§
Subdivision 1.Business conducted in such a way as to create losses or improper taxable net income.
When any corporation liable to taxation under this chapter conducts its business in such a manner as, directly or indirectly, to benefit its members or stockholders or any person or corporation interested in such business or to reduce the income attributable to this state by selling the commodities or services in which it deals at less than the fair price which might be obtained therefor, or buying such commodities or services at more than the fair price for which they might have been obtained, or when any corporation, a substantial portion of whose shares is owned directly or indirectly by another corporation, deals in the commodities or services of the latter corporation in such a manner as to create a loss or improper net income or to reduce the taxable net income attributable to this state, the commissioner of revenue may determine the amount of its income so as to reflect what would have been its reasonable taxable net income but for the arrangements causing the understatement of its taxable net income or the overstatement of its losses, having regard to the fair profits which, but for any agreement, arrangement, or understanding, might have been or could have been obtained from such business.
§
Subd. 2.Affiliated or related corporations, combined report.
When a corporation which is required to file an income tax return is affiliated with or related to any other corporation through stock ownership by the same interests or as parent or subsidiary corporations, or has its income regulated through contract or other arrangement, the commissioner of revenue may permit or require such combined report as, in the commissioner's opinion, is necessary in order to determine the taxable net income of any one of the affiliated or related corporations.
§
Subd. 5.Interest limitation.
The interest expense limitation under section 163(j) of the Internal Revenue Code must be computed using the combined report entities included in the unitary group under section 290.17, subdivision 4. The limitation must be aggregated between combined report entities consistent with the application to a consolidated group for federal income tax purposes.
Notes of Decisions
HMN Fin., Inc. v. Comm'r of Revenue, 782 N.W.2d 558 (Minn. 2010).
· cites it 30× “The Commissioner also claims authority under Minn.Stat. § 290.34, subd. 2, which provides that the Commissioner may “require such combined report as, in the commissioner’s opinion, is necessary in order to determine the taxable net income of any one of the affiliated or related…”
Bunge Corp. v. Comm'r of Revenue, 305 N.W.2d 779 (Minn. 1981).
· cites it 12× “Respondent decided that section 290.34, subdivision 1, authorized him to disregard the commission dividend arrangement and to redetermine Bunge’s income to reflect what he contends that it would have been without the DISC arrangement.”
Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Comm'r of Revenue, 398 N.W.2d 530 (Minn. 1986).
· cites it 17× “More specifically, Minn.Stat. § 290.34, subd. 2 (1974) provided that: When a corporation which is required to file an income tax return is affiliated with or related to any other corporation through stock ownership by the same interests or as parent or subsidiary corporations,…”
NCR Corp. v. Comm'r of Revenue, 438 N.W.2d 86 (Minn. 1989).
· cites it 4× “In 1982, the Minnesota Legislature amended Minn.Stat. § 290.34 (1982) to permit affiliated corporations, such as a parent and subsidiary, to file a "combined report.”
Caterpillar, Inc. v. Comm'r of Revenue, 568 N.W.2d 695 (Minn. 1997).
· cites it 3× “During the years in question, three domestic members of the unitary business conducted business activity in Minnesota, which resulted in Caterpillar filing Minnesota corporate excise tax returns.”
Addison Miller, Inc. v. Comm'r of Taxation, 81 N.W.2d 89 (Minn. 1957).
· cites it 4× “With respect to the first assignment of error, § 290.34, subd. 1, reads as follows: “Conducting business in such a way as to create losses or improper net income.”
Watlow Winona, Inc. v. Comm'r of Revenue, 495 N.W.2d 427 (Minn. 1993).
· cites it 2× “Having concluded that Wino-na was engaged in a unitary business with Watlow and Watlow’s other subsidiaries, the Commissioner determined that it was required to report its net income to Minnesota using the combined income approach of Minn.Stat. § 290.34, subd. 2 (Supp. 1987).”
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.