Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts STAR System
201110280H
SOAH DOCKET NO. 304-11-7612.73
CPA HEARING NO. 105,113
RE: *************
TAXPAYER NO.: *************
AUDIT OFFICE: Advanced Processes 2S52
AUDIT PERIOD: May 1, 2007 THROUGH February 28, 2010
Mixed Beverage Gross Receipts Tax/RDT
BEFORE THE COMPTROLLER
OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
OF THE STATE OF TEXAS
SUSAN COMBS
Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts
TREVOR MOORE
Representing Tax Division
*************
Representing Petitioner
COMPTROLLER’S DECISION
The Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts (Comptroller) assessed personal
liability against ************* (Petitioner) under TEX. TAX CODE ANN. Section
111.0611 for the mixed beverage gross receipts tax liability of *************
(COMPANY A), which operated a bar named COMPANY B. Petitioner requested
redetermination contending that: (1) Petitioner was not directly involved in
the day-to-day operations of the bar, and (2) the Comptroller cannot assess the
additional 50% fraud penalty against either corporate taxpayers or the
individual corporate officer where the audit assessment was estimated. In his
Proposal for Decision, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) recommends that the
assessment be affirmed in its entirety.
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY, NOTICE & JURISDICTION
On July 14, 2011, Comptroller Staff (Staff) referred the case to the State
Office of Administrative Hearings for a written submission hearing. Staff was
represented by Assistant General Counsel Trevor Moore. Petitioner was
represented by *************, Principal of COMPANY C. The record closed on
September 7, 2011, by order of ALJ Peter Brooks.
There are no issues of notice or jurisdiction in this proceeding, and those
matters are set out in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law without
further discussion here.
II. REASONS FOR DECISION
A. Evidence Submitted
The following documents were submitted by Staff:
1. Articles of Organization and Franchise Tax Public Information Reports of
COMPANY A;
2. Audit Referral Report for Additional Penalty of COMPANY A;
3. Petitioner’s Corrected Texas Notification of Personal Liability for
Fraudulent Tax Evasion;
4. Letter denying redetermination hearing request of COMPANY A;
5. Texas Notification of Amended Audit Results issued to COMPANY A;
6. Inventory receipts of COMPANY D;
7. Texas Mixed Beverage Gross Receipts Tax Report filed by COMPANY A;
8. Texas Notification of Personal Liability for Fraudulent Tax Evasion;
9. Successor Liability Exam; and
10. Audit Plan.
The documents were admitted into the record without objection.
B. Background
The personal liability assessed against Petitioner stems from an unpaid tax
liability of COMPANY A, a limited liability company, arising from the
Comptroller’s mixed beverage audit of COMPANY A’s operation of a full-service
convenience store for the period July 1, 2006, through February 28, 2010
(COMPANY A audit period). The Comptroller issued COMPANY A a Texas Notification
of Amended Audit Results dated August 17, 2010, assessing a deficiency in the
amount of $*************, consisting of tax, the standard 10% and the
additional 50% fraud penalties, and interest accrued through the date of
Notification. The assessment was a jeopardy determination. COMPANY A’s request
for a redetermination hearing was denied by the Comptroller because the request
was not timely filed. The COMPANY A assessment became final on September 7,
2011.
Petitioner was a member and manager of COMPANY A during its audit period. On
August 17, 2010, the Comptroller issued a Texas Notification of Personal
Liability for Fraudulent Tax Evasion against Petitioner assessing a deficiency
consisting of tax, the standard 10% and 50% fraud penalties, and interest
accrued through the date of the Notification covering the period of May 1,
2007, through February 28, 2010. The assessment against Petitioner totaled
$*************. The personal liability assessment is for a lesser amount than
that assessed against COMPANY A because the period from July 1, 2006, through
April 30, 2007, was not included. The basis for personal liability, TEX. TAX
CODE ANN. Section 111.0611, was not effective until June 15, 2007. The report
for May of 2007, which was due in June of 2007, was the first report that was
subject to the new personal liability statute.
C. Analysis and Recommendation
This case involves the assessment of personal liability for fraudulent tax
evasion under TEX. TAX CODE ANN Section 111.0611, which imposes personal
liability on an officer, manager, or director of a corporation, association, or
limited liability company or a partner of a general partnership, or a managing
general partner of a limited partnership or limited liability partnership who
“as an officer, manager, director, or partner, took an action or participated
in a fraudulent scheme or fraudulent plan to evade the payment of taxes ....”
The personal liability is for the taxes, the standard 10% penalty, an
additional 50% penalty if applicable, and interest that are due from the
corporation, association, or limited liability company.
With regard to other analogous tax imposition statutes, the Comptroller has
held that in a redetermination proceeding Staff bears the burden of proof to
present a prima facie case for imposition of the tax. Once Staff has presented
such facts, the burden of proof shifts to the taxpayer to prove by a
preponderance of the evidence that liability should not be imposed. This rule
has been followed for individual liability for tax collected and not remitted
under TEX. TAX CODE ANN. Section 111.016, [ENDNOTE: (1)] for successor
liability under TEX. TAX CODE ANN. Section 111.020, [ENDNOTE: (2)] for persons
who acquire businesses through a fraudulent transfer or sham transaction under
TEX. TAX CODE ANN Section 111.024, [ENDNOTE: (3)] and for liability of officers
and directors for corporate debts after forfeiture of corporate privileges
under TEX. TAX CODE ANN Section 171.255. [ENDNOTE: (4)] TEX. TAX CODE ANN
Section 111.0611 is similar in that it provides for personal liability on the
part of an officer, manager, director, or partner for an underlying assessment
against a corporation, partnership, or other business entity. Therefore, as a
preliminary matter, it is necessary to inquire whether the written submission
record establishes the necessary facts to support personal liability. [ENDNOTE:
(5)]
One of the first facts that must be established is that Petitioner was an
officer, manager, or director of COMPANY A during the liability period. Staff
states that Petitioner was a manager and member, which is supported by the
COMPANY A Texas Franchise Tax Public Information Report for 2006, 2007, 2008,
and 2009 that identifies Petitioner variously as a member, partner, or officer.
Petitioner is identified as the “manager/member” on the Articles of
Organization for a Texas Limited Liability Company filed for COMPANY A with the
Secretary of State. These documents are sufficient to establish that Petitioner
was a member and manager of COMPANY A.
The next fact to be established is that Petitioner, in his capacity as a member
and manager of COMPANY A, “took an action or participated in a fraudulent
scheme or fraudulent plan to evade the payment” of taxes that were due.
[ENDNOTE: (6)] TEX. TAX CODE ANN Section 111.0611(b) provides the following
guidance regarding the factors to consider in determining whether personal
liability attaches:
For purposes of this section, actions that may indicate the existence of a
fraudulent scheme or fraudulent plan to evade payment of taxes include:
(1) filing, or causing to be filed, a fraudulent tax return or report with the
comptroller on behalf of the business entity;
(2) intentionally failing to file a tax return, report, or other required
document with the comptroller when the business entity is under a legal
obligation to file;
(3) filing, or causing to be filed, a tax return or report with the comptroller
on behalf of the business entity that contains an intentionally false statement
that results in the amount of the tax due exceeding the amount of tax reported
by 25 percent or more; and
(4) altering, destroying, or concealing any record, document, or thing,
presenting to the comptroller any altered or fraudulent record, document, or
thing, or otherwise engaging in fraudulent conduct with the intent to affect
the course or outcome of a comptroller audit or investigation, a
redetermination hearing, or another proceeding involving the comptroller.
The liability imposed under TEX. TAX CODE ANN Section 111.0611 is based on
fraud as evidenced by the plain wording of the statute. The use of this
language strongly suggests that the appropriate standard of proof should be
clear and convincing evidence, which is the standard required to establish that
imposition of the Section 111.061(b) 50% fraud penalty is warranted. [ENDNOTE:
(7)] The Comptroller, in COMPTROLLER’S DECISION NO. 104,433 (2011), held that
Staff bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the
assessment of personal liability under TEX. TAX CODE ANN Section 111.0611 is
warranted.
The provisions most relevant to this case are Subsections 111.0611(b)(1) and
(b)(3) regarding filing fraudulent tax returns or filing returns that contain
intentionally false statements that result in tax errors of 25% or more. The
mixed beverage gross receipts tax returns filed on behalf of COMPANY A reported
only a fraction of the taxes found to be due in the audit. The percentage of
tax that was not reported for the period for which the personal liability was
assessed (May 1, 2007, through February 28, 2010) was 82.67%. [ENDNOTE: (8)]
The percentage rate actually increases to 84.50% if the tax assessed and the
tax reported is adjusted to reflect the period that was not included in the
personal liability assessment. Each of the returns filed during the audit
period contained a gross error. [ENDNOTE: (9)]
The written submission record establishes Petitioner’s role in filing the mixed
beverage gross receipts tax returns and in the day-to-day operations of the
bar. COMPANY A’s Audit Referral Report states that Petitioner not only prepared
and signed the mixed beverage gross receipts tax returns and remittances, but
also identifies Petitioner as the individual who ordered and paid for the bar’s
expenses and taxable inventory, accepted and signed for the inventory, and made
the deposits. Staff submitted copies of receipts for delivery of liquor to the
bar which Petitioner had signed. Petitioner’s involvement in the day-to-day
operations of the bar, plus the gross underreporting of tax, suffice by clear
and convincing evidence to establish that Petitioner filed the mixed beverage
gross receipts tax returns as part of a fraudulent scheme or plan to evade the
payment of taxes that were due.
Petitioner’s contentions are not supported by the record. Contrary to his
representation, Staff has established by clear and convincing evidence
Petitioner’s role in filing the mixed beverage gross receipts tax returns and
in the day-to-day operations of the bar. Petitioner’s reliance on COMPTROLLER’S
DECISION NO. 103,918 (2011), in which the personal liability assessment was
dismissed, is misplaced because Staff had failed to establish that Petitioner,
in her capacity as president of the company, was responsible for the gross tax
underreporting.
Petitioner also contends that the Comptroller cannot assess the additional 50%
fraud penalty where the assessment was estimated. Petitioner offers no
authority in support of this contention. Petitioner’s contention is
contradicted by Decision No. 104,433 in which the personal liability was
imposed on the corporation’s president and the audit assessment was estimated.
Similarly, the Comptroller has repeatedly affirmed the imposition of the
additional 50% fraud penalty in cases where the audit assessment was estimated.
[ENDNOTE: (10)]
It should also be noted that the assessment became final after COMPANY A’s
request for redetermination was rejected. To the extent Petitioner is
challenging the validity of the underlying mixed beverage tax liability of
COMPANY A such a challenge is barred. Under a long-standing policy applied in
successor or individual assessments, an underlying assessment that is final may
not be contested in a redetermination hearing of the successor or individual.
In order to contest the underlying assessment the taxpayer must pay the
assessment and file a refund claim. [ENDNOTE: (11)]
The ALJ finds that Petitioner’s contentions should be rejected and that the
personal liability assessment should be affirmed.
III. FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts (Comptroller) assessed personal
liability against ************* (Petitioner) for the audit period of May 1,
2007, through February 28, 2010, under TEX. TAX CODE ANN Section 111.0611 for
the mixed beverage gross receipts tax liability of ************* (COMPANY A).
Petitioner timely requested redetermination.
2. Comptroller Staff (Staff) referred the case to the State Office of
Administrative Hearings for a written submission hearing.
3. Staff issued a Notice of Hearing by Written Submission that contained a
statement of the nature of the hearing; a statement of the legal authority and
jurisdiction under which the hearing was to be held; a reference to the
particular sections of the statutes and rules involved; and a short, plain
statement of the matters asserted.
4. The mixed beverage gross receipts tax liability of COMPANY A is final.
5. The mixed beverage gross receipts tax liability of COMPANY A was based on
its operation of a bar named COMPANY B.
6. Petitioner was a manager and member of COMPANY A during the audit period.
7. Petitioner, as a manager and member of COMPANY A, filed fraudulent tax
returns on behalf of COMPANY A.
8. Petitioner, as a member and manager of COMPANY A, filed returns on behalf of
COMPANY A that contained intentionally false statements that contained gross
errors of 25% or more.
9. Petitioner filed mixed beverage gross receipts tax returns for COMPANY A
that resulted in an overall error rate of 82.67%.
IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The Comptroller has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to TEX. TAX CODE
ANN. ch. 111.
2. The State Office of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over matters
related to the hearing in this matter, including the authority to issue a
proposal for decision with findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to
TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. ch. 2003.
3. The Comptroller provided proper and timely notice of the hearing pursuant to
TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. ch. 2001.
4. Effective June 15, 2007, an officer, manager, or director of a corporation,
association, or limited liability company, a partner of a general partnership,
or a managing general partner of a limited partnership or limited liability
partnership who, as an officer, manager, director, or partner, took an action
or participated in a fraudulent scheme or fraudulent plan to evade the payment
of taxes due under Title 2 or 3 is personally liable for the taxes and any
penalty and interest due. TEX. TAX CODE ANN Section 111.0611(a).
5. Staff in a redetermination proceeding bears the burden of proving by clear
and convincing evidence that the assessment of personal liability against
Petitioner is warranted under TEX. TAX CODE ANN. Section 111.0611.
6. Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact, Staff established by clear and
convincing evidence that the assessment of personal liability under TEX. TAX
CODE ANN Section 111.0611 was warranted.
7. Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the assessed
tax, penalties, and interest should be affirmed.
Hearing No. 105,113
ORDER OF THE COMPTROLLER
On September 16, 2011, the State Office of Administrative Hearings’ (SOAH)
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), Peter Brooks, issued a Proposal for Decision in
the above referenced matter. The parties were given fifteen days from the date
of the Decision to file exceptions with SOAH. No exceptions were filed, and the
Comptroller has determined that the ALJ’s Proposal for Decision, except for
minor changes to correct typographical or clerical errors, should be adopted as
written.
The above Decision resulting in Petitioner’s liability as set out in Attachment
A, which is incorporated by reference, is approved and adopted in all respects.
The Decision becomes final twenty days after the date Petitioner receives
notice of this Decision, and the total sum of the tax, penalty, and interest
amounts is due and payable within twenty days thereafter. If such sum is not
paid within such time, an additional penalty of ten percent of the taxes due
will accrue, and interest will continue to accrue. If either party desires a
rehearing, that party must file a motion for rehearing, which must state the
grounds for rehearing, no later than twenty days after the date Petitioner
receives notice of this Decision. Notice of this Decision is presumed to occur
on the third day after the date of this Decision.
Signed on this 7th day of October 2011.
SUSAN COMBS
Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts
by: Martin A. Hubert
Deputy Comptroller
ENDNOTE(S)
(1) SEE E.G., COMPTROLLER’S DECISION NO. 43,867 (2004).
(2) SEE E.G., COMPTROLLER’S DECISION NOS. 40,036 (2002) and 42,112 (2004).
(3) SEE E.G., COMPTROLLER’S DECISION NOS. 102,143 (2009), 48,289 & 49,580
(2009), 49,475 (2009), 100,503 (2009), and 102,707 (2010).
(4) SEE E.G., COMPTROLLER’S DECISION NOS. 29,852 (1993) and 43,294 (2004).
(5) SEE COMPTROLLER’S DECISION NO. 104,433 (2011).
(6) SEE TEX. TAX CODE ANN. SECTION 111.0611(a).
(7) SEE 34 TEX. ADMIN. CODE Section 1.40(1)(B).
(8) COMPANY A’s Audit Referral Report. The error rate was calculated by using
the amount reported on the sales tax returns filed during the period covered by
Petitioner’s audit and the tax adjustments made for the same period. The tax
assessed ($*************) was divided by the sum of the tax reported
($*************) and the tax assessed ($*************).
(9) ID.
(10) SEE COMPTROLLER’S DECISION NOS. 103,124 (2010), 103,900 & 104,186 (2011),
and 104,540 (2011).
(11) SEE COMPTROLLER’S DECISION NO. 104,433.
ACCESSION NUMBER: 201110280H
SUPERSEDED: N
DOCUMENT TYPE: H
DATE: 10/07/2011
TAX TYPE: MIX