Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 206.102 (2026)

Income producing activities solely in state.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

INCOME TAX ACT OF 1967

Act 281 of 1967

206.102 Income producing activities solely in state.

Sec. 102.

In the case of taxable income of a taxpayer whose income-producing activities are confined solely to this state, the entire taxable income of such taxpayer shall be allocated to this state, except as otherwise expressly provided in this part.

History: 1967, Act 281, Eff. Oct. 1, 1967 ;-- Am. 2011, Act 38, Eff. Jan. 1, 2012

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1985–2013 · leading case: Tad Malpass v. Dep't of Treasury, 833 N.W.2d 272 (Mich. 2013).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Tad Malpass v. Dep't of Treasury, 833 N.W.2d 272 (Mich. 2013). “22 MCL 206.102. 23 MCL 206.103. 24 MCL 206.110(1).”

Wheeler Est. v. Dep't of Treasury, 825 N.W.2d 588 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012). “MCL 206.102. If a taxpayer has income from activities that are taxable both inside and outside of Michigan, that income is allocated pursuant to MCL 206.”

Stolper v. Dep't of Treasury, 417 N.W.2d 520 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987). “557(130)(l)(k), permits the taxpayer to allocate and apportion income as provided in chapter 3 of the mita, MCL 206.102 et seq.; *416 MSA 7.557(1102) et seq.”

Preston v. Dep't of Treasury, 815 N.W.2d 781 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011). “MCL 206.102. However, if a taxpayer has income from business activities that are *734 taxable both in and outside of Michigan, that income is allocated or apportioned according to MITA.”

Detroit Bank & Trust Co. v. Dep't of Treasury, 377 N.W.2d 425 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985). “Contrary to the testimony of witness Gould, petitioner could not use § 102, MCL 206.102; MSA 7.557(1102), because that section dealt solely with "taxable income of a taxpayer whose income-producing activities are confined solely to this state”.”

Carman v. Dep't of Treasury, 517 N.W.2d 884 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994). “One of the listed adjustments is that resulting from the allocation and apportionment provisions of chapter 3 of the act, MCL 206.102 et seq.; MSA 7.557(1102) et seq.”

Est. of Thomas M Wheeler v. Dep't of Treasury (Mich. 2013). “”26 These provisions require an individual taxpayer with business income stemming from business activity both within and outside of the state to allocate and apportion “[a]ll business income” using the formula contained in MCL 206.”

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.