ALLcrimesfood&drugstaxestelecomcommercehealthconservationtransportationagricultureveteransbrowse all titles »
0

4 U.S.C. § 121Correction of erroneous data for place of primary use

submitted 26 years ago by Pub. L. 106-252 to r/title-4-FLAG-AND-SEAL-SEAT-OF-GOVERNMENT-AND-THE-STATES · 278 words · no verdicts yet

in plain englishAI-generated · not legal advice

A state or local tax authority can challenge a wrong address used for phone tax purposes. It must give the phone company official notice to fix it going forward. Before that happens, the customer or company can prove it's correct.

(a) In General. This section lets a taxing jurisdiction — or a state acting on behalf of one or more taxing jurisdictions within it — fix wrong location data used for mobile phone taxes. (1) A taxing jurisdiction (or state) can decide that the address being used to figure out which taxing jurisdictions get mobile telecommunications taxes, charges, or fees doesn't actually meet the definition of "place of primary use" in section 124(8). It can then give the phone company ("home service provider") binding notice to change that address going forward, starting from the date of the notice. Two conditions apply: if the taxing jurisdiction making the decision isn't a state itself, it must first get the consent of every other affected taxing jurisdiction in that state before giving notice; and before giving the notice, the customer must get a chance — under the usual state or local tax procedures — to show that the address really is their place of primary use. (2) Separately, a taxing jurisdiction (or state) can decide that a phone company's own jurisdiction assignment (made under section 120) is wrong, and give binding notice to change that assignment going forward from the date of the notice. The same two conditions apply: the taxing jurisdiction must get consent from other affected jurisdictions in the state first (if it isn't the state itself), and the phone company must get a chance — under the usual procedures — to show that its assignment was actually correct.
the actual law source: uscode.house.gov ↗public domain
(a)1In General.—

A taxing jurisdiction, or a State on behalf of any taxing jurisdiction or taxing jurisdictions within such State, may—

(1)

determine that the address used for purposes of determining the taxing jurisdictions to which taxes, charges, or fees for mobile telecommunications services are remitted does not meet the definition of place of primary use in section 124(8) and give binding notice to the home service provider to change the place of primary use on a prospective basis from the date of notice of determination if—

(A)

if the taxing jurisdiction making such determination is not a State, such taxing jurisdiction obtains the consent of all affected taxing jurisdictions within the State before giving such notice of determination; and

(B)

before the taxing jurisdiction gives such notice of determination, the customer is given an opportunity to demonstrate in accordance with applicable State or local tax, charge, or fee administrative procedures that the address is the customer’s place of primary use;

(2)

determine that the assignment of a taxing jurisdiction by a home service provider under section 120 does not reflect the correct taxing jurisdiction and give binding notice to the home service provider to change the assignment on a prospective basis from the date of notice of determination if—

(A)

if the taxing jurisdiction making such determination is not a State, such taxing jurisdiction obtains the consent of all affected taxing jurisdictions within the State before giving such notice of determination; and

(B)

the home service provider is given an opportunity to demonstrate in accordance with applicable State or local tax, charge, or fee administrative procedures that the assignment reflects the correct taxing jurisdiction.

Source credit: (Added Pub. L. 106–252, § 2(a), July 28, 2000, 114 Stat. 629.)

history & why it existsrecord from the source credit
  • 2000Enacted · Pub. L. 106-252 · 114 Stat. 629

A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by Pub. L. 106-252 on 2000-07-28.

all 0 arguments · sorted by: best

0/280

no arguments yet — make the first case