Posted on 08/26/2007 5:13:37 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin
(Paying rent to itself cuts millions off retailer's tax bill)
Madison, WI - Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has avoided millions of dollars in state taxes by paying rent on 87 Wisconsin properties in a way that the state Department of Revenue calls an "abuse and distortion of income."
As a result, state tax auditors say, Wal-Mart owes more than $17.7 million in back corporate income taxes, interest and penalties for 1998, 1999 and 2000. More could be due for later years.
Revenue Department lawyer Mark Zimmer argues that the world's largest retailer is not paying its fair share of taxes that support public schools, local police and fire departments and the highways it uses to transport what it sells in Wisconsin.
As a result, Wal-Mart shifts the burden of paying for those services "to individuals and small businesses who are unable to set up such elaborate mechanisms," Zimmer told the Tax Appeals Commission, which is considering the matter.
The charges are unusually aggressive for the state's tax-collection agency, and the case is being closely watched by tax professionals. Legislators, too, have become involved; some want to change state law to end the technique Wal-Mart is using.
Wal-Mart says it has not done anything wrong but is merely taking advantage of an overlap of state and federal tax laws: To reduce its taxes and costs, it sets up one subsidiary to run its stores and another subsidiary to own its real estate. The operating subsidiary pays rent to the real estate subsidiary and takes a tax deduction for the rent, even though that money eventually ends up in the corporation's own pocket.
"Anything Wal-Mart can do to lawfully lower its costs allows the company to pass it along through lower prices," said company spokesman John Simley. "This is a lawful (tax) structure in Wisconsin."
Wal-Mart paid $26.2 million in state and local Wisconsin taxes, including property, state income and unemployment taxes and licenses and fees, in the last year, Simley said.
He declined to break down the $26.2 million by type of taxes. But City of Milwaukee records say the company will pay $1.2 million in property taxes on its five stores in the city this year. In Madison, the company will pay $151,654 in property taxes on four properties.
Simley said Wal-Mart also collected $187.2 million in sales taxes for the State of Wisconsin last year - or 4.5% of all yearly sales tax collections in the state.
Caught up in the budget
The Tax Appeals Commission case is part of the Capitol impasse over the next state budget.
In their version of the state budget, Democrats who control the state Senate outlawed the tax-lowering technique used by Wal-Mart.
The sponsor of that change, Sen. Russ Decker (D-Schofield), said Wal-Mart and others who use the deduction are "scamming the system, and we ought to plug the loophole."
Wal-Mart is the "poster child" for corporations that don't pay their fair share of taxes, Senate Majority Leader Judy Robson (D-Beloit) said at Thursday's meeting of the special legislative committee trying to negotiate a compromise state budget.
"There are many taxes that we pay in Wisconsin," Simley said.
Other companies use a similar technique, he said, although Wal-Mart is the only company fighting the state about it before the Tax Appeals Commission. In other states, companies including AutoZone Inc. of Memphis, Tenn., have fought similar cases.
A representative of Kohl's Corp., Menomonee Falls, which owns department stores across the nation, said it does not use the tactic. A Sears spokesman said it also does not use the strategy.
Wal-Mart's use of the technique also is part of a larger Capitol debate over whether Wisconsin should modify its entire corporate income tax system by instituting "combined reporting." Under that system, all related companies file one income tax return. Now, all companies doing business in Wisconsin file their own returns, even if two or more of them are owned by a single parent company.
It is only because of this separate reporting status that the technique used by Wal-Mart works.
Decker and Senate Democrats have proposed combined reporting as part of the budget talks. But Gov. Jim Doyle, also a Democrat, opposes it, as does the Republican-dominated Assembly.
Doyle won't make a decision on whether to sign into law Decker's proposal to outlaw the Wal-Mart technique until he knows whether it is part of the final budget passed by the Legislature, said Doyle aide Matt Canter.
If that change becomes law, Simley said he did not know what it would mean for Wal-Mart's prices, expansion plans or employment in Wisconsin.
Wal-Mart is Wisconsin's largest private employer, with 28,920 workers. The average hourly wage of Wal-Mart's full-time workers in Wisconsin is $10.91, Simley said.
How it works
Many states are trying to crack down on the technique used by Wal-Mart, commonly called a "captive REIT," or real estate investment trust.
"In effect, Wal-Mart pays rent to itself and takes a deduction for doing so," according to the Revenue Department claim.
Here's how it works:
Wal-Mart sets up two subsidiaries - a company to run its stores, and another entity, called a real estate investment trust, to own the real estate they sit on.
The operating company pays rent to the REIT, taking the rent as a deduction and thus lowering its profits taxed by Wisconsin.
The REIT in turn pays the rent as part of a dividend to the parent company. The dividend is tax-free under state and federal law.
The state Revenue Department contended that the company is organized that way merely to avoid taxes and therefore disallowed the deduction, resulting in the multimillion-dollar dispute.
Simley said that although the structure does save taxes, there are other reasons to be organized that way, including letting specialists in real estate manage the properties while other managers actually run the stores.
States have usually lost their attacks on the REIT strategy elsewhere, said Michael Martens, a lawyer and certified public accountant. He is managing director of the UHY accounting firm in Boston and an expert in the cases.
Wisconsin officials declined to say how their case might differ from those in other states. They noted that decisions of the Tax Appeals Commission can be reviewed by the courts. Both sides expect that to happen in this case.
Richard Pomp, a professor at the University of Connecticut Law School and an expert in state tax law, said he is surprised by Wisconsin's challenge of Wal-Mart over the REIT deduction. The solution, he said, is not a petition to the Tax Appeals Commission but rather legislation to require combined reporting.
"For a state to not have combined reporting, and then to complain about strategies that are facilitated by a lack of combined reporting, is somewhat disingenuous," he said.
Decker, the sponsor of Wisconsin's combined-reporting legislation, said the state should be doing whatever is necessary to collect its fair share of taxes from Wal-Mart.
"It's just a fairness issue," he said. "Go down on Main Street - these businesses are being economically disadvantaged to these big corporations."
Martens said the increasing number of challenges to captive REITs is a sign of the times.
"Everyone is being a little more conscious about how things appear, and states want you to pass the 'red face test,' " he added. "Can you explain what you are doing and do it without a red face?"
The State needs to do their OWN d@mn tax collecting, not make we business owners (big & small) do all the heavy lifting for them!
And that's all I have to say about that! :)
Other than...if Wal-Mart is smart, they'll pull out of this god-forsaken Tax Hell of a state, as we plan to do in the near future.
OK. Now I'm done, LOL!
We haven’t had a good, old-fashioned ‘Wal-Mart Bash’ for quite some time now!
*WINK*
IIRC, that paragon of Wisconsin industry, Harley-Davidson, does the exact same thing.
Wonder why the WI libs aren’t going after them?
The libs just don’t get it. Wal-Mart doesn’t pay taxes, people who buy the products they sell pay them. The key word I latched on to was “avoided”. Big difference in avoidance and evasion. I avoid all taxes I can.
That is funny. A government entity is accusing someone of abusing and distorting income.
“I avoid all taxes I can.”
Amen to that! If every citizen in this country awoke from their stupor, they’d get on the stick and FORCE Government to live within it’s means, just as the rest of us do every day. Nothing burns me up more than those pukes wasting my money!
I want the roads in good repair and plowed when it snows. I want a competent Cop, Fireman or EMT on the RARE chance that I’ll ever need one. I want my trash picked up on time. I want clean water for others (I have a well.) And I want a decent Library within driving/walking distance, so I can download porn and less fortunate kids can have FREE books to read. (Just kidding about the porn!!)
And that’s about all I want my EXTORTED tax dollars to fund. That’s MORE than enough for A Life Well Lived, IMHO. :)
I understand that what they describe is a common practice. Two corporations, one owns the assets, the other is the operations arm and rents from the other for tax benefit.
The heavy industry (metal) from which I retired 16 years ago did just that, as did the other plants nearby.
OK if I get this right, Walmart rents the area their store is located on. Now does not whoever owns the property pay the taxes on it? This doesn’t make any sense.
“I understand that what they describe is a common practice.”
Our company will do it in the future, when we’re cash-ready to build our own building and get out from under the cash-cruncher of renting space.
What the heck do the LibTards think happens in every HOME across America that’s smart enough to have a home-based business of some kind for the tax write-offs? While not exactly “paying yourself rent” for the use of a portion of your home to conduct business, you do get a tax break on expenses in that area; a portion of your mortgage, your utilities, depreciation on equipment and furniture, etc.
Crud. I’ve probably just given old Judy Robeson (D, Beloit) yet another idea to wring yet another dime out of me, LOL!
Look out Avon, Amway and Tupperware Ladies of Wisconsin! Judy’s gunnin’ for YOU next! ;)
EXACTLY! Avoidance is not evasion. That was my point.
*points and laughs*
Not quite. A corporation (or YOUR privately or publicly owned business for that matter) can set up various “entities” under an Umbrella Corporation.
Wal-Mart owns the property and I’m sure builds the buildings under another “entity” but they “rent” said building from yet another “entity” within the corporation.
It’s completely LEGAL and done by other corporations in WI and in other states. (Harley-Davidson was quoted earlier.)
Why don’t the LibTards investigate “Clinton, Inc.” and their business practices? I’m sure they’ve got a few hundred “entities” in Slick’s name, each taking a piece of the pie and giving back as little as legally possible.
Does anyone REALLY think he re-vamped office space in Harlem for his nefarious enterprises out of the goodness of his shriveled, black heart?
ROFLMAO! :)
I did my Wal-Mart Run on Friday. If anyone wants a compilation of my receipt, I’m happy to comply.
Only 100% Made in America items purchased, as always. In fact, I’m currently snacking on M&Ms as I Freep, purchased from a Wal-Mart in Wisconsin (who gladly collected the sales tax for the jack-booted thug tax-collectors in WI) but manufactured in New Jersey...where they were most likely taxed as well!
Jerks.
Actually, isn’t rent to self a GAAP requirement for owned property? And you do it based on the the market value of the building, not the book value of the building. Statutory reporting rules can vary dramatically from GAAP, but normally a corporation has an accounting department with experts on the subject who are paid to research and follow each states reporting requirements to the letter.
Oh Good Grief -— WalMart Ping..........
In the words of every 1 st year law professor, “ It isn’t a loop hole, IT IS THE LAW!”
Wallmart is folowing the letter of the law. If the state doesn’t like it, the legislature needs to change the law, and the Govornor needs to sign off on it.
Till then,....pissoff.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.