<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>CFOsnafu.com &#187; Exemptions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cfosnafu.com/tag/exemptions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cfosnafu.com</link>
	<description>Some days it should be legal to keep two sets of books</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 18:27:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Company&#8217;s manufacturing exemption gets the boot</title>
		<link>http://www.cfosnafu.com/companys-manufacturing-exemption-gets-the-boot/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cfosnafu.com/companys-manufacturing-exemption-gets-the-boot/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 10:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shane Borer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA["They're saying WHAT is exempt??"]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Assessments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[In this week's e-newsletter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Latest news & views]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sales and use tax missteps]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DOR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Exemptions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Indianda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Manufacturing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Use tax]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cfosnafu.com/?p=118</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Using purchased supplies in production isn&#8217;t always enough to trigger a use tax exemption. That&#8217;s the latest according to a new finding from Indiana&#8217;s Dept. of Revenue. An auto exhaust systems manufacturer purchased steel-toed boots for its employees to use in the production process. Because the equipment was used in manufacturing a product, the company [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Using purchased supplies in production isn&#8217;t always enough to trigger a use tax exemption. <span id="more-118"></span></p>
<p>That&#8217;s the latest according to a new finding from Indiana&#8217;s Dept. of Revenue.</p>
<p>An auto exhaust systems manufacturer purchased steel-toed boots for its employees to use in the production process. Because the equipment was used in manufacturing a product, the company filed a claim for a use tax exemption on its purchases.</p>
<p>But Indiana DOR denied the exemption after a critical discovery: The company had purchased the steel-toed boots and <em>sold </em>them to its workers at a reduced cost instead of giving away the equipment for free.</p>
<p>Because of that move, the company was actually providing a benefit for its employees &#8212; the opportunity to purchase protective shoes at a reduced price. Using the boots to provide workers with a benefit is a taxable use, and DOR promptly denied the company&#8217;s exemption claim.</p>
<p>Instead of absorbing the costs, providing workers with protective equipment and earning a valuable tax exemption, the company must remit the full amount of use taxes on its purchases.</p>
<p>Sounds like an expensive kick where the sun don&#8217;t shine to us.</p>
<img src="http://www.cfosnafu.com/?ak_action=api_record_view&id=118&type=feed" alt="" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cfosnafu.com/companys-manufacturing-exemption-gets-the-boot/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

