications:
Additions:
-
Interest income and dividends derived from obligations
or securities of states other than Michigan;
-
Taxes on or measured by net income, including the CIT;
-
Carryback or carryover of a net operating loss, to the
extent deducted for federal taxable income purposes; and
-
Royalties, interest, or other expense paid to a related
person for the use of an intangible asset, if the person is not included
in the taxpayers’ unitary business group (with certain exceptions).
Deductions (to the extent included in federal
taxable income):
-
Dividends (including deemed dividends and Section 78
Gross Up) and royalties received from foreign persons;
-
Interest income from U.S. obligations; and
-
Eliminate any income or expenses from producing oil and
gas to extent included in or deducted from federal taxable income.
Provisions Not Carried Over from the MBT
-
A deduction for certain deferred tax liabilities (FAS
109 adjustments) are not permitted under the CIT;
-
Certain income or losses attributable to another entity
will not be included;
-
Charitable contributions made to the Michigan Education
Trust will no longer be deductible;
-
Certain gains and/or income related to qualified
affordable housing could no longer be deducted from business income; and
-
No carryover of any tax net operating losses from the
Business Income tax portion of the MBT are allowed.
Tax Credits: The CIT retains only one of the tax
credits offered under the MBT, the small business alternative tax credit. To
be eligible for this credit firms must have gross receipts of less than $20
million; adjusted business income of less than $1.3 million; and limited
amounts of total of compensation and directors' fees paid or allocated to
individual shareholders and officers. If eligible for this credit, taxpayers
will be tax based at a rate of 1.8% of adjusted business income.
Appropriations Language: In order to avoid the potential for the CIT
to become the subject of a recall petition, the new CIT statute includes a
Department of Treasury appropriation in the amount of $100 for the
implementation of the CIT. Obviously, it’s going to cost a lot more than
$100 for Treasury to implement the CIT. So why have an inadequate
appropriation amount included in the bill that creates a new tax?
This is a political maneuver that has become more or less standard procedure
(an appropriation was also included in the MBT Act when it was enacted)
ever since the repeal of the SBT was eligible to be placed on the ballot
following a successful recall petition effort. Legislation that includes an
appropriation is not subject to being brought up for a vote of the people
via a recall petition.
MBT Filing Option: The new law amends the MBT Act by providing
for the eventual repeal of the MBT. Beginning January 1, 2012, an MBT
taxpayer will be defined to be only a person or unitary business group with
a “certificated credit” that has elected to file under the MBT. These
taxpayers will be required to pay a tax based on the greater of their MBT
liability or a modified version of their tax liability had they filed under
the CIT. Certain credit amounts that exceed the taxpayer's liability will be
refunded. Once elected, taxpayers must continue filing MBT returns until all
the certificated credits are exhausted. At that time the taxpayer will be
required to begin filing CIT returns.
"Certificated credits” include:
-
Brownfield Redevelopment Credits
-
Early Stage Venture Capital Credit
-
Farmland Preservation Credit
-
Historic Preservation Credit
-
Media Production Credit
-
Media Infrastructure Credit
-
Renaissance Zone Credit
-
NASCAR Safety Credit
-
NASCAR Speedway Credit
Michigan Economic Growth Authority credits, including:
-
Credits for Photovoltaic Technology
-
Employment Credit
-
Anchor Company Payroll Credit
-
Federal Government Employment Credit
-
Anchor Company Taxable Value Credit
-
Polycrystalline Silicon Manufacturing Credit
-
Credits for High-Power Energy Batteries
-
Hybrid Technology R&D Credit
The Ultimate Repeal of the MBT: The MBT Act
will ultimately be repealed, once the Department of Treasury provides
written notice to the Secretary of State that all certificated credits had
been exhausted.
Financial Institutions Tax: As under the MBT, financial institutions
will continue to be subject to a net capital tax. The tax rate is 0.29%
(essentially the same as under the MBT) but the deduction for goodwill
has been eliminated.
Insurance Company Tax: Under the CIT insurance companies will be
subject to the same gross premiums tax (1.25% of gross premiums written
on Michigan property or risks) that they were subject to under the MBT.
Flow-Through Entity Withholding Requirements
The idea of requiring withholding or estimated taxes for flow-through
entities with nonresident individual partners or S corporation shareholders
is not new. In fact, it was required under both the Single Business Tax (SBT)
and the MBT. What is new to Michigan (and to the best of the author’s
knowledge is only required in one other state – New Jersey) is the
requirement for flow-through entities to withhold CIT taxes on
non-individual owners, e.g., partnerships, LLCs or C corporations that have
an ownership interest in a flow-through entity. These potentially
multi-tiered withholding requirements, which are described below, add a
layer of unnecessary complexity that only one other state requires.
Section 703(4) of HB-4361 (H-1) requires, in part, that “every flow-through
entity with business activity in this state that has more than $200,000 of
business income in the tax year after allocation and apportionment … shall
withhold a tax in an amount computed by applying the rate … [6.0%] to the
distributive share of the business income of each member that is a
corporation or that is a flow-through entity.”
Subsection (5) of this section of HB-4361 (H-1) goes to state that:
If a flow-through entity is subject to the withholding requirements of
Subsection (4) then a member of that flow-through entity that is itself a
flow-through entity shall withhold a tax on the distributive share on
business income as described in subsection (4) of each of its members. The
Department shall apply tax withheld by a flow-through entity on the
distributive share on business income of a member flow-through entity to the
withholding required of that member flow-through entity. Multistate
Tax Compact Provisions
The Multistate Tax Compact (MTC) was an attempt by a large number of states
to bring a degree of “uniformity” to state tax laws for taxpayers with
activity in multiple states. Michigan adopted the MTC and by so doing its
provisions automatically apply to any “income tax” that Michigan enacts. As
such, the MTC applies to the Michigan individual income tax and, as some
have argued, to the income tax portion (and possibly to the modified
gross receipts part) of the MBT. The MTC did not apply to the SBT
because it was not a tax based on net income.
Prospective vs. Retroactive Application: The legislature passed HB
4479 to clarify that the option to elect the apportionment provisions of the
MTC do not apply to the last year of the MBT or the new CIT. While in many
state and local tax (SALT) practitioner’s opinions, the legislature never
intended the MTC’s elective apportionment provisions to apply to the either
the income or modified gross receipts based portions of the MBT, the
legislature chose to make this change prospective, e.g., effective for tax
years beginning on or after January 1, 2011, rather than retroactive to the
start date of the MBT. Thus, effective for tax years beginning on or after
January 1, 2011, any taxpayer subject to either the MBT or the new CIT will
not have the option of using the equally-weighted, three factor
apportionment formula found in the MTC and all taxpayers will, therefore, be
required to use 100%-sales factor apportionment.
As stated in the Senate Fiscal Agency’s Bill Analysis:
Under current law, a multistate taxpayer can elect to file under the
provisions of the MTC rather than the requirements of the laws of states in
which it has business activity. One of these provisions involves how to
allocate business activity across states. The MTC allows a taxpayer to
compute an apportionment factor by computing three separate factors, adding
them together and dividing by three. The three factors are based on payroll,
property, and sales, with each factor calculated by taking the amount of
that factor attributable to the taxpayer within a state and dividing it by
the total of that factor attributable to the taxpayer in all states. By
dividing by three, the formula equally weights each of the factors. The MBT
and the proposed CIT use only a sales factor, taking Michigan sales and
dividing that amount by the taxpayer's total sales.
The Senate Fiscal Agency’s Bill Analysis stated that, “an out-of-state
taxpayer, particularly one with little or no property in Michigan, the
three-factor formula produces a much smaller apportionment factor.” In fact,
for taxpayers with no or minimal payroll or property in Michigan, e.g., just
Michigan sales, their Michigan apportionment factor and at least the
business income tax portion of their MBT liability could be reduced by up to
two-thirds.
Caveat for Taxpayers Considering Filing Refund Claims Based on the MTC
Legislation: The issue of whether or not the three-factor apportionment
filing option found in the MTC is available or not is currently in
litigation and it is unknown at this time, given the recent actions of the
legislature, whether or not the Michigan Department of Treasury will or will
not choose to continue to dispute whether or not the MTC apportionment
provisions can be elected for any of the first three years of the MBT.
Potential Changes to the CIT that May Be
Considered
When the Legislature returns from its summer break, it will be
considering modifications and technical fixes to the CIT, IIT and
MBT. The following are some changes to the CIT and IIT that the
author believes may be on the table for consideration by the
Legislature and the Administration.
- Elimination of certain MBT references that were inadvertently
carried over to the CIT;
- Modification or elimination of the new withholding rules for
non-individual owners of flow-through entities;
- Modification of how partnership income is apportioned to partners,
e.g., income is currently apportioned at the partnership level and
then flowed-through to the respective partners vs. flowing both the
income and the apportionment factors through to the partners;
- Conforming sourcing rules for both IIT and CIT apportionment
purposes;
- Consider raising the estimated tax filing threshold ($800) and the
safe harbor ($20,000 prior year liability) exception; and
- Modifying the CIT to allow a deduction related to the Federal Work
Opportunity Credit (IRC Section 51) Wages and/or the R&D
credit, in cases where a taxpayer (for federal tax purposes)
has to add-back the wages and/or R&D deduction, in order to receive
a federal income tax credit.
Potential Technical Fixes for CIT Which Are Similar to Certain
Proposed MBT Fixes
- Consider providing clarification that foreign entities disregarded
for federal income tax purposes are or are not disregarded for CIT;
- Consider adopting the “first intended use” standard for when goods
come to rest at their ultimate destination for purposes of sourcing
sales;
- Clarifying the due date for payment of tax is same as the return
date, not the date the return is filed, if filed earlier;
- Clarifying that for unitary business groups, all intercompany
transactions should be eliminated, regardless of type, e.g., not
just for income/expense and apportionment factor purposes; and
- Providing guidance in regards to NOLs survive corporate
reorganizations, which would be similar to the SBT treatment.
|
Individual Income Tax Provisions
Substantial changes to Michigan’s individual income tax were enacted as a
part of this tax reform and are summarized below. Note: All of these
individual income tax changes are effective for tax years beginning on or
after January 1, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
Individual Income Tax Rate Changes
-
The IIT tax rate is frozen at 4.35%
for tax years 2011 and 2012
-
The previous annual IIT rate
reduction of .1% is repealed
-
For 2013 and thereafter the income
tax rate for individuals will be 4.25%
Elimination or Change to Several Current Exemptions
-
The standard personal exemption
for taxpayers and each dependent is frozen at $3,700 (the level
under current law) through tax year 2012. Beginning in 2013, this
exemption will again be adjusted annually for inflation occurring
after 2012.
-
The standard personal exemption
will be phased-out for single taxpayers with “total household
resources” between $75,000 and $100,000, and for married couples
filing joint returns with total household resources between $150,000
and $200,000.
-
The additional exemption
allowed for each taxpayer age 65 and older is eliminated.
-
The additional exemption per
dependent child under the age of 19 is repealed.
-
The additional exemption
received by taxpayers whose unemployment compensation exceeds 50% of
their AGI will be eliminated.
Modifications to the Definition
of Individual Taxable Income
Deductions Related to Pension and Retirement Income: The
following deductions related to pension and retirement income will be
based on the age of the older spouse.
- For taxpayers born before 1946, there
will be no change in the treatment of retirement or pension income.
Public pensions, as well as social security benefits will continue to be
completely exempt from taxation. A portion of pension and retirement
income from private plans will continue to be exempt from tax ($45,120
for single filers and $90,240 for joint filers in tax year 2010, and
adjusted for inflation). Seniors in this category will continue to be
permitted to deduct a portion of interest, dividends, and capital gains
they receive. Note: The private pension exemption will continue
to be reduced by the amount of any compensation and retirement benefits
received for services in the armed forces, as well as any public
pension.
- For taxpayers born during the 1946 to 1952
period, the new law eliminates the current exemptions for retirement
and pension income, although the exemptions for social security,
railroad and military pension income under current law will be retained,
while the taxpayer is less than 67 years of age. Until the taxpayer
reached age 67, the new law allows a new exemption that will exempt
a portion of pension and retirement income ($20,000 for a single return
or $40,000 for a joint return), regardless of whether the income was
from a public or private pension. Note: If total household
resources exceeds $75,000 for a single return, or $150,000 for a joint
return, the new law eliminates the $20,000/$40,000 public and private
pension income exemptions.
After the taxpayer reached age 67, the new law keeps the
exemption amount the same, but will apply the exemption to all income,
including retirement and nonretirement income. The new law also retains
the full exemption for social security income. The law implies that the
taxpayers in this age category will still be eligible to receive the
standard personal exemption, regardless of age. Note: If total
household resources exceeds $75,000 for a single return, or $150,000 for
a joint return, the new law eliminates the $20,000/$40,000 exemption.
Further, individuals claiming exemption for military or railroad
pensions will not be eligible for the $20,000/$40,000 exemption.
Effective January 1, 2012, senior citizens born after 1945 will no
longer be permitted to deduct a portion of interest, dividends, and
capital gains they receive.
- For taxpayers born after 1952, the new
law eliminates any exemption of public or private pension or retirement
income other than social security, military or railroad pension income
until the taxpayer reached 67 years of age. Once the taxpayer reached
age 67, the new law allows an exemption ($20,000 for a single return or
$40,000 for a joint return) against all types of income, including
social security income and other types of income (including retirement
and nonretirement income).
After reaching age 67 the new law allows a taxpayer to forgo the
$20,000/$40,000 exemption for all income and instead deduct 100% of
social security, military or railroad pension income. Under the new law,
if a taxpayer elects to claim the $20,000/$40,000 exemption, they will
not be allowed to claim either the deduction for Social Security income
or the standard personal exemption. Taxpayers will not be eligible to
receive the standard personal exemption once he or she turned age 67,
unless the taxpayer elects to claim the 100% deduction for social
security, military or railroad pension income.
If a taxpayer elects the $20,000/$40,000 exemption and if total
household resources exceed $75,000 for a single return, or $150,000 for
a joint return, the new law will eliminate the $20,000/$40,000
exemption. If a taxpayer elects to exempt social security, military or
railroad pension income, the personal exemption that is otherwise
allowed will be subject to being phased-out for total household
resources between $75,000 to $100,000 for single filers and $150,000 to
$200,000 for joint filers.
Effective January 1, 2012, senior citizens born after 1945 will no
longer be permitted to deduct a portion of interest, dividends, and
capital gains they receive.
New Pension and Retirement
Withholding Requirements: Because of the recent changes to the
taxability of pension payments and retirement benefits, the payers of
these types of benefits will be required to withhold at a rate of 4.35%
on the “taxable portion” of said benefits.
Michigan Supreme Court Review: The issue of whether or not the
state can tax public employee pension income under the state
constitution, along with several other issues, is currently being
reviewed by the Michigan Supreme Court.
Other Changes to the Definition of Taxable Income:
-
Qualifying political
contributions are no longer be deductible.
-
Certain wages, which are not
deductible under IRC Section 280C, will no longer be deductible.
-
Distributions from certain
individual retirement accounts used to pay qualified higher
education expenses will no longer be deductible.
-
Charitable contributions made
from a qualified retirement plan or account will no longer be
deductible.
-
Reinvestments of gains made
from certain investments certified by the Michigan Strategic Fund
will no longer be deductible.
-
Both gross income and related
expenses from oil and gas production are removed if the gross income
was subject to the severance tax.
-
If deducted in determining
Federal AGI, expenses incurred to produce nontaxable income will no
longer be deducted from AGI a second time.
Additional Miscellaneous Changes
Business income reported under the individual income tax will be
apportioned based on 100% of a sales factor, rather than the equally
weighted, three-factor formula based on property, payroll, and sales
under current law. However, rules for sourcing sales were not changed to
conform to the CIT sourcing rules, which, if not changed, could cause
flow-through entities with both individual and corporate owners
significant problems.
Elimination of Most Individual Income Tax Credits
-
Nonresident estates and trusts
will no longer receive a credit related to reciprocity agreements
with other states.
-
For rehabilitation plans
certified after January 1, 2012, the historical preservation credit
will be eliminated.
-
For agreements entered into
after January 1, 2012, tax vouchers issued under provisions related
to the Michigan Early Stage Venture Investment Act may no
longer be applied toward a tax liability.
All non-refundable credits are
eliminated, including:
-
City Income tax credit
-
College tuition credit.
-
Community Foundation credit
-
Donations to family development
programs
-
Film credit for wage
withholding
-
Homeless/Food Bank credit
-
Medical savings account
contributions
-
Public contribution credit
-
Vehicle donation credit
Changes to Refundable Credits
Michigan Earned Income Tax Credit: For tax years after 2011, the
Michigan Earned Income Tax Credit is reduced from 20% to 6%.
Changes to the Homestead Property Tax Credit: For tax years beginning
after 2011, taxpayers are no longer eligible for the credit, if the
“taxable value” (for property tax purposes) of their homestead
exceeds $135,000. Household income is replaced by “total household
resources”, which excludes losses from business, rentals and royalties
and also excludes net operating losses.
For senior claimants the full credit of 100% is available if total
household resources are $21,000 or less. The amount of the credit is
then reduced by 4% for each additional $1,000 until the total reaches
$30,000. Between $30,000 and $41,000 seniors will receive 60% of the
credit.
All non-senior claimants are eligible for a tax credit of 60% based on
the following:
The credit will be phased-out starting at total household resources of
$41,000 and is reduced by 10% for every $1,000 increment. Thus, the
credit is eliminated once total household resources reach $50,000.
Presumably the phase-out of the credit between $41,000 and $50,000 also
applies to seniors.
Author’s Note: All the opinions, comments and suggestions contained in
this article are the author’s own and may or may not represent those of
the MACPA or its members.About the Author
B. D. Copping, CPA, MST, is the owner of Copping State & Local Tax
Consulting (www.coppingsalt.com).
B. D. chairs the MACPA’s State & Local Tax Task Force and has more than 30
years of multistate tax planning and consulting experience. He is a former
Michigan Revenue Commissioner, “Big Four” SALT Practice Leader, SALT
Director for Top Ten National CPA Firm, Director of Corporate Income Taxes
for a Fortune 100 Company, frequent speaker at SALT conferences, and author
of numerous tax articles and the first two editions of the 1,200 page CCH
Multistate Tax Guide to Financial Institutions.
Top |
 |

September/October 2011
Printer Friendly Version


 |