Were lobbying services performed by an employee for the employee's association employer taxable?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1989. Ezel answers yours, under current Connecticut tax law, with citations.
Note -- obsolete historical guidance. DRS marks this ruling "not current" and states that it was obsoleted by Announcement (AN) 2000(8).
Plain-English summary
The ruling states that lobbyist services became subject to sales and use tax effective July 1, 1989, but the tax did not apply to services an employee performed for the employer.
Because the requester appeared to be an employee of X Association, lobbying performed for the association was not taxable if that employment relationship was correct. DRS invited a refund claim for tax already paid, specifying the amount and period.
What this means for you
The historical exception depended on a true employee-employer relationship. AN 2000(8) later obsoleted the guidance.
Common questions
Were lobbyist services generally taxable under the ruling? Yes, beginning July 1, 1989.
Did the tax apply to an employee lobbying for the employer? No.
Could previously paid tax be recovered? DRS said to file a refund claim stating the amount and period.
Citations and references
- Announcement (AN) 2000(8) -- identified by DRS as obsoleting this ruling.
Source
- Landing page: Connecticut DRS Rulings
- Ruling: Ruling 89-245
Original ruling text
Ruling 89-245, Lobbying
This information is not current and is being provided for reference purposes only
This Ruling has been obsoleted by AN 2000(8)
Effective July 1, 1989, the services of a lobbyist are subject to sales and use taxes. This tax does not apply to services rendered by an employee for his employer.
From your letter, it appears that you are an employee of X Association. If that is the case, any lobbying services provided by you for the Association would not be subject to tax.
To the extent that sales tax has already been paid on this service, please file a claim for refund with this office specifying the amount so paid and the period covered.
TIMOTHY F. BANNON
COMMISSIONER
November 29, 1989
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1989 ruling on this question. Ezel checks current Connecticut tax law and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.