Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP About Honigman Honigman - - PDF document

WWW.HONIGMAN.COM

Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP

About Honigman

Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP is a leading business law firm that services clients throughout the country from its Midwest base. We counsel clients on complex legal issues in more than 60 areas of legal practice and pride ourselves on understanding our clients’ businesses, and being exceptionally responsive to their business goals and needs. For more than 65 years, we have been commended by our peers and clients for our exceptional performance.

State and Local Tax Services

Honigman's State and Local Tax (SALT) Practice Group understands that these taxes are a significant

• perating expense for most businesses. The practice of state tax law today requires technical knowledge,

the ability to keep pace with the ever-changing state of the law and innovative solutions to new tax

• problems. Our clients demand sophisticated tax counsel and we seek to meet those demands through the

experience and innovation of our SALT Practice Group. The experienced lawyers in Honigman's SALT practice have achieved tax savings for hundreds of our clients. Honigman's SALT Practice Group is nationally recognized and its lawyers have represented numerous Fortune 500 companies, closely held enterprises, small businesses and individuals in the state of Michigan and throughout the country. Honigman's SALT services include:  Tax litigation  Informal conference representation  Audit advice and defense  Voluntary disclosure  Unclaimed property audits  Tax legislation drafting and lobbying  Nexus compliance studies  Multistate tax minimization strategies  Tax compliance analysis  City and local taxes The SALT Practice Group advises clients on the state and local tax implications of a wide range of transactions and corporate reorganizations, including the analyses of mergers, acquisitions and

• dispositions. We have obtained favorable advance rulings from Michigan and other states to assist clients in

their state tax planning needs. We have worked with clients to minimize any previous liability through tax amnesty and voluntary disclosure programs in almost every state. We are able to resolve matters in a timely and efficient manner due to our depth of experience, working relationships with key governmental personnel, and thorough knowledge of state and local laws and

• policies. We have achieved beneficial settlements, in part, because of our ability and reputation to

successfully litigate unresolved issues. If an issue cannot be settled, we aggressively pursue the matter through the court process.

WWW.HONIGMAN.COM

Recent Significant Litigation Matters

 Application of the Multistate Tax Compact to the Michigan Single Business Tax. AK Steel v Dep’t of Treasury, 314 Mich App 453; __NW2d __ (2016); 2016 WL 744071  SaaS, electronic services are not subject to use tax - Auto-Owners, Inc v Dep’t of Treasury, 313 Mich App 56; 880 NW2d 337 (2015)  Application of industrial processing exemption - Detroit Edison v Dep’t of Treasury, 498 Mich 28; 869 NW2d 810 (2015)  Credit ordering under the Michigan Business Tax - Ashley Capital v Dep’t of Treasury, 314 Mich App 1; 884 NW2d 848 (2015)  Internet intellectual property license not subject to tax - Alticor Inv Inc v Dep’t of Treasury, unpublished

• pinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, Issued October 27, 2015 (Docket No. 322000)

 Professional gambler may deduct business expenses - Dombrowski v Dep’t of Treasury, unpublished

• pinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued October 21, 2014 (Docket No. 316888)

 Imposition of Michigan use tax on transactions subject to Michigan sales tax - Andrie Inc v Dep’t of Treasury, 496 Mich 161, 853 NW2d 310 (2014)  Application of unitary business principle and combined apportionment to business income tax - Estate

• f Wheeler v Dep’t of Treasury, 494 Mich 237; 833 NW2d 272 (2013)

 Taxation of electronic database - ProQuest Information and Learning, LLC v Dep’t of Treasury, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Michigan Court of Appeals, issued January 15, 2013 (Docket No 307586)  Calculation of tax base for fiscal year taxpayers - P & M Holding, Inc v Dep’t of Treasury, unpublished

• pinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued November 15, 2012 (Docket No. 307037)

 S corporations tax base under the SBT - TMW Enterprises v Dep’t of Treasury, 285 Mich App 167; 775 NW2d 342 (2009)  Limits of Michigan’s physical presence nexus standards - Vestax Securities Corp v Dep’t of Treasury, MI Supreme Court Order, 489 Mich 939; 798 NW2d 15 (2011)  Limits of retroactive tax legislation - General Motors v Dep’t of Treasury, 290 Mich App 355; 803 NW2d 698 (2010)  SBT taxation of non-unitary gain - Reynolds Metals Company, LLC v Michigan Dep’t of Treasury, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued March 20, 2012 (Docket No. 300001)  Royalty income taxation - Pfizer, Inc v Michigan Dep’t of Treasury, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued February 14, 2012 (Docket No. 301632)  Situs of sales - Uniloy Milacron USA, Inc v Michigan Dept of Treasury, 296 Mich App 93; 815 NW2d 811 (2012) For questions regarding State and Local Tax or Real Estate Tax Appeals issues, please contact: Lynn A. Gandhi 313.465.7646 lgandhi@honigman.com June Summers Haas 517.377.0734 jhaas@honigman.com Daniel L. Stanley 517.377.0714 dstanley@honigman.com Steven P. Schneider 313.465.7544 sschneider@honigman.com Stewart L. Mandell 313.465.7420 slmandell@honigman.com Khalilah V. Spencer 313.465.7654 kspencer@honigman.com

WWW.HONIGMAN.COM