WA Legal Roundup - Div II
Bowie distributes those little val pak coupon books. The DOR categorized this as "publishing" for purposes of the B&O tax. DOR backed off and Bowie appealed the rescission (presumably, they were getting a better tax rate as publishers). The ALJ Appeal held that Bowie was not a publisher, because a third party printed the materials. On appeal to Superior Court, the trial court had a problem that unbound coupons would not fall under the publishing tax, but bound ones would. Nonetheless, he found for DOR that the val-paks were not periodicals based on a common sense reading of periodicals.
The B&O Publishing rate is imposed on persons engaged "in the business of . . . [p]rinting, and of publishing newspapers, periodicals, or magazines." The statute defines a periodical as a printed publication issued at regularly scheduled interviews. The question of fact was whether these were distributed at "stated intervals." DOR said no because the schedule were not readily available to recipients. Bowie said yes because the schedule is on its website under an advertise with us buried link. Guess what just happened? Material issue of fact!
Reversed and remanded to get to the bottom of this elusive fact.