Iowa Supreme Court upholds taxation of KFC
Lawyer Blogs
The Iowa Supreme Court has upheld a decision to levy corporate income taxes against fried chicken giant KFC.
At question is whether the state can impose income tax on revenue received by a company that doesn't have a presence in Iowa. KFC doesn't own any restaurants or have employees in Iowa. All KFC's in the state are owned by independent franchisers.
The Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance assessed KFC more than $248,000 for unpaid corporate income taxes in 2001.
Mark Schuling, the agency's director, says any corporation that collects revenue in Iowa should pay taxes.
KFC Corp., whose parent company is Louisville, Ky.-based Yum Brands Inc., challenged the assessment saying under Iowa law it was not subject to taxes because it didn't have property in the state.
Related listings
-
Mich. court ruling would nix water discharge plan
Lawyer Blogs 12/30/2010A divided Michigan Supreme Court has issued an opinion that would continue to prevent an energy company from discharging treated wastewater into the headwaters of the Au Sable River in Otsego County.The 4-3 decision would deny the water discharge pla...
-
High court ruling prompts new Ohio campaign rules
Lawyer Blogs 12/29/2010Ohio has unveiled new disclosure requirements in response to a U.S. Supreme Court decision earlier this year that eased restrictions on campaign spending.Corporations, nonprofits and labor groups will have to show the amounts they spend on independen...
-
Top NY court upholds dismissal of golf ‘fore’ suit
Lawyer Blogs 12/27/2010Slices, hooks, and other errant shots are a common hazard on the links and a golfer can’t expect to get a warning shout of “Fore!” every time a ball comes his way, New York’s top court ruled last week in dismissing a personal injury lawsuit.Dr. Anoop...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.