AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• An Arizona corporation, Bogle Management Co., Inc. (Taxpayer), which conducts its business from Georgia, provides agricultural management services to farms in New Mexico without maintaining a physical office there but having a physical presence through its managers. Taxpayer was assessed for gross receipts tax by the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department (the Department) on reimbursement payments and management fees it received under the New Mexico Gross Receipts and Compensating Tax Act. Taxpayer contends that these payments are exempt from taxation as it acts as a disclosed agent, performs no services in New Mexico, and is located in another state (paras 1, 3-6).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Taxpayer: Argues that the Department's decision to assess gross receipts tax was erroneous because it acted as a disclosed agent, is located out of state, and did not perform services in New Mexico, making its reimbursements and management fees exempt from taxation (para 1).
• Department: Contends that the hearing officer correctly found the management fees and reimbursement payments subject to gross receipts tax, as Taxpayer sold services in New Mexico, had a presence in the state, and allocated its receipts to New Mexico (para 9).

Legal Issues

• Whether the Taxpayer was acting as a disclosed agent, thereby exempting its reimbursements and management fees from New Mexico gross receipts tax.
• Whether the Taxpayer's services performed outside of New Mexico exempt it from gross receipts tax under the Act.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the hearing officer’s decision that Taxpayer’s reimbursements and management fees are subject to New Mexico gross receipts tax (para 2).

Reasons

• Per M. Monica Zamora, with Michael E. Vigil and Henry M. Bohnhoff concurring, the court held that the hearing officer’s decision was not arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law, and was supported by substantial evidence. The court found that Taxpayer did not meet the requirements for the disclosed agent exemption and was engaged in business in New Mexico, making its reimbursements and management fees subject to gross receipts tax. The court also noted that Taxpayer's services, deemed performed in New Mexico due to the consumption of services in the state, were correctly assessed for gross receipts tax regardless of where the services were physically performed (paras 10-24).