Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
Massachusetts Introduces Software Service Tax (masslive.com)
76 points by imb 4707 days ago
18 comments

MA has so many make-work jobs who do absolutely nothing at least they could leave those of us trying to do something alone. I was talking to a guy who used to be a product designer for Brookstone, Polaroid and GM. He has an idea to create 100 simple products all manufactured within 100 miles of Boston.

http://www.onehundred.co

He thought he would reach out to some MA economic development organization and let them know what he was doing. They got back to him right away, I forget which exact agency, to let him know they would not be able to provide any help. He was kind of miffed because he hadn't asked for anything - but now he knew they would not be able to help no matter what he might need.

I tried to look up the agency he contacted and I found these agencies:

Commonwealth Corporation

MassDevelopment

Mass. Office of Housing and Economic Development

Mass. Office of Business Development

Mass. Business Development Center

Mass. Small Business Development Center

Mass. Export Center

Mass. Office of International Trade & Investment

MassVentures

Mass. Growth Capital Corporation

Mass. Technology Collaborative

Mass. Technology Transfer Center

Mass. Clean Energy Center

Mass. Life Sciences Center

Commonwealth Marketing Office

Don't worry about any waste or duplication - the Mass. Office of Performance Management & Oversight was created with the job of making sure all these groups are working together.

Each of these places has dozens if not hundreds of employees with titles I can't even parody:

Executive Assistant to the Deputy Director

Program Assistant to the Director

Director of Cluster Development

http://www.masstech.org/meet-masstech/our-team/meet-our-staf...

All of these people standing by ready to fire back an email that they really can't be of any help

Well, I'd assume "Executive Assistant to the Deputy Director" is the secretary for the no. 2 at the MTC, which doesn't seem all that unreasonable. The "Program Assistant to the Director" is probably a project manager. The "Director of Cluster Development" is probably in charge of whoever is developing clusters, whatever those are. The titles are slightly overblown, but little more than I'd expect at any government department or large corporation.
It sounds like you aren't familiar with the depths of corruption in Massachusetts state government. Let's put it this way: the last three previous Speakers of the House are all Federal felons.
What do you think the broadband community outreach coordinator does?
Don't even get me started! For other examples of how the MA state government loves to put their money anywhere BUT their mouth, come check out the number of "Additional Vice Provost" positions in the state university (UMass) system.

They laid off people who were doing actual work to make room for people whose only job responsibility is to collect a paycheck.

It amazes me no end!

According to a friend of mine who is relatively knowledgeable about this law, it was originally intended to target enterprise companies that were essentially selling software for next to nothing and then charging like mad for the "installation and configuration" to avoid sales tax.

The wisdom of even that approach is debatable, but the actual language of the law is far from conveying that intent and is a total, indecipherable mess. No one has the remotest clue what is actually covered under the language of the law.

I'm part of a small software consultancy in MA, and we've now got 30 days to decide which of our customers this crazy language applies to, and which it doesn't. Is Django "pre-written" software? Does spinning up and customizing an instance count?

It's crazy town.

>intended to target enterprise companies that were essentially selling software for next to nothing and then charging like mad for the "installation and configuration" to avoid sales tax.

Such is what happens you impose high tax rates: people relabel transactions so they fall outside the tax. The. You have to issue new rules that try to make the relabeling not work. Then, the regulation books start to explode in length to cover the all the blooming techniques, and with it, he regulatory agencies...

And then the process starts over.

This is America, where even people who pay a next-to-nothing tax rate on high incomes complain about supposedly high tax rates.
Or you could just implement sensible taxes in the first place, e.g. by not exempting ‘services’ from a (then-renamed) ‘sales tax’. It is rather easy to have a loophole-free tax on sales and services, unless you have specific requirements not to charge X, Y and Z because A, B and C – then it quickly can get complicated if people try to squeeze W and V into X and you have to build up regulation books :)
A simpler approach would be to set up a lower tax rate on both sales and services.
I bought a new kitchen countertop through Lowes a few months ago, and this is exactly what they did. The countertop is priced by the square foot, but they write up the total cost as labor so that they don't have to charge sales tax.
I think the idea is a fairly reasonable one, taxing large enterprises for charging insane support/servicing fees. Their implementation of it sounds really crappy though.
What on earth about this is "reasonable?" How is this any different from other professional services? We're supposed to live in a free market society where customers have the choice to pay those "insane" fees if they want to. You're advocating that the government stick their noses into the business decisions of the private sector.

It's funny that this takes place at the site of the first tax rebellion.

Professional services taxes similar to sales taxes are not unheard of, nor are gross receipts taxes that vary based on what kind of business you're in. There are as many tax systems as there are tax jurisdictions.

The problem here is somebody wrote a "services tax" without the first clue what they were actually doing. It's like intending to impose a new cigarette tax, but writing it such that anything which burns might fall under the definition of cigarette.

Also, the main point is that they're not following the spirit of the law. The primary value is the software, but they're under-charging for it and over-charging for related services in order to avoid taxation on the true value of the software. That's what someone was ham-fistedly trying to fix.

There are as many tax systems as there are tax jurisdictions.

And this is one of the main problems. Not only are governments (local, state, federal) trying to find creative ways to siphon money from the private sector, but the inherent nature of software services make this impossible to manage or track.

What's wrong with allowing a company to charge $1 for their software, then $100k for customization? Yes, it's a sales tax loophole, but how would this be different from a custom electronics or plumbing supply company from charging $1 for the parts and $100k for labor?

I don't know that a gross receipts tax is the answer, or what is. MA is free to do what they want, I'm just worried that this will spill over to IL, who is much more in debt.

It's not different, and if that's happening in those industries, it should be halted there, as well. Either that isn't happening (or happening to the same extent) in those industries, it hasn't been brought to the legislature's attention, or, as someone brought up elsewhere, other industries have better lobbyists.

Don't look for me to defend sales taxes in general, they're regressive evils and should be ripped out and replaced with progressive income taxes. But so long as they exist, I'm happy to see loopholes like this closed. Just not closed stupidly.

@nknighthb, I can't seem to reply to your last comment, but I'm curious... why are sales taxes "regressive evils?" The more you consume, the more you pay (at least for physical products). This makes sure everyone has skin in the game.

I would argue that an income tax is a moral "evil", but realize we're way past ever abolishing it. There's no inherent reason a governing power should ever know how much income you produce, even though it may be convenient (and popular) to impose. I suppose that's where our worldviews differ.

Hey guys,

The ABI Hub is an awesome coworking space and startup incubator in Manchester, NH. http://abihub.org/

I've been going there for a few months and moved to NH at the beginning of the year. It has been awesome.

There is a technology scene ready to bloom in Manchester. Also, the cost of living is about 50% of Boston's.

For those who aren't from around here, NH doesn't have unfair taxes :)

NH has no sales tax and no state income tax. Of course you have much fewer "services" than MA. For example MA has a 19 member Commission on the Status of Women - which of course needs an executive director. And the executive director needs an assistant.
But don't forget that reduced services include things like town water (you'll need a well with a radon filtration system), a reliable electric grid (you'll need a generator), and timely snow removal (you'll want a vehicle that uses thrice the fuel).

And the crux of the matter - as NH does absolutely nothing against federal taxes, you'll still be paying the majority of your present transaction costs.

You want to talk about town water? Boston and surrounding towns get water from the Quabbin reservoir. Due to above average rainfall this year it is filled to 95% capacity. If not one more drop of rain were added to the reservoir it would take 5 years to drain it at current use rate. So I was shocked when the MA DEP forced our town to restrict outdoor watering. Someone in a make work job decided our towns use was above a standard set for western towns and there is no debate. Restrict water use or be fined.
Why were you shocked - had you just moved to MA?

One town I was in won't pick up your garbage unless your recycling bin is out as well. No concept that someone could produce so little trash and would rather the quarter-full recycling sit the rare occasion they put out a trash bag. And of course it precludes taking the emptied bin in before the second truck comes around. And FSM help you if the guy decides to search in your bag and declares your trash demolition or construction material.

They of course had color coded water restrictions posted everywhere busybodies frequented - elementary schools etc. And I can't not mention the legislature-dictated seat belt law.

But my quarrel is that the nanny state is a symptom of how broken and autonomous our "representational" system is. One shouldn't have to give up civilization to get away from the busybodies, and escaping to NH is just a pressure relief valve. While the people doing it feel freer, this couldn't be further from reality - the ridiculousness has only become distant because other people are more distant. All types of militarized law enforcement may still freely kill them or their dogs while pretending to be heroes. Their communications are still stored indefinitely and mined for thoughtcrime. They're still prohibited from ingesting whatever chemicals they'd like. And they're still working over a quarter of the year to support these hostilities against them. But since they have an illusion of freedom they're likely to stop criticizing the entirety of the nanny state, focus on aspects they identify with, and flip to supporting it.

NH has water (right?), an electric grid (no idea whether it's reliable, all I know for sure is that they have a nuclear power plant) and based on what I was told, the best snow removal in the country.
Since when do we let facts get in the way of snark?
No facts were harmed in the making of this snark.

Sure, not everywhere in NH is like that. But one can't spread libertarianism by proposing to dismantle the fire department.

It'll depend on the location, plenty of it is rural. But plenty of it is built up and e.g. Manchester has a water works: http://www.manchesternh.gov/Departments/WaterWorks.aspx

(What do you expect from a town incorporated in 1751 with 110K residents?)

As an NH resident, I can confirm this. Also, vanity plates are inexpensive here.
I didn't know I'd need all those things for my water, but it's probably because I'm a renter. My rent is a paltry $685 per month (in Manchester) for a decent two bedroom. Compare to boston ($1500/mo)

The landlord removes my snow on time for free...

Never had an issue with the electricity.

But for a homeowner, yeah. I agree. Plus higher property tax.

> NH doesn't have unfair taxes

As a result, NH has blessed us with drive up liquor stores right on the interstate. ;)

This has disturbing implications for the rest of the country. What happens if the developers of Massachusetts just roll over and give the state hundreds of millions of dollars of extra revenue? What message does that send to other states?
I have no doubt that this will spread. I'm almost surprised that it hasn't taken off before now. But as for the people of Mass., they won't be rolling over and "giving". It is money that will be taken. That's one of the big differences between a tax, and government "revenue", and the way a business makes its money.
Maryland tried this and killed it, try this search: https://www.google.com/search?q=maryland+computer+services+t...

Particularly unwise given how easy it was for people to move to Northern Virginia.

Your profile indicates that you live in NY. That state already charges a sales tax on the pre-written portion of software-services sales. So I'm not sure on what basis you suggest people should move out of MA in protest at such a tax. Are you planning to move out of NY to protest it?
Did I say that people should move out of MA to protest the tax? I'm pretty sure I didn't say that
Is a plumber in Massachusetts required to charge tax on all services rendered, or only those that involve pre-made physical parts?

Is there a paralogous example from a different profession that we can use to gain insight into this new law?

No plumbers don't charge sales tax on services; neither do doctors, lawyers, dentists, or landscapers. Sensible states tax things they want to discourage like gasoline use or smoking. They don't tax people trying work more.
It seems ridiculous to charge only one profession for providing service, and it sounds like software people just have the worst lobbyists and the worst public image (plumbers are the iconic symbol of the "little guy" small business).

Here in Ontario it's much simpler (but steeper) - the harmonized provincial/federal sales and service tax is 13% on everything. Sales, service, you don't have to give a crap. There's a short list of exemptions for groceries and medical stuff.

Our taxes are high, but straightforward.

There is no money for politicians or lobbyists in straightforward laws.

Every store in MA has their own opinion about what foods are taxed and what aren't. Candy-yes, gum-no, ice cream at a grocery store - no. Ice cream in a cone - yes.

You guys pay 13% every time money exchanges hands? Does that include when you eat a restaurant, and if so, do you also tip the waiter?
You realize that in most of the U.S. you pay sales taxes on restaurant food and tip the waiter, right?

In some states groceries are exempt from sales tax, but restaurant food is not exempted by any state (except in the trivial sense in states that don't have a sales tax at all).

New Hampshire even has a special sales tax just for restaurant food (despite not having a general sales tax).
With very little, very clearly defined exceptions, every time money exchanges hands to pay for a service or a good, tax is applied. We also tip. The country has a set of two minimum wages. One for jobs that do not make tips, and another one, slightly lower, for those expected to make tips.

Federal tax is 5% and provincial tax ranges from 0 to 10%, meaning you pay 5-15% depending on your location for each good or service rendered. Essential goods/services (defined by each province and the federal gov.) are not subject to the specific tax (e.g. in Quebec, books are considered essential goods by the province, but not by the federal, so you pay only 5% tax)

No (some things are exempt), yes (food at a restaurant is both a good and a service), and yes (the HST goes to the restaurant, the tip goes to the waiter).
Its a value added tax, so no, 13% doesn't get taxed every time money changes hands. Only the added value.
In Australia it's 10% with no tips. Wages are considerably higher (so is cost of living however.)
That line caught me off guard. In New Jersey they do charge sales tax. All contractors (plumbers, remodelers, electricians)are required to charge and file sales tax on services that are done as maintenance.

There is something called "exempt capital improvements" and they do not get taxed. Basically, new kitchen remodel doesn't get taxed, but fixing a broken faucet does. Repair a cracked bathtub? Taxed. Rip it out and remodel the bathroom? No tax.

It sounds like NJ isn't encouraging conservation, but rather more consumption. This is backwards, IMHO.
Move. Now. The more people leave the state and/or refuse to provide services to people there the less money they get. Sure it's not a easy thing to do at all but the only way politicians get a message if it there is a high price attached.
In the state of Vermont where I live our legislature introduced and passed a similar bill several years ago, under nearly identical circumstances. Nestled into another bill, the state house inserted and passed a sweeping tax on "Cloud Services" which affected all software delivered to the end user via the internet.

The real salt in the wound for businesses was that the tax was going to be retroactively applied to the previous four years of revenue. This would have driven a fair share of our fledgling technology sector out of business almost immediately.

Thankfully, our Governor did not agree with the way the tax was passed into law, nor how it was applied. He first delayed and eventually removed the tax all together.

When politicians sneak revenue draining taxes into the business market like this, without public comment or discussion, it makes me truly concerned that they are simply self interested.

Hopefully the Massachusetts state house will pull their heads out of the sand and clear up the confusion with their constituents. Maybe by next election cycle, those affected will let their feelings be known in the polls.

"Singleton is upset that the technology industry did not lobby more strongly against the tax, and he worries it will hurt Massachusetts"

It occurred to me I've been a developer for 13 years and have no clue who's got my back if the government starts to target my business unfairly. What kind of industry lobbies or trade groups are even out there to fight a law like this?

There is a FAQ here: http://www.mass.gov/dor/docs/dor/law-changes/faqss-computer-...

Per question 23, it appears that adding a computer to a LAN is an example of a taxable service.

I'll say this as the owner of a small consultancy that will (probably) be affected by the new law: I have far less objection to the tax itself than the specifics of how it's implemented. In any case, it might first be worthwhile to read the actual language in question [1].

So with that in mind, the implementation problems include:

1) There was very little notice given to the affected parties - the bill passed July 24, effective July 31. (This is somewhat unavoidable, since part of the stated purpose of the tax is to fund transportation projects in 2013 - so delaying its effects would be counterproductive to the underlying goal).

2) There's still quite a bit of ambiguity surrounding implementation, including - crucially - what's taxable and what isn't. MA DOR (the state's version of the IRS) has issued some FAQs [2] and clarifications - which, annoyance aside, have actually been helpful. However, they only begin to answer the very real questions that this presents for many businesses - but we're responsible for collecting the tax basically yesterday (first filing due September 20, to cover taxes starting August 1). I read today that DOR will issue additional clarification and guidance in October... which I can only assume will be retroactive. So we'll likely be forced to either charge some people an unnecessary tax, or take an unexpected 6% revenue cut, or possibly end up having to pay penalties. Merits of the tax aside, the uncertainty - inevitable with such a new rule! - is what's killer.

3) Broadly speaking, the distinction they're trying to draw in the law does seem a bit weird. As I understand it (and IANAL, but have talked to a few - all of whom are still trying to parse what this means), if I write a custom CMS "from scratch", that's still considered a tax-free service. If I train you on, say, Wordpress (or any open-source or commercial product, really), that's still tax-free as well. If, however, I build a plugin to integrate Wordpress with your in-house SSO system - that's taxable. A custom theme? Probably.

Where do frameworks fit in? (Say, if I write you a shiny, custom CMS in Django). I don't know. There's a specific clarification issued by DOR that operating systems are exempt - or rather, to quote directly: "Custom application software (including custom software that incorporates such proprietary code) that is designed to run on a prewritten operating system is treated as custom software and not as a modification of the prewritten operating system software."

There are some interesting caveats being carved out - for example: "Suppose a computer system is designed but not actually built, so software is never actually integrated with hardware. Are the services still subject to sales tax? No."

Again, while on the whole I'd of course prefer that this tax go away entirely, at the end of the day it's no more or less rational than the taxation (or non-taxation) of many other goods and services. The critical problem here is the implementation, which introduces a whole lot of uncertainty and risk into a business that, until a few days ago, has never had to deal with this sort of thing.

[1] http://www.mass.gov/dor/businesses/help-and-resources/legal-...

[2] http://www.mass.gov/dor/docs/dor/law-changes/faqss-computer-...

It seems like they should extend that to all industries and not just single out software development. Why not say that any lawyer who just modifies boilerplate legal documents is now subject to a tax? That would seem to be in the same spirit.
However, it's not likely that they'll ever put a tax on lawyers, since most members of the state legislature are probably lawyers themselves.
> If, however, I build a plugin to integrate Wordpress with your in-house SSO system - that's taxable.

Couldn't you argue that Wordpress is a framework for which you are building custom software?

Throw all the software services into the harbor!
Careful it may be considered terrorism these days.
It certainly was at the time.
Looks like Boston needs another tea party or LAN party? I don't know but something has to be done. It seems like this industry has been attacked unfairly as of late.
The main problem I have with this is that they are taxing information work that is clean, to fund /freeways/. Way to go, 20'th century!
Why do all the American states have different taxes?

Here in Australia we have 10% GST (Goods and services tax). So wherever you're from in the country you can expect both goods and services to be priced the same. So much simpler for the average consumer!

The name of the country is United States of America.

So it was formed that way - each of the original 13 states got together to form a more perfect union. But each of the 13 states retained some autonomy including ability to levy tax within the state for various means or purposes.

Been that way ever since.

Can't see a national tax - our culture would not allow it.

You mean like the national income tax?
That money funds the Federal government.

Completely different.

There is a national tax on gasoline.
Let me try again. I'm talking about a national tax to divide among the states.

Federal Income tax, Gasoline tax, etc all fund the Federal Government. And yes the Feds does distribute some of the money via grants or a Congressional action (Medicaid, highway funds, etc).

But I don't see the US adopting a national use tax like VAT that is collected by the Federal government but automatically given out to the states based on where the money is spent.

Our country likes to keep things on the state and local level as much as possible.

The gas tax is a use tax which has been federally acceptable (interstate highway). Income tax required a constitutional amendment.
> Why do all the American states have different taxes?

So that when you get fed up with sky-high taxes for no services from places like Massachusetts or California, you can move to Texas or Florida. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laboratories_of_democracy

It allows companies and people to vote with their feet.
What a mess... So if I buy a SaaS product that requires some config on the providers end, is that taxable too?
Taxachusetts
As of a few months ago, MA actually charges tax on SaaS sold to customers in MA - that's been pretty clear. (I got notices from a few of my SaaS providers and everything).
Texas also does as of a few years ago. In general services aren't taxed in Texas, but 17 classes of services are defined as taxable [1], ranging from movie-theater tickets to mobile-phone service to pest-control. One of those is data-processing services:

Examples of data processing include check preparation; accounts payable or receivable preparation; web hosting, web site creation and maintenance; data storage, including offsite backup of electronic files; conversion of data from one type of medium to another (i.e. converting paper documents or videotapes to digital files); and the performance of a totalisator service with the use of computational equipment required by the Texas Racing Act. Data processing services providers include sellers of software as a service and application service providers.

[1] http://www.window.state.tx.us/taxinfo/taxpubs/tx96_259.pdf

Really? Do you have a reference for that?
Why computer services? Why not tax something no one likes - radio and TV ads
I practice tax law and write for forbes on tax law.. this area of law may seem confusing, but that is mostly for the media buzz. The law has generally been fairly clear.

Many states have long had laws that taxed "pre-written or canned software." MA is just one of the newer states that have enacted this law. New York has had the law in the books for years.

Pre-written software means that you've previously created software and you've literally re-used the code.

Professional, custom or designed software is still exempt as a "professional service."

What happens when you're like SAP and you start with canned software, but then customize it? Then, you pay sales tax on the canned portion and then you don't pay tax on the customization costs.

In sales tax audits, they test this by comparing code sold off the shelf to the code presented as "custom." Generally, consultants are used.

There are also sales tax on "informational reports." This started as paying sales tax for "stock tips" sent over the fax. But, today this has extended to informational reports that were created by software. Thus, a lot of businesses that "don't sell canned software" and provide a "service" cannot escape the tax law by simply providing the end product alone.

I can understand people getting angry, but the law has been around for a while... I've gone through multiple audits with companies such as reuters, bloomberg and etc. I don't particularly feel that its unfair, since if you provide a "custom service" then you're exempt.

Obviously, there are always going to be ways to "technically" get away with avoiding sales tax, but that doesn't mean that they're inherently unfair. Companies avoided paying sales tax on software for a while, until the states realized that they were being cheated by these businesses. Then, businesses decided that if we don't sell the software on "CDs" then its not tangible property and "legally not taxable." So, they would bring the CDs and install the software and then leave with the CD's to effectively avoid the sales tax.

Then, they started to allow the software to be hosted online and only provide the "end-product aka SaaS." Services are commonly exempt and hard to follow, thus they escaped the states radar for years. Its a cat and mouse game that will continue.

I think the best example is if an attorney or accountant were to provide the same exact tax return or memo to everyone, then it'd be taxable under sales tax law. But, because we provide a different memo or tax return to everyone (maybe using a system like turbotax or something), it is a custom product because the service is only applicable to that person. If the developer provides a copy of turbo tax, then its taxable because its always the same. But, if the developer uses RoR, Python or some other system to "create" the end product for the individual, then its not taxable. Hopefully, this crude example is decent enough to get the point across.

Why do they single out software in this regard? Or are there similar laws on the books for things like legal documents? i.e. if I have a lawyer draw up a lease and its a boilerplate with the correct blanks filed in, is there a tax on that? If not, why not since it seems extremely similar?
Adding a tax on the 'services' portion is exactly what this bill does. Mass has also had sales tax on the 'canned software' itself for years.
Taxachusetts...