Example 1: Direct Mail Corp, a corporation based outside Tennessee, provides direct mail services to its customer, Business Corp. Business Corp transacts with Direct Mail Corp to deliver printed fliers to a list of customers that is provided to it by Business Corp. Some of Business Corp's customers are in Tennessee and some of those customers are in other states. Direct Mail Corp will use the postal service to deliver the printed fliers to Business Corp' s customers. The sale of Direct Mail Corp's services to Business Corp is assigned to Tennessee to the extent that the services are delivered on behalf of Business Corp to Tennessee customers (i.e., to the extent that the fliers are delivered on behalf of Business Corp to Business Corp's intended audience in Tennessee).
Example 2: Ad Corp is a corporation based outside Tennessee that provides advertising and advertising-related services in Tennessee and in neighboring states. Ad Corp enters into a contract at a location outside Tennessee with an individual customer who is not a Tennessee resident to design advertisements for billboards to be displayed in Tennessee, and to design fliers to be mailed to Tennessee residents. All of the design work is performed outside Tennessee. The sale of the design services is in Tennessee because the service is physically delivered on behalf of the customer to the customer's intended audience in Tennessee.
Example 3: Same facts as Example 2, except that the contract is with a business customer that is based outside Tennessee. The sale of the design services is in Tennessee because the services are physically delivered on behalf of the customer to the customer's intended audience in Tennessee.
Example 4: Fulfillment Corp, a corporation based outside Tennessee, provides product delivery fulfillment services in Tennessee and in neighboring states to Sales Corp, a corporation located outside Tennessee that sells tangible personal property through a mail order catalog and over the Internet to customers. In some cases when a customer purchases tangible personal property from Sales Corp to be delivered in Tennessee, Fulfillment Corp will, pursuant to its contract with Sales Corp, deliver that property from its fulfillment warehouse located outside Tennessee. The sale of the fulfillment services of Fulfillment Corp to Sales Corp is assigned to Tennessee to the extent that Fulfillment Corp's deliveries on behalf of Sales Corp are to recipients in Tennessee.
Example 5: Software Corp, a software development corporation, enters into a contract with a business customer, Buyer Corp, which is physically located in Tennessee, to develop custom software to be used in Buyer Corp's business. Software Corp develops the custom software outside Tennessee, and then physically installs the software on Buyer Corp's computer hardware located in Tennessee. The development and sale of the custom software is properly characterized as a service transaction, and the sale is assigned to Tennessee because the software is physically delivered to the customer in Tennessee.
Example 6: Same facts as Example 5, except that Buyer Corp has offices in Tennessee and several other states, but is commercially domiciled outside Tennessee and orders the software from a location outside Tennessee. The receipts from the development and sale of the custom software service are assigned to Tennessee because the software is physically delivered to the customer in Tennessee.
Example 1: Support Corp, a corporation that is based outside Tennessee, provides software support and diagnostic services to individual and business customers that have previously purchased certain software from third-party vendors. These individual and business customers are located in Tennessee and other states. Support Corp supplies its services on a case-by-case basis when directly contacted by its customer. Support Corp generally provides these services through the Internet but sometimes provides these services by phone. In all cases, Support Corp verifies the customer's account information before providing any service. Using the information that Support Corp verifies before performing a service, Support Corp can determine where its services are received, and therefore must assign its sales to these locations. The sales made to Support Corp's individual and business customers are in Tennessee to the extent that Support Corp's services are received in Tennessee. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(ii)(I) and (II).
Example 2: Online Corp, a corporation based outside Tennessee, provides web-based services through the means of the Internet to individual customers who are residents of Tennessee and other states. These customers access Online Corp's web services primarily in their states of residence, and sometimes, while traveling, in other states. For a substantial portion of its sales, Online Corp either can determine the state or states where such services are received, or, where it cannot determine such state or states, it has sufficient information regarding the place of receipt to reasonably approximate such state or states. However, Online Corp cannot determine or reasonably approximate the state or states of receipt for all of such sales. Assuming that Online Corp reasonably believes, based on all available information, that the geographic distribution of the sales for which it cannot determine or reasonably approximate the location of the receipt of its services generally tracks those for which it does have this information, Online Corp must assign to Tennessee the sales for which it does not know the customers' location in the same proportion as those sales for which it has this information. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(1)(e)2.
Example 3: Same facts as in Example 2, except that Online Corp reasonably believes that the geographic distribution of the sales for which it cannot determine or reasonably approximate the location of the receipt of its web-based services do not generally track the sales for which it does have this information. Online Corp must assign the sales of its services for which it lacks information as provided to its individual customers using the customers' billing addresses. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(ii)(I)II.
Example 4: Net Corp, a corporation based outside Tennessee, provides web-based services to a business customer, Business Corp, a company with offices in Tennessee and two neighboring states. Particular employees of Business Corp access the services from computers in each Business Corp office. Assume that Net Corp determines that Business Corp employees in Tennessee were responsible for 75% of Business Corp's use of Net Corp's services, and Business Corp employees in other states were responsible for 25% of Business Corp's use of Net Corp's services. In such case, 75% of the sale is received in Tennessee, and therefore 75% of the sale is in Tennessee. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(ii)(II). Assume alternatively that Net Corp lacks sufficient information regarding the location or locations where Business Corp's employees used the services to determine or reasonably approximate such location or locations. Under these circumstances, if Net Corp derives 5% or less of its sales from Business Corp, Net Corp must assign the sale under Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(ii)(II)III to the state where Business Corp principally managed the contract, or if that state is not reasonably determinable, to the state where Business Corp placed the order for the services, or if that state is not reasonably determinable, to the state of Business Corp's billing address. If Net Corp derives more than 5% of its sales of services from Business Corp, Net Corp is required to identify the state in which its contract of sale is principally managed by Business Corp and must assign the receipts to that state.
Example 5: Net Corp, a corporation based outside Tennessee, provides web-based services through the means of the Internet to more than 250 individual and business customers in Tennessee and in other states. Assume that for each customer Net Corp cannot determine the state or states where its web services are actually received, and lacks sufficient information regarding the place of receipt to reasonably approximate such state or states. Also assume that Net Corp does not derive more than 5% of its sales of services from any single customer. Net Corp may apply the safe harbor stated in Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(ii)(II)IV and may assign its sales using each customer's billing address.
Example 1: Web Corp, a corporation that is based outside Tennessee, provides Internet content to viewers in Tennessee and other states. Web Corp sells advertising space to business customers pursuant to which the customers' advertisements will appear in connection with Web Corp's Internet content. Web Corp receives a fee for running the advertisements that is determined by reference to the number of times the advertisement is viewed or clicked upon by the viewers of its website. Web Corp's sale of advertising space to its business customers is assigned to Tennessee to the extent that the viewers of the Internet content are in Tennessee, as measured by viewings or clicks. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(iii)(I). If Web Corp is unable to determine the actual location of its viewers, and lacks sufficient information regarding the location of its viewers to reasonably approximate such location, Web Corp must approximate the amount of its Tennessee sales by multiplying the amount of such sales by a percentage that reflects the Tennessee population in the specific geographic area in which the content containing the advertising is delivered relative to the total population in such area. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(iii)(III).
Example 2: Retail Corp, a corporation that is based outside of Tennessee, sells tangible property through its retail stores located in Tennessee and other states, and through a mail order catalog. Answer Co, a corporation that operates call centers in multiple states, contracts with Retail Corp to answer telephone calls from individuals placing orders for products found in Retail Corp's catalogs. In this case, the phone answering services of Answer Co are being delivered to Retail Corp's customers and prospective customers. Therefore, Answer Co is delivering a service electronically to Retail Corp's customers or prospective customers on behalf of Retail Corp, and must assign the proceeds from this service to the state or states from which the phone calls are placed by such customers or prospective customers. If Answer Co cannot determine the actual locations from which phone calls are placed, and lacks sufficient information regarding the locations to reasonably approximate such locations, Answer Co must approximate the amount of its Tennessee sales by multiplying the amount of its fee from Retail Corp by a percentage that reflects the Tennessee population in the specific geographic area from which the calls are placed relative to the total population in such area. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(iii)(III)I.
Example 3: Web Corp, a corporation that is based outside of Tennessee, sells tangible property to customers via its Internet website. Design Co designed and maintains Web Corp's website, including making changes to the site based on customer feedback received through the site. Design Co's services are delivered to Web Corp, the proceeds from which are assigned pursuant to Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(ii). The fact that Web Corp's customers and prospective customers incidentally benefit from Design Co's services, and may even interact with Design Co in the course of providing feedback, does not transform the service into one delivered "on behalf of" Web Corp to Web Corp's customers and prospective customers.
Example 4: Wholesale Corp, a corporation that is based outside Tennessee, develops an Internet-based information database outside Tennessee and enters into a contract with Retail Corp whereby Retail Corp will market and sell access to this database to end users. Depending on the facts, the provision of database access may be either the sale of a service or the license of intangible property or may have elements of both. Assume that on the particular facts applicable in this example Wholesale Corp is selling database access in transactions properly characterized as involving the performance of a service. When an end user purchases access to Wholesale Corp's database from Retail Corp, Retail Corp in turn compensates Wholesale Corp in connection with that transaction. In this case, Wholesale Corp's services are being delivered through Retail Corp to the end user. Wholesale Corp must assign its sales to Retail Corp to the state or states in which the end users receive access to Wholesale Corp's database. If Wholesale Corp cannot determine the state or states where the end users actually receive access to Wholesale Corp's database, and lacks sufficient information regarding the location from which the end users access the database to reasonably approximate such location, Wholesale Corp must approximate the extent to which its services are received by end users in Tennessee by using a percentage that reflects the ratio of the Tennessee population in the specific geographic area in which Retail Corp regularly markets and sells Wholesale Corp's database relative to the total population in such area. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(iii)(III)II. Note that it does not matter for purposes of the analysis whether Wholesale Corp's sale of database access constitutes a service or a license of intangible property, or some combination of both. See Rule 1320-06-1-.42(5)(f).
This safe harbor applies only for purposes of Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(d)3(i), and not otherwise.
Example 1: Architecture Corp provides building design services as to buildings located, or expected to be located, in Tennessee to individual customers who are residents of Tennessee and other states, and to business customers that are based in Tennessee and other states. Architecture Corp's sales are assigned to Tennessee because the locations of the buildings to which its design services relate are in Tennessee, or are expected to be in Tennessee. For purposes of assigning these sales, it is not relevant where, in the case of an individual customer, the customer primarily resides or is billed for such services, and it is not relevant where, in the case of a business customer, the customer principally manages the contract, placed the order for the services or is billed for such services. Further, such sales are assigned to Tennessee even if Architecture Corp's designs are either physically delivered to its customer in paper form in a state other than Tennessee or are electronically delivered to its customer in a state other than Tennessee. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(d)3(ii).
Example 2: Law Corp provides legal services to individual clients who are residents of Tennessee and other states. In some cases, Law Corp may prepare one or more legal documents for its client as a result of these services and/or the legal work may be related to litigation or a legal matter that is ongoing in a state other than where the client is resident. Assume that Law Corp knows the state of primary residence for many of its clients, and where it does not know this state of primary residence, it knows the client's billing address. Also assume that Law Corp does not derive more than 5% of its sales of services from any one individual client. Where Law Corp knows its client's state of primary residence, it shall assign the sale to that state. Where Law Corp does not know its client's state of primary residence, but rather knows the client's billing address, it shall assign the sale to that state. For purposes of the analysis it is irrelevant whether the legal documents relating to the service are mailed or otherwise delivered to a location in another state, or the litigation or other legal matter that is the underlying predicate for the services is in another state. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(d)2(ii) and 3(i)(I).
Example 3: Law Corp provides legal services to several multistate business clients. In each case, Law Corp knows the state in which the agreement for legal services that governs the client relationship is principally managed by the client. In one case, the agreement is principally managed in Tennessee; in the other cases, the agreement is principally managed in a state other than Tennessee. Where the agreement for legal services is principally managed by the client in Tennessee, the sale of the services shall be assigned to Tennessee; in the other cases, the sale is not assigned to Tennessee. In the case of the sale that is assigned to Tennessee, the sale shall be so assigned even if (1) the legal documents relating to the service are mailed or otherwise delivered to a location in another state, or (2) the litigation or other legal matter that is the underlying predicate for the services is in another state. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(d)2(ii) and 3(i)(II).
Example 4: Consulting Corp, a company that provides consulting services to law firms and other customers, is hired by Law Corp in connection with legal representation that Law Corp provides to Client Co. Specifically, Consulting Corp is hired to provide expert testimony at a trial being conducted by Law Corp on behalf of Client Co. Client Co pays for Consulting Corp's services directly. Assuming that Consulting Corp knows that its agreement with Law Corp is principally managed by Law Corp in Tennessee, the sale of Consulting Corp's services shall be assigned to Tennessee. It is not relevant for purposes of the analysis that Client Co is the ultimate beneficiary of Consulting Corp's services, or that Client Co pays for Consulting Corp's services directly. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(d)3(i)(II).
Example 5: Advisor Corp, a corporation that provides investment advisory services, provides such advisory services to Investment Co. Investment Co is a multistate business client of Advisor Corp that uses Advisor Corp's services in connection with investment accounts that it manages for individual clients, who are the ultimate beneficiaries of Advisor Corp's services. Assume that Investment Co's individual clients are persons that are residents of numerous states, which may or may not include Tennessee. Assuming that Advisor Corp knows that its agreement with Investment Co is principally managed by Investment Co in Tennessee, the sale of Advisor Corp's services shall be assigned to Tennessee. It is not relevant for purposes of the analysis that the ultimate beneficiaries of Advisor Corp's services may be Investment Co's clients, who are residents of numerous states. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(d)3(i)(II).
Example 6: Design Corp is a corporation based outside Tennessee that provides graphic design and similar services in Tennessee and in neighboring states. Design Corp enters into a contract at a location outside Tennessee with an individual customer to design fliers for the customer. Assume that Design Corp does not know the individual customer's state of primary residence and does not derive more than 5% of its sales of services from the individual customer. All of the design work is performed outside Tennessee. The sale is in Tennessee if the customer's billing address is in Tennessee. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(d)3(i)(I).
Example 1: Crayon Corp and Dealer Co enter into a license contract under which Dealer Co as licensee is permitted to use trademarks that are owned by Crayon Corp in connection with Dealer Co's sale of certain products to retail customers. Under the contract, Dealer Co is required to pay Crayon Corp a licensing fee that is a fixed percentage of the total volume of monthly sales made by Dealer Co of products using the Crayon Corp trademarks. Under the contract, Dealer Co is permitted to sell the products at multiple store locations, including store locations that are both within and without Tennessee. Further, the licensing fees that are paid by Dealer Co are broken out on a per-store basis. The licensing fees paid to Crayon Corp by Dealer Co represent fees from the license of a marketing intangible. The portion of the fees to be assigned to Tennessee shall be determined by multiplying the fees by a percentage that reflects the ratio of Dealer Co's receipts that are derived from its Tennessee stores relative to Dealer Co's total receipts. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(5)(b).
Example 2: Network Corp is a broadcaster that licenses rights to its film programming to both platform distribution companies and individual customers. Platform distribution companies pay licensing fees to Network Corp for the rights to distribute Network Corp's film programming to the platform distribution companies' customers. Network Corp's individual customers pay access fees to Network Corp for the right to directly access and view Network Corp's film programming. Network Corp's receipts from each platform distribution company will be assigned to Tennessee if the broadcast customer's commercial domicile is in Tennessee. Network Corp's receipts from each individual broadcast customer will be assigned to Tennessee if the address of the broadcast customer listed in the broadcaster's records is in Tennessee. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(5)(d).
Example 3: Moniker Corp enters into a license contract with Wholesale Co. Pursuant to the contract Wholesale Co is granted the right to use trademarks owned by Moniker Corp to brand sports equipment that is to be manufactured by Wholesale Co or an unrelated entity, and to sell the manufactured equipment to unrelated companies that will ultimately market the equipment to consumers in a specific geographic region, including a foreign country. The license agreement confers a license of a marketing intangible, even though the trademarks in question will be affixed to property to be manufactured. In addition, the license of the marketing intangible is for the right to use the intangible property in connection with sales to be made at wholesale rather than directly to retail customers. The component of the licensing fee that constitutes the Tennessee sales of Moniker Corp is determined by multiplying the amount of the fee by a percentage that reflects the ratio of the Tennessee population in the specific geographic region relative to the total population in such region. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(5)(b).
Example 4: Formula, Inc and Appliance Co enter into a license contract under which Appliance Co is permitted to use a patent owned by Formula, Inc to manufacture appliances. The license contract specifies that Appliance Co is to pay Formula, Inc a royalty that is a fixed percentage of the gross receipts from the products that are later sold. The contract does not specify any other fees. The appliances are both manufactured and sold in Tennessee and several other states. Assume the licensing fees are paid for the license of a production intangible, even though the royalty is to be paid based upon the sales of a manufactured product (i.e., the license is not one that includes a marketing intangible). Because the Commissioner can reasonably establish that the actual use of the intangible property takes place in part in Tennessee, the royalty is assigned based on the location of such use rather than to location of the licensee's commercial domicile, in accordance with Rule 1320-06-01-.42(5)(c). It is presumed that the entire use is in Tennessee except to the extent that the taxpayer can demonstrate that the actual location of some or all of the use takes place outside Tennessee. Assuming that Formula, Inc can demonstrate the percentage of manufacturing that takes place in Tennessee using the patent relative to such manufacturing in other states, that percentage of the total licensing fee paid to Formula, Inc under the contract will constitute Formula, Inc's Tennessee sales. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(5)(c).
Example 5: Axel Corp enters into a license agreement with Biker Co in which Biker Co is granted the right to produce motor scooters using patented technology owned by Axel Corp, and also to sell such scooters by marketing the fact that the scooters were manufactured using the special technology. The contract is a license of both a marketing and production intangible, i.e., a mixed intangible. The scooters are manufactured outside Tennessee. Assume that Axel Corp lacks actual information regarding the proportion of Biker Co's receipts that are derived from Tennessee customers. Also assume that Biker Co is granted the right to sell the scooters in a U.S. geographic region in which the Tennessee population constitutes 25% of the total population during the period in question. The licensing contract requires an upfront licensing fee to be paid by Biker Co to Axel Corp and does not specify what percentage of the fee derives from Biker Co's right to use Axel Corp's patented technology. Because the fees for the license of the marketing and production intangible are not separately and reasonably stated in the contract, it is presumed that the licensing fees are paid entirely for the license of a marketing intangible, unless either the taxpayer or Commissioner reasonably establishes otherwise. Assuming that neither party establishes otherwise, 25% of the licensing fee constitutes Tennessee sales. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(5)(b) and (e).
Example 6: Same facts as Example 5, except that the license contract specifies separate fees to be paid for the right to produce the motor scooters and for the right to sell the scooters by marketing the fact that the scooters were manufactured using the special technology. The licensing contract constitutes both the license of a marketing intangible and the license of a production intangible. Assuming that the separately stated fees are reasonable, the Commissioner will:
Example 7: Better Burger Corp, which is based outside Tennessee, enters into franchise contracts with franchisees who agree to operate Better Burger restaurants as franchisees in various states. Several of the Better Burger Corp franchises are in Tennessee. In each case, the franchise contract between the individual and Better Burger provides that the franchisee is to pay Better Burger Corp an upfront fee for the receipt of the franchise and monthly franchise fees, which cover, among other things, the right to use the Better Burger name and service marks, food processes and cooking know-how, as well as fees for management services. The upfront fees for the receipt of the Tennessee franchises constitute fees paid for the licensing of a marketing intangible. These fees constitute Tennessee sales because the franchises are for the right to make Tennessee sales. The monthly franchise fees paid by Tennessee franchisees constitute fees paid for (1) the license of marketing intangibles (the Better Burger name and service marks), (2) the license of production intangibles (food processes and know-how) and (3) personal services (management fees). The fees paid for the license of the marketing intangibles and the production intangibles constitute Tennessee sales because in each case the use of the intangibles is to take place in Tennessee. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(5)(b)-(c). The fees paid for the personal services are to be assigned pursuant to Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4).
Example 8: Online Corp, a corporation based outside Tennessee, licenses an information database through the means of the Internet to individual customers that are residents of Tennessee and other states. These customers access Online Corp's information database primarily in their states of residence, and sometimes, while traveling, in other states. The license is a license of intangible property that resembles a sale of goods or services and shall be assigned in accordance with Rule 1320-06-01-.42(5)(f). If Online Corp can determine or reasonably approximate the state or states where its database is accessed, then it must do so. Assuming that Online Corp cannot determine or reasonably approximate the location where its database is accessed, Online Corp must assign the sales made to the individual customers using the customers' billing addresses to the extent known. Assume for purposes of this example that Online Corp knows the billing address for each of its customers. In this case, Online Corp's sales made to its individual customers are in Tennessee in any case in which the customer's billing address is in Tennessee. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(ii)(I).
Example 9: Net Corp, a corporation based outside Tennessee, licenses an information database through the means of the Internet to a business customer, Business Corp, a company with offices in Tennessee and two neighboring states. The license is a license of intangible property that resembles a sale of goods or services and shall be assigned in accordance with Rule 1320-06-01-.42(5)(f). Assume that Net Corp cannot determine where its database is accessed but reasonably approximates that 75% of Business Corp's database access took place in Tennessee, and 25% of Business Corp's database access took place in other states. In such case, 75% of the receipts from database access is in Tennessee. Assume alternatively that Net Corp lacks sufficient information regarding the location where its database is accessed to reasonably approximate such location. Under these circumstances, if Net Corp derives 5% or less of its receipts from database access from Business Corp, Net Corp must assign the sale under Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(ii)(II) to the state where Business Corp principally managed the contract, or if that state is not reasonably determinable to the state where Business Corp placed the order for the services, or if that state is not reasonably determinable to the state of Business Corp's billing address. If Net Corp derives more than 5% of its receipts from database access from Business Corp, Net Corp is required to identify the state in which its contract of sale is principally managed by Business Corp and must assign the receipts to that state. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(ii)(II).
Example 10: Net Corp, a corporation based outside Tennessee, licenses an information database through the means of the Internet to more than 250 individual and business customers in Tennessee and in other states. The license is a license of intangible property that resembles a sale of goods or services and shall be assigned in accordance with Rule 1320-06-01-.42(5)(f). Assume that Net Corp cannot determine or reasonably approximate the location where its information database is accessed. Also assume that Net Corp does not derive more than 5% of its sales of database access from any single customer. Net Corp may apply the safe harbor stated in Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(ii)(II)IV, and may assign its sales to a state or states using each customer's billing address.
Example 11: Web Corp, a corporation based outside of Tennessee, licenses an Internet-based information database to business customers who then sublicense the database to individual end users that are residents of Tennessee and other states. These end users access Web Corp's information database primarily in their states of residence, and sometimes, while traveling, in other states. Web Corp's license of the database to its customers includes the right to sublicense the database to end users, while the sublicenses provide that the rights to access and use the database are limited to the end users' own use and prohibit the individual end users from further sublicensing the database. Web Corp receives a fee from each customer based upon the number of sublicenses issued to end users. The license is a license of intangible property that resembles a sale of goods or services and shall be assigned by applying the rules set forth in Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(iii). See 1320-06-01-.42(5)(f). If Web Corp can determine or reasonably approximate the state or states where its database is accessed by end users, then it must do so. Assuming that Web Corp lacks sufficient information from which it can determine or reasonably approximate the location where its database is accessed by end users, Web Corp must approximate the extent to which its database is accessed in Tennessee using a percentage that represents the ratio of the Tennessee population in the specific geographic area in which Web Corp's customer sublicenses the database access relative to the total population in such area. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(4)(c)2(iii)(II).
Example 1: Airline Corp, a corporation based outside Tennessee, sells its rights to use several gates at an airport located in Tennessee to Buyer Corp, a corporation that is based outside Tennessee. The contract of sale is negotiated and signed outside of Tennessee. The sale is in Tennessee because the intangible property sold is a contract right that authorizes the holder to conduct a business activity solely in Tennessee. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(6)(a)1.
Example 2: Wireless Corp, a corporation based outside Tennessee, sells a license issued by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to operate wireless telecommunications services in a designated area in Tennessee to Buyer Corp, a corporation that is based outside Tennessee. The contract of sale is negotiated and signed outside of Tennessee. The sale is in Tennessee because the intangible property sold is a government license that authorizes the holder to conduct business activity solely in Tennessee. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(6)(a)1.
Example 3: Same facts as in Example 2 except that Wireless Corp sells to Buyer Corp an FCC license to operate wireless telecommunications services in a designated area in Tennessee and an adjacent state. Wireless Corp must attempt to reasonably approximate the extent to which the intangible property is used in or associated with Tennessee. For purposes of making this reasonable approximation, Wireless Corp may rely upon credible data that identifies the percentage of persons that use wireless telecommunications in the two states covered by the license. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(6)(a)1.
Example 4: Sports League Corp, a corporation that is based outside Tennessee, sells the rights to broadcast the sporting events played by the teams in its league in all 50 U.S. states to Network Corp. Although the games played by Sports League Corp will be broadcast in all 50 states, the games are of greater interest in the southeast region of the country, including Tennessee. Because the intangible property sold is a contract right that authorizes the holder to conduct a business activity in a specified geographic area, Sports League Corp must attempt to reasonably approximate the extent to which the intangible property is used in or associated with Tennessee. For purposes of making this reasonable approximation, Sports League Corp may rely upon audience measurement information that identifies the percentage of the audience for its sporting events in Tennessee and the other states. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(6)(a)1.
Example 5: Business Corp, a corporation based outside Tennessee engaged in business activities in Tennessee and other states, enters into a covenant not to compete with Competition Corp, a corporation that is based outside Tennessee, in exchange for a fee. The agreement requires Business Corp to refrain from engaging in certain business activity in Tennessee and other states. The component of the fee that constitutes a Tennessee sale is determined by multiplying the amount of the fee by a fraction represented by the percentage of the Tennessee population over the total population in the specified geographic region. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(6)(a)2.
Example 6: Inventor Corp, a corporation that is based outside Tennessee, sells patented technology that it has developed to Buyer Corp, a business customer that is based in Tennessee. Assume that the sale is not one in which the receipts derive from payments that are contingent on the productivity, use or disposition of the property. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(6)(a)4. Inventor Corp understands that Buyer Corp is likely to use the patented technology in Tennessee, but the patented technology can be used anywhere (i.e., the rights sold are not rights that authorize the holder to conduct a business activity in a specific geographic area). The sale of the patented technology shall be excluded from the numerator and denominator of Inventor Corp's sales factor. See Rule 1320-06-01-.42(6)(a)5.
Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 1320-06-01-.42
Authority: T.C.A. §§ 67-1-102(a) and 67-4-2012.