United States: New Jersey Tax Court: Limited Partner Has Nexus With New Jersey

In a decision released today, the Tax Court of New Jersey ruled in Preserve II, Inc. v. Division of Taxation that a limited partner's interest in a partnership doing business in New Jersey created nexus for corporation business tax (CBT) purposes.1 (A copy of the decision can be found at the Tax Court's website). The decision creates uncertainty for taxpayers that had been relying on BIS LP, Inc. v. Division of Taxation,2 a 2011 decision issued by New Jersey's appellate court. Both cases raised similar issues and had similar facts, yet the Tax Court ruled against the limited partner in Preserve II.

Numerous appeals are pending for other, similarly situated taxpayers at the administrative level and in the courts. Those taxpayers will need to re-examine their strategy in the wake of today's decision.

Background

The case involved an out-of-state limited partner (Preserve) with a 99% interest in two partnerships that conducted homebuilding activities in New Jersey. The partnership agreements gave general partners (not Preserve) "full, exclusive and absolute" authority to manage and control the partnerships. But Preserve and the general partners shared corporate officers, accounting and tax services, banking facilities, and other functions. The limited partner, general partners, and the underlying partnerships were indirectly owned by the same corporate parent.

Preserve argued that it lacked income tax nexus with New Jersey because it was merely a passive investor in the partnerships. The Division countered that Preserve and the partnerships were unitary because of the close relationship and shared functions between Preserve and the general partners. Judge Sundar heard oral argument in March 2016.

Prior Nexus Guidance for Limited Partners

The Division's regulation provides that a limited partner has nexus with New Jersey if the limited partner: is also a general partner; takes an active part in the control of the partnership; has property in New Jersey; has payroll in New Jersey; or is integrally related with the business of the partnership.3 The New Jersey courts analyzed this regulation in BIS LP, Inc.4 Like Preserve II, the BIS LP case involved a corporate limited partner whose only connection to New Jersey was a 99% interest in a partnership doing business in the state. But the Division had stipulated that the limited partner in BIS LP didn't have the right to participate in the management of the partnership, and that the limited partner and partnership were not in the same line of business. Accordingly, BIS LP held that the corporate partner was merely a passive investor and lacked nexus with New Jersey.5

More recently, in Village Super Market,6 the Division adopted a different litigation strategy. Rather than stipulate to the facts, the taxpayer was forced to participate in a multi-day trial. After a lengthy examination of the facts, the court determined that the corporate lines between the limited partner and partnership were so blurred, that the limited partner had physical presence in New Jersey. After its success in Village Super Market, the Division followed a similar strategy in Preserve II.

Tax Court's Decision in Preserve II

In Preserve II, the Tax Court distinguished prior New Jersey precedent concerning out-of-state limited partners. In an opinion that included a lengthy discussion of the facts, Judge Sundar noted that the limited partner and the general partners had overlapping officers and key management personnel. She further noted that the limited partner had made a capital contribution of only $9,900, and found no credible evidence that the officers acted for the partner in a completely passive role of watching that contribution grow. A finding that some of the individual officers didn't even know of the limited partner's separate existence helped to sow further doubt.

In the absence of any evidence of finite lines between the limited partner and the partnerships' home building operations, the court concluded that Preserve was not a mere passive investor with no nexus with New Jersey.

What's Next for Taxpayers with Related Claims?

There are a number of takeaways from the Tax Court's decision in Preserve II, and the impact of the decision extends beyond the facts of the case.

Out-of-state limited partners: tax years before 2014. The Division has now won two straight cases on the issue of whether an out-of-state limited partner has nexus with New Jersey. But this does not mean that other taxpayers should necessarily abandon their refund claims. If a limited partner is limited in name only and is closely affiliated with the general partner, it will clearly have a difficult time convincing the Division or a court that it lacks nexus with New Jersey. If, however, the partner is truly a passive investor or is unrelated to the other partners, it should be able to distinguish its situation from the facts in Preserve II.

Out-of-state limited partners: 2014 and forward. Effective in 2014, the New Jersey legislature amended the CBT partnership statute. A partnership with non-resident partners must pay tax on behalf of those partners. The tax paid is credited to the partners, but only a partner that concedes nexus is entitled to claim the credit. If a non-resident partner lacks nexus, the statute does not permit the partner to obtain a refund. In effect, the statute imposes an entity-level tax on partnerships—but only on partnerships with out-of-state partners. Because of this clear discrimination, partnerships with non-resident partners should consider challenging the rule. Although the Division may try to defend this discriminatory treatment based on the compensatory tax doctrine, the Division would have a difficult time prevailing with such an argument.7

New Jersey's unitary business test. In BIS LP, the appellate court affirmed a taxpayer-friendly application of the unitary-business test. Like Preserve II, the BIS LP case involved a 99% limited partner. But in BIS LP, the court ruled that the partner and partnership were non-unitary because they conducted different businesses: the partner was a holding company, whereas the partnership was an IT company. Although Preserve II addresses the unitary-business test, it provides little analysis concerning its application. Therefore, taxpayers can still rely on the appellate court's guidance in BIS LP. This is significant. Even if a corporate partner has nexus with New Jersey, there is significant flexibility concerning whether to flow-up partnership income and factors, or to compute the tax due using separate accounting.

Expansion of nexus standard? The Tax Court noted that in 2002, the legislature extended the reach of the CBT statute to corporations that derived receipts from New Jersey sources.8 Based on this standard, the court concluded that Preserve is "undoubtedly subject" to CBT. The court's application of this nexus standard could embolden the Division to assert economic nexus in other situations where an out-of-state company has investments in New Jersey.

Special apportionment for investment companies. The Tax Court's decision may make it more difficult for a holding company to qualify for special apportionment as an investment company. If a company limits its activities to investing in corporate stocks, limited partnership interests, debt, patents, or other securities, the CBT statue provides a 60% tax reduction. Based on the court's decision in a prior case,9 many taxpayers believed that limited partners automatically qualified for this special treatment. But after Preserve II, a limited partner won't qualify unless it can show that it is truly a passive investor. The 60% tax reduction was designed to apply only to New Jersey-based holding companies. But there are obvious constitutional problems with this. If your out-of-state holding company is taxable in New Jersey, and would otherwise qualify as an investment company, it should reduce its tax by 60% so that it's treated the same as a New Jersey-based taxpayer.

Effective date of regulations. This decision marks the second time a court has criticized the Division for making a regulation effective on a particular date (rather than as of a particular tax year, which is the approach used by the legislature for new or amended statutes). The court observed that this could lead to absurd results, explaining that "taxpayers in identical situations will be disparately treated simply because of the date they each chose to file their tax returns."10 Earlier this year, the Division promulgated a number of new CBT regulatory provisions with an effective date of May 18, 2017.11 If your company is adversely affected by any of the new provisions, the Tax Court's decision in Preserve II provides another basis for challenging them.
Reed Smith will be addressing these issues in detail in an upcoming webinar. In the meantime, please contact one of the authors of this alert if you have any questions about how Preserve II might impact pending appeals or positions you're considering on upcoming returns.

Footnotes

1 The decision encompassed three docketed cases. One docket involved the limited partner: Preserve II, Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation, Docket No. 010921–2013 (N.J. Tax Oct. 4, 2017). The other two dockets involved the underlying partnerships: Docket Nos. 010920–2013 and 010922–2013.

2 26 N.J. Tax 489 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2011). After deciding that the limited partner in BIS lacked nexus, the appellate court remanded the case back to the Tax Court to decide whether the limited partner was entitled to a refund of tax paid on its behalf. The Tax Court ruled that the limited partner was entitled to a refund and the appellate court affirmed. BIS LP, Inc. v. Division of Taxation, 27 N.J. Tax 58 (N.J. Tax 2012), affirmed 28 N.J. Tax 269 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2014).

3 See N.J.A.C. 18:7–7.6(c).

4 25 N.J. Tax 88 (N.J. Tax 2009), affirmed 26 N.J. Tax 489 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2011).

5 See id. at 102–03.

6 See Village Super Market of PA, Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation, 27 N.J. Tax 394 (N.J. Tax 2013), affirmed 2015 WL 998622 (March 9, 2015).

7 David J. Gutowski, et al., The BIS Case: A Big Shift in New Jersey's Unitary Business Rule and the Taxation of Corporate Partners, 22 J. of Multistate Tax. 7 (2012), available here.

8 See L. 2002, c. 40, § 1 (amending N.J.S.A. 54:10A–2 to impose CBT on "the privilege of deriving receipts from sources within this State").

9 See Manheim N.J. Invest. Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation, 30 N.J. Tax 18, 30 n.5 (N.J. Tax 2017) (Andresini, J.T.C.).

10 See Preserve II, supra.

11 See generally 49 N.J.R. 52(b).

This article is presented for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions