Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 36, § 194-A (2026)

Review of certain changes in the application of sales and use tax law

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
1.  Consultation.  Before implementing a significant change in policy, practice or interpretation of the sales and use tax law that would result in additional revenue, the State Tax Assessor shall consult with the Office of the Attorney General.  
[PL 2017, c. 211, Pt. E, §3 (AMD); PL 2017, c. 211, Pt. E, §9 (AFF).]
2.  Notification and review.  If, pursuant to the consultation required by subsection 1, the Office of the Attorney General and the assessor agree that a proposed change in policy, practice or interpretation of the sales and use tax law is a significant change that would result in additional revenue and should be reviewed by the appropriate legislative committee of oversight, the assessor shall notify the chairs of the appropriate legislative committee of oversight of the results of the consultation at least 45 days prior to implementation of the change, if reasonably practicable. The chairs of the legislative committee of oversight shall notify all committee members in writing of the proposed change and may schedule a time for committee review and discussion.  
[PL 2017, c. 211, Pt. E, §3 (AMD); PL 2017, c. 211, Pt. E, §9 (AFF).]
3.  Report. 
[PL 2017, c. 211, Pt. E, §3 (RP); PL 2017, c. 211, Pt. E, §9 (AFF).]
4.  Assessment validity.  This section establishes a procedural consultation and notification requirement to assist routine legislative oversight and does not affect the validity of any assessment or tax liability issued pursuant to or arising under this Title.  
[PL 2017, c. 211, Pt. E, §3 (AMD); PL 2017, c. 211, Pt. E, §9 (AFF).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 2011, c. 503, §1 (NEW). PL 2017, c. 211, Pt. E, §3 (AMD). PL 2017, c. 211, Pt. E, §9 (AFF).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2022–2022 · leading case: State Tax Assessor v. Tracfone Wireless, Inc., 2022 ME 36 (Me. 2022).
State Tax Assessor v. Tracfone Wireless, Inc., 2022 ME 36 (Me. 2022). · cites it 3× “Summary judgment in the Assessor’s favor on 36 M.R.S. § 194-A. 18 the service provider tax affirmed.”
State Tax Assessor v. Tracfone Wireless, Inc., 2022 ME 36 (Me. 2022). · cites it 3× “Summary judgment in the Assessor’s favor on 36 M.R.S. § 194-A. 18 the service provider tax affirmed.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 36, § 194-A(1) — 2 cases
State Tax Assessor v. Tracfone Wireless, Inc., 2022 ME 36 (Me. 2022). “Summary judgment in the Assessor’s favor on 36 M.R.S. § 194-A. 18 the service provider tax affirmed.”
State Tax Assessor v. Tracfone Wireless, Inc., 2022 ME 36 (Me. 2022). “Summary judgment in the Assessor’s favor on 36 M.R.S. § 194-A. 18 the service provider tax affirmed.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 36, § 194-A(4) — 2 cases
State Tax Assessor v. Tracfone Wireless, Inc., 2022 ME 36 (Me. 2022). “Summary judgment in the Assessor’s favor on 36 M.R.S. § 194-A. 18 the service provider tax affirmed.”
State Tax Assessor v. Tracfone Wireless, Inc., 2022 ME 36 (Me. 2022). “Summary judgment in the Assessor’s favor on 36 M.R.S. § 194-A. 18 the service provider tax affirmed.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.