This is page 2 of:

Walmart Sales Tax Snafu: How Did They Get This So Wrong?

July 29th, 2013

In case that’s not clear enough, the complaint also cites a 2005 Pennsylvania Department of Revenue update that spells it out further:

The regulations require a retailer to deduct the coupon amount from the taxable portion of the purchase price, if the cash register receipt describes both the item purchased and the coupon that applies to it. The description requirement ensures that a coupon relating to a nontaxable item will not reduce the taxable purchase price. It also protects the retailer by showing why the taxable price was reduced.

The Department interprets the requirement of a description to mean that the cash register receipt makes a clear reference to the item and the coupon related to it or a clear reference that there is an amount deducted on any purchase or a percentage discount on all items listed whether taxable or not.

Of course, this being a Walmart receipt, the receipt includes the UPC codes from both the shaving gel and the coupon. That matters because if the coupon didn’t show up on the receipt, it would qualify as a rebate—which isn’t tax-exempt—instead of an on-the-spot coupon under Pennsylvania law.

Walmart hasn’t filed its legal response to the lawsuit, but did ask to have it moved to federal court, which indicates the potential damages are worth at least $5 million. However, Walmart spokesman Dan Fogleman told a Pittsburgh television station that “Walmart’s current systems, with respect to the collection and remittance of sales tax, are in compliance with Pennsylvania’s tax laws. We have previously sought an opinion from the state which confirmed this.”

So who got it wrong? Is it Farneth’s lawyer? Walmart’s tax department? The Pennsylvania tax bureaucrat who OKed Walmart’s tax logic?

Or did it come from IT—either a subtle bug in the POS code, an inadequately tested change, or a misconfiguration for all the Walmart stores in Pennsylvania, all the Pittsburgh Walmarts or just that particular store?

At this point, there’s a good chance Walmart still doesn’t know for sure. And if Walmart has tracked down an internal systems problem, it’s not in the chain’s interest to say anything—especially if it turns out to affect sales-tax calculation in some other states, too.

Worse still, Walmart can’t even take the safe route in this case. There is no safe route. If the chain collects the disputed sales tax, it could be slapped with steeper penalties if it loses the lawsuit. If it doesn’t collect the disputed sales tax, it could be in trouble with the state—unless it makes up the difference on its own.

All Walmart can do is keep sifting through its POS systems to make sure everything is the way it’s supposed to be—and hope it’s that tax bureaucrat’s fault after all.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.