NOW:53110:USA00949
http://widgets.journalinteractive.com/cache/JIResponseCacher.ashx?duration=5&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdata.wp.myweather.net%2FeWxII%2F%3Fdata%3D*USA00949
38°
H 43° L 38°
Cloudy | 22MPH

The Way I See It!

I am an Ultra-Conservative, Alpha-Male, True Authentic Leader, Type "C" Personality, who is very active in my community; whether it is donating time, clothes or money for Project Concern or going to Common Council meetings and voicing my opinions. As a blogger, I intend to provide a different viewpoint "The way I see it!" on various world, national and local issues with a few helpful tips & tidbits sprinkled in.

Is the City of Cudahy Charging Sales Tax for Nuisance Weed Fees?

Cudahy, Taxes

Will Cudahy get caught out on this one?

 

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

 

State wants sales tax from Milwaukee's nuisance weed fees

 

When city workers cut down overgrown weeds and bill property owners for their work, they're not just controlling nuisance vegetation.

 

They're providing "landscaping service," says the state Department of Revenue.  And they're supposed to be adding sales taxes to their bills, state auditors have told Milwaukee city officials.

 

Now the state has hit the city with a $208,095 bill for four years of back taxes and interest, including about $40,000 for weed removal.  Most of the bill is for services at the Port of Milwaukee, such as docking fees and crane rental charges.

 

That news came Wednesday to the Common Council's Finance & Personnel Committee, stunning aldermen and groups representing Wisconsin cities and villages.  It was not immediately clear how many local governments are in the same situation, but city officials said other municipalities had appealed similar rulings and lost.

 

"How does this happen?”  Ald. Bob Bauman asked.  "How is it that we just forgot to collect the sales tax?"

 

Deputy Comptroller Mike Daun said city officials collected sales tax on other services but thought some services were tax-exempt.  For example, officials in the Department of Public Works believed weed removal was considered nuisance abatement, only to be told by state Revenue Department auditors that it was landscaping, said John Egan, another deputy comptroller.

 

Source and full story: MJS

 

 

This site uses Facebook comments to make it easier for you to contribute. If you see a comment you would like to flag for spam or abuse, click the "x" in the upper right of it. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use.

Page Tools