Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1975 )


Menu:
  •               THE           AT~V~RNEY                  GENERAL
    OF-mXAS
    The Honorable Bob Bullock                                  Opinion No.         H-710
    Comptroller    of Public Accounts
    State Finance Building                                     Re: Propriety   of allocation of
    Austin,  Texas                                             stock and bond sales fees of a
    broker between Texas and other
    states for franchise tax purposes.
    Dear Mr.   Bullock:
    You have requested our opinion concerning the franchise tax allocation      of
    receipts of an incorporated    stock broker received from Texas clients.      You have
    asked what percentage    of these receipts   should be allocated as “business  done in
    Texas” under the provisions     of article 12. 02, Taxation-General.
    You have advised us that the taxpayer,    a Delaware corporation,    classifies
    only 60% of its commissions      on New York Stock Exchange transactions      for the
    account of Texas clients and 50% of its receipts from the sale or purchase of
    bonds for such clients as “receipts    from its business  done in Texas. ” Although
    all commissions    were paid and received at its Texas office,   the taxpayer utilizes
    these percentages    because the State of New York reportedly    considers   the remain-
    ing percentages   to be allocable to New York for franchise   tax purposes.
    Article  12. 02 (l)(b)     provides   that the term        “gross   receipts      from   . . . business
    done in Texas” includes:
    (ii) Services   performed       within Texas;      . .
    . .   .
    (iv) All other business        receipts   within Texas        . . . .
    In certain cases intangibles may be included within the definition of other business
    receipts,  and as such would be allocated on the basis of the Ilocation of payor”
    Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. Calverts414   S. W. 2d 172 (Tex. Sup. 1967).
    p. 3060
    The Honorable      Bob Bullock     - page two(H-710)
    In our view, brokers’ commissions            as a general matter constitute receipts
    for services,     although in a particular      fact situation       some receipts may arise
    from intangibles.       Ske Gus; v. Schneider,        Bernet & Hickman,          Inc.,    
    341 S.W. 2d
    461 (Tex. Civ. AK         -- Waco    1960,  writ   ref’
    d.    n. r.  e.,  
    344 S.W.2d 429
    );
    Brownev.      King, 196 S.W.      884(Tex.Civ.App.          -- San Antonio 1917, aff’d, 235 S.
    W. 522 ); 73 C. J. S.      Property $9.       Thus,ordinarily      the allocation      of receipts from
    commissions      should be on the basis of the percentage              of services   performed      in
    Texas in particular       transactions.     Cf. Attorney General Opinion H-281 (1974).                 The
    selection of a proper percentage woxd necessarily                 involve factual determinations;
    hence we are unable to say as a matter of law whether the taxpayer’s                       claimed
    percentages     are correct.     Article   12. 12, Taxation-General,           provides ample in-
    vestigatory    authority to the Comptroller         to facilitate     such determinations.        The
    Comptroller     is certainly    not bound by New York’s determination.
    SUMMARY
    As a general matter,    commissions   of a
    stock broker should be allocated on the basis
    of the percentage  of services performed    in Texas.
    The Comptroller   is authorized to investigate and
    determine the proper percentage.
    Attorney    General    of Texas
    OBERT HEATH.   Chairman
    Opinion Committee .
    p. 3061
    

Document Info

Docket Number: H-710

Judges: John Hill

Filed Date: 7/2/1975

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017