Latest Findlay, Ohio, 
weather
 
 Feature Columns
     Columnists
         Beth Richards
         Paul Kleman
         Don Crawford
         Jean Bowman
     Local History
     Nature
         Ron Bowerman
         Duane Smith
 News Sections
     Local
 Military Salute
 Business
     GFI News
     Real Estate Matters
     Finance
         Tax Matters
 Community
     United Way
     Food Recipes
         Wolfgang Puck
     Parks
     Restaurant Reviews
         Teacher's Desk
     Humane Society
         Pet of the Month
     Hancock Saves
 Entertainment
     Art
     Books/Authors
     Music
     Movie Reviews
         Michael Siebenaler
     Sudoku
     Food
     Findlay Live
 Family
     Senior Forum
     Health and Home
         BVHA
         Car Care Tips
     Retire Smart
 Tech Corner
     Jason Eatherton
 Fin's Corner
     Fin Facts
     Word Search
     Fun Pages
 The FLY Paper
     Game Zone
     Columns
     Concert Dates
 Education
     Higher Education
     Area Schools
     Students of the Month
     Teacher's Desk
         Jodi Miller,
 Contact Us
     Advertising
     Submit Story

Business > Finance > Tax Matters



KENTUCKY COURT RULING
By Richard C. Zbiegien CPA

Email this article
 Printer friendly page

The Kentucky Court of Appeals made a ruling that may have far reaching implications for the municipal bond market. The Court of Appeals ruled that it is unconstitutional for the state to tax interest revenue received by its residents from tax-free bonds issued by other states and political subdivisions.

The state is expected to appeal the decision to the Kentucky Supreme Court. If it is upheld, the ruling may likely encourage other similar challenges to taxation in other state that tax out-of-state issues.

The Case was brought against the Kentucky Department of revenue in 2003. The appeals court found Kentucky's taxation system "clearly" unconstitutional because it allows more favorable tax treatment to in-state bonds than it does for "extraterritorially issued" bonds.

The Kentucky ruling also paves the way for the plaintiffs to seek class-action certification. This could make the state potentially responsible for refunding tax payments, not only to those who filed the suit, but also to other Kentucky taxpayers who join the lawsuit.

If the lawsuit is ultimately successful, it could have a major impact on the municipal bond market. Present tax policy causes most municipal bond investors to purchase bonds issued in their state of residence in order to avoid state taxes. A dramatic change in investor preference could significantly change municipal finance through the country.

Tax-free bond investors and revenue officials from other states will be following this case very closely.

College savings plans and other state programs could be affected significantly.

If the Supreme Court decides to review this case and sides with the state appeals court ruling that it is unconstitutional to tax out-of-state bonds while not taxing those issued in state, the same reasoning could be applied to 529 plans and could wipe out the state tax advantages that many states offer.

Established under Section 529 of the Internal Revenue Code, college savings plans allow adults to save money in special accounts that will be free from federal income tax when used to pay for the QUALIFIED HIGHER-EDUCATION expenses of their children and other beneficiaries. Many states try to lure assets to their in-state programs by offering residents a deduction on personal income tax returns for contributions to these plans.

There are presently at least 38 states that refrain from taxing bonds in state. This case will affect those states.

On May 22, 2007 the Kentucky Supreme Court passed up an opportunity to review this case.


Top of Page