In addition, we make certain that our caregivers are compassionate, dependable and provide the highest level of care to our patients. Our team works quickly and skillfully to place the highest qualified candidates in medical facilities nationwide. The Taxpayer’s protest was granted in part and denied in part.Healthcare Staffing Ellsworth recruits and places everyone from highly-skilled nurses to all allied health professionals and any other clinical and administrative staff in the healthcare industry. The Taxpayer was ordered to pay all remaining assessed tax and interest. The hearing officer ordered assessed tax related to the pre-Jfranchise fees and royalties, as well as all assessed penalty to be abated. On the last issue, the hearing officer concluded that the Taxpayer was not subject to penalty as it established that it made a mistake of law, in good faith and on reasonable grounds. The Taxpayer’s receipts from providing temporary employees to Indian Health Service facilities were found to be deductible, as was already indicated in the audit narrative. Regarding the second and third issues, the hearing officer found that the franchise royalties prior to Jwere not subject to tax, but subject to gross receipts tax after that time. First, is money the Taxpayer received from the company’s clients received in a disclosed agency capacity and not subject to gross receipts tax? Second, is money the Taxpayer received from the company for the granting of a franchise and license to use a trademark before Jsubject to gross receipts tax? Third, is money received after Jfor the same purpose not subject to gross receipts tax under the definition of “property” in Section 7-9-3(J)? Fourth, is money the Taxpayer received from Indian Health Services deductible under Section 7-9-93 NMSA 1978? Fifth, if the Taxpayer is liable for the assessed tax, is it entitled to an abatement of penalty for non-negligence under Section 7-1-69 NMSA 1978? As to the first issue, the hearing officer found that the Taxpayer failed to establish that it collected receipts as a disclosed agent. There were five issues involved in the protest. As a result of the audit, the Department issued the assessment to the Taxpayer. Beginning on October 8, 2010, the Department conducted an audit of the Taxpayer for the reporting periods from Januthrough August 31, 2010. The Taxpayer was the legal employer of the New Mexico company’s temporary employees and processed payroll and issued tax forms, but the company was responsible for recruitment, training, testing and selection of employees, hiring and firing them, determining salary and benefits, and setting rates for their customers to pay the healthcare workers. The Taxpayer terminated the franchise agreement on May 12, 2009. Under the agreement, the New Mexico company operated a franchise in New Mexico that offered and sold temporary medical healthcare personnel services, programs, products and activities in accordance with the Taxpayer’s developed style, system and technique of business operations. In 1998, the Taxpayer entered into a franchise agreement with a New Mexico company. The Taxpayer is a Georgia corporation with its principal place of business in New York. On November 13, 2012, after having been granted an extension to protest, the Taxpayer filed a protest of the assessment. On August 16, 2012, the Department assessed the Taxpayer for gross receipts tax, penalty and interest for the CRS reporting periods from Januthrough August 31, 2010.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |