NYC Tax Law Library: A Community Resource
Kalish Law LLC has compiled the NYC Tax Law Library as a complimentary public service for the benefit of the legal and tax community. This resource is a curated compilation of links to publicly available materials, including statutes, regulations, and recent tribunal decisions, organized to facilitate easier access for practitioners, advisors, and taxpayers.
Help Us Keep This Resource Current
We rely on the collaboration of the tax community to maintain the integrity and accuracy of this library. If you have suggestions for improvements, notice a broken link, or identify a more recent version of a document, please email us at jarrett@kalishtaxlaw.com. Your feedback is essential to keeping this resource as helpful and accurate as possible for all users.
Commercial Rent Tax
Recent Tribunal Decisions:
The “Recent Tribunal Decisions” section of the NYC Tax Law Library solely contains recent published decisions from the Appeals Division of the NYC Tax Appeals Tribunal. The NYC Tax Law Library does not contain any such decisions from prior to 2003 and does not contain any determinations from the ALJ Division of the NYC Tax Appeals Tribunal. The NYC Tax Law Library also does not contain any NYS Court Decisions, even in instances where Appeals Division decisions that are included in the library were the subject of further appellate review in the New York State courts. The summaries of the decisions included below are the same as those that are publicly provided by the NYC Tax Appeals Tribunal and are not the work product of Kalish Law LLC.
ASTRO GALLERY OF GEMS INC. TAT(E)21-21(CR) (February 14, 2023)
THE EXCEPTION WAS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. THE TRIBUNAL DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO REVIEW AN EXCEPTION TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DETERMINATION FILED MORE THAN 30 DAYS AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF THE DETERMINATION.
1 WORLD TRADE CENTER LLC, ET AL. TAT (E) 07-34 (CR), et al. (October 12, 2011)
PETITIONERS' PAYMENTS TO THE PORT AUTHORITY FOR THE PERIOD AFTER , ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE COMMERCIAL RENT TAX (THE "CRT"). PETITIONERS' PAYMENTS TO THE PORT AUTHORITY FOR THE PERIOD ENDING , ARE SUBJECT TO THE CRT. PETITIONERS CORRECTLY REPORTED THE INITIAL RENT PAYMENTS ON THEIR CRT RETURNS AS RENT FOR THE FIRST TAX YEAR ATTRIBUTABLE SOLELY TO THE PERIOD PRIOR TO , AND CANNOT PRORATE SUCH PAYMENTS OVER THE ENTIRE 99-YEAR TERM OF THE LEASE OR ON A DAILY BASIS OVER THE PERIOD BEGINNING , AND ENDING . BUSINESS INTERRUPTION INSURANCE PAYMENTS CANNOT BE DEDUCTED IN COMPUTING BASE RENT AS EQUIVALENT TO SUBTENANT RENTS. ALL PENALTIES ARE CANCELLED.
PATTERSON, BELKNAP, WEBB & TYLER, LLP TAT (E) 00-8 (CR) - DECISION (July 7, 2006)
PETITIONER COULD NOT REDUCE ITS BASE RENT FOR COMMERCIAL RENT TAX PURPOSES FOR THE PERIOD THROUGH BY ITS SHARE OF A REAL PROPERTY TAX REFUND THAT PETITIONER RECEIVED IN 1996 BUT THAT WAS RELATED TO PAYMENTS INVOLVING ANOTHER LEASE WITH ANOTHER LANDLORD FOR A DIFFERENT PREMISES FOR EARLIER TAX PERIODS. PETITIONER FAILED TO FILE PROTECTIVE REFUND CLAIMS WITHIN THE APPLICABLE LIMITATIONS PERIODS. HOWEVER, PETITIONER IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE NEGLIGENCE PENALTIES UNDER CODE SECTION 11-715(d) AS THE BASE RENT REDUCTION WHILE WRONG, WAS NOT NEGLIGENT NOR WAS THERE AN INTENTIONAL DISREGARD OF THE LAW OR RULES.
GOLDMAN & GOLDMAN, P.C. TAT (E) 02-12 (CR) (March 24, 2005)
SINCE THERE WERE NO UNRESOLVED ISSUES OF MATERIAL FACT, THE COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK (THE "COMMISSIONER") WAS ENTITLED TO SUMMARY DETERMINATION THAT THE PETITION FILED ON BY THE PETITIONER WAS NOT TIMELY FILED WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE NOTICE OF DETERMINATION (THE "NOTICE") BEING PROTESTED. THE COMMISSIONER PROVED THAT THE NOTICE WAS PROPERLY ADDRESSED AND ESTABLISHED WHEN THE NOTICE WAS MAILED BY (1) OFFERING PROOF OF A STANDARD PROCEDURE USED REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICES OF DETERMINATION BY AN INDIVIDUAL WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THAT PROCEDURE AND (2) OFFERING PROOF THAT THE STANDARD PROCEDURE WAS FOLLOWED IN THIS CASE. PETITIONER WAS UNABLE TO REBUT THE PRESUMPTION OF RECEIPT
AIR PEGASUS CORPORATION TAT (E) 00-23 (CR), TAT (E) 00-24 (CR) (February 4, 2005)
PETITIONER WAS SUBJECT TO THE COMMERCIAL RENT OR OCCUPANCY TAX ("CRT") AS THE PETITIONER PAID RENT TO THE PORT AUTHORITY OF THE STATES OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY (THE "PORT AUTHORITY") FOR THE USE AND OCCUPANCY OF TAXABLE PREMISES, THE WEST 30TH STREET HELIPORT (THE "HELIPORT"). PETITIONER WAS NOT THE AGENT OF THE PORT AUTHORITY FOR PURPOSES OF PETITIONER'S OPERATIONS AT THE HELIPORT. IN ADDITION, THERE IS NO PROVISION IN THE CRT OR ANY OTHER STATUTE EXEMPTING PETITIONER FROM THE CRT.