Target Subsidiary Battles Florida Revenue Dept. Over Taxes
Target Enterprise Inc. is challenging the state's attempt to collect more than $10.2 million in taxes and interest after an audit of the company for fiscal years 2017, 2018 and 2019.
December 28, 2021 at 01:08 PM
3 minute read
A subsidiary of the Target retail chain is battling the Florida Department of Revenue over millions of dollars in corporate income taxes.
Target Enterprise Inc. filed a lawsuit last week in Leon County circuit court challenging the state's attempt to collect more than $10.2 million in taxes and interest after an audit of the company for fiscal years that ended in January 2017, January 2018 and January 2019.
The subsidiary, referred to in the lawsuit as TEI, is based in Minnesota and provides services to Target and other affiliated companies. Those services include marketing, consulting and brand-building, with TEI receiving revenue for the services, according to the lawsuit.
The dispute involves a law that requires, for tax purposes, companies that operate in Florida and other states to "apportion" adjusted gross income to Florida.
After conducting the audit, the Department of Revenue notified TEI in August that it owed $7.9 million in taxes and $2.3 million in interest, with interest continuing to build, according to a copy of the department assessment included in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit said the Department of Revenue deviated from a formula typically used in determining apportionment of income. State law says such deviation is allowed if the typical methods "do not fairly represent the extent of a taxpayer's tax base attributable to this state."
But TEI contends in the lawsuit that there was "nothing unusual or unique about the underlying facts of this case" to justify the deviation.
"TEI entered into the services agreement to provide the services to Target Group (the Target Corp. and affiliates)," the lawsuit said. "The fact that one corporate member of a business enterprise provides services to another affiliated corporate member of the same business enterprise is hardly unique."
The lawsuit, filed Wednesday and assigned to Circuit Judge Layne Smith, said the department used an alternative apportionment method, known as market sourcing, that involved comparing retail square footage of Target stores in Florida with other states.
TEI contends that using the alternative method was improper and violated the company's due-process rights and the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The due-process argument, for example, said TEI employees outside of Florida were providing services to other parts of Minneapolis-based Target.
"Because application of the department's 'market sourcing' approach results in taxing the value earned by TEI for services performed outside Florida, the department's methodology violates the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution," the lawsuit said. "For this reason, the assessment must be abated in full."
Jim Saunders reports for the News Service of Florida.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPlaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
4 minute readAs Unpredictability Rises, Gov't Law Practices Expect Trump Bump. Especially in Florida
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250