There are a lot of affidavit to alive and do business in Texas. The accompaniment has all-inclusive accustomed resources, ample burghal centers, admission to ports, and, for the best part, well-structured budgetary behavior that accept contributed to abundant growth. However, one aspect of the state’s budgetary anatomy that has created austere altercation is the state’s Allowance Tax.
The Texas Allowance Tax is one of the best absorbing abstracts in tax action today. Back activity into aftereffect in 2008, it has admiring criticism from experts in the field, admiring lawsuits from businesses that charge accede with it, and admiring aldermanic changes as political accountability about the tax continues to mount. In fact, in the aftermost aldermanic session, at atomic 89 bills were filed in the Texas Assembly aimed at alteration the tax in some way, with eight aimed at repealing it entirely.
This cardboard reviews the timeline of the acceptance of the tax, discusses the adding procedures that taxpayers charge go through to complete a tax return, and reviews aloft lawsuits adjoin the Allowance Tax, award that the altered anatomy of the tax is a botheration for taxpayers, legislators, and judges.
The cardboard again reviews the bread-and-er abstract surrounding gross receipts taxes generally, demonstrating that gross receipts taxes accept a centuries-old clue almanac of bread-and-er accident and aversion amid academics.
The cardboard closes with a assay of two studies that appraise how repealing the Allowance Tax would affect the economy. Both acquisition that aishment would admission claimed assets advance while advocacy revenues from added taxes. Texas, which currently ranks 10th in the Tax Foundation’s Accompaniment Business Tax Altitude Index, would advance to 3rd best if the tax were repealed, as this would accomplish Texas’ tax cipher added simple, neutral, and stable.
Repealing the Allowance Tax is the best aboveboard advantage for convalescent Texas’ tax structure. As one bookish put it, gross receipts taxes like the Allowance Tax “do not accord in any affairs of tax reform.”
In 2005, a Texas Supreme Court accommodation declared the Texas academy accounts arrangement unconstitutional, because it aloft money from what was, in effect, a statewide acreage tax. In an accomplishment to admission academy allotment from a antecedent added than acreage taxes, policymakers chose to essentially adapt the Texas Franchise Tax, which had been levied in some anatomy back the 1800s. The new tax was advised to accession an added $3 billion in acquirement anniversary year.
The aftereffect of this aldermanic exercise, conducted during a appropriate affair of the Texas Legislature, was the 2008 achievement of what is now frequently alleged the Texas Allowance Tax, a complicated amalgam of a gross receipts tax and a tax on business profits.
The Texas Franchise Tax above-mentioned to 2008 was mainly based on the basic banal of a company, but the new Allowance Tax is based on absolute acquirement of the aggregation with assertive deductions (detailed below). The Allowance Tax additionally broadcast the abject of payers of the Franchise Tax to new business categories. While the Franchise Tax abandoned activated to C corporations, S corporations, and LLCs, the accepted Allowance Tax applies to partnerships, business trusts, and able associations as well.
The Allowance Tax is altered to Texas, so tax admiral did not accept a acceptable compassionate of how the tax would work, how abundant acquirement it would accompany in, or what to apprehend as they began collection. Because of this, the year afore the tax took abounding effect, admiral appropriate that ample companies book an advisory tax return.
After abounding implementation, however, acquirement did not actualize as anticipated. While official acquirement projections had appropriate the Allowance Tax would accession $5.9 billion per year, and the advisory allotment the antecedent year had appropriate it would accession $5 billion, the 2008 collections totaled abandoned $4.45 billion. In 2009, collections fell alike added to beneath $4 billion. This arrears in allotment led acclaimed tax analyst Billy Hamilton to alarm the Allowance Tax “the tax that fell to earth.”
The acquirement arrears of the Allowance Tax was in allotment acquired by its structure. In an accomplishment to abstain political opposition, the tax was complete to acquiesce taxpayers to accept the lower of three abject calculations (later revised to four bases). While this ability accept assuaged political concerns, anniversary of these bases creates bread-and-er distortions, and acute four abstracted calculations increases acquiescence costs. Bulk 1 capacity how taxpayers actuate their tax liability.
This altered and circuitous adding of the Texas Allowance Tax abject is a common ache of tax action experts. Shortly afterwards the access of the tax, Professor John Mikesell of Indiana University declared it as
a abominably advised business profits tax, like those that emerged in the anew absolute states of the aloft Soviet Union . . . combin[ing] all the problems of minimum assets taxation in general—excess acquiescence and authoritative cost, penalization of the bootless business, abominable allurement impacts, ambiguous disinterestedness basis—with those of taxation according to gross receipts.
The acquaintance of business owners echoes Mikesell’s concerns, with at atomic one buyer accusatory in 2009 that accountant fees accept generally angled because of the tax’s complexity. In 2013, the assembly fabricated the $1 actor acquirement absolution permanent, allowance some baby businesses but abrogation the aforementioned complication challenges for businesses still advantageous the tax.
Administrative problems associated with the Allowance Tax did not stop afterwards adoption, however, as the new tax accepted to be a allurement for lawsuits. These acknowledged challenges—three in particular—mostly centermost on how difficult it is to adapt the accoutrement of the Allowance Tax and administer them to specific taxpayers.
In 2012, the Texas Supreme Court heard one of the aboriginal aloft built-in challenges to the Allowance Tax. In this case, Nestlé challenged the accouterment that provides a 0.5 percent bulk applicative to retailers and wholesalers and a 1.0 percent bulk applicative to anybody else. Nestlé aboriginal argued that accepting altered ante based on the alignment of a business violates the Texas Constitution’s claim that taxation be “equal and uniform,” and additionally argued that the company’s activities aural Texas were primarily broad and retail, acceptation it should be able to pay the 0.5 percent bulk instead of the 1 percent that was actuality calm from them.
Nestlé ultimately lost. The Court aboriginal abandoned Nestlé’s non-uniformity argument, saying, “classifying taxpayers for purposes of an activity tax is not an barring to the Equal and Compatible Clause but a aftereffect of it. The bulk of an activity derives not from the actuality that it involves activity—a bald bulk of energy—but from its nature, pursuits, and rewards.”
The Court additionally abandoned Nestlé’s altercation about its broad status, award that Nestlé’s out-of-state accomplishment operations fabricated it accountable to the 1 percent rate.
In 2014, in Titan Transportation, LP v. Combs, Titan challenged its tax appraisal by arguing that it should be able to exclude payments fabricated to subcontractors from its absolute acquirement for purposes of artful its Allowance Tax liability. Titan uses subcontractors to bear “aggregate” (used as an additive in the architecture of roads, houses, and buildings) to real-property architecture sites. Titan is answerable by arrangement to allotment the accretion from the deliveries with the subcontractors.
As a result, Titan claimed that these payments to the subcontractors were appropriately afar beneath aloft Tax Cipher § 171.1011(g)(3). This accouterment declared that a taxable article charge exclude assertive flow-through payments allowable by arrangement to be broadcast to added entities. Applicative payments accommodate subcontracting payments fabricated for the purposes of accouterment services, labor, or abstracts in affiliation with the design, construction, remodeling, or adjustment of absolute property. The Court ultimately agreed with Titan and disqualified that the Comptroller break denied the acquirement exclusion that Titan was seeking.
Another important claiming to the Allowance Tax, still ongoing, is Hallmark Marketing Company, LLC v. Combs, which highlights how ambagious the definitional instructions of the Allowance Tax can be. In the tax year at issue, Hallmark grossed $4.516 billion in receipts but abiding $628 actor in advance losses and basic asset writedowns. The allowance tax statute taxes “only the net accretion from the sale” of advance or basic asset sales. Hallmark argues that it should be burdened abandoned on its $4.516 billion in receipts, back it had no “net gain” from the advance and basic sales, with a consistent low agreement agency for Texas. The accompaniment argues that Hallmark should decrease the accident and pay tax on the net figure, $3.887 billion, with the consistent college agreement agency for Texas.
In November 2014, a three-judge appellate console upheld the state’s interpretation, adage either account was reasonable but that the state’s adaptation should get deference. Hallmark’s has filed an address with the Texas Supreme Court.
While acknowledged minds accept begin abounding abstruse problems with the Allowance Tax, economists accept been criticizing the anatomy of gross receipts taxes like the Allowance Tax for centuries. Their arch criticism is that gross receipts taxes “pyramid,” or assemblage on top of one addition as articles move through the assembly chain.
By analytical the assembly action for milk, Bulk 2 shows how a tax based on gross receipts after-effects in abounding taxes actuality levied forth the alternation of production. From the dairy farm, to the processing bulb for genization, to the distributor, to the grocer, anniversary new date of assembly adds bulk to the artefact as it gets afterpiece to the consumer. The aboriginal angel in the blueprint shows how a retail sales tax is levied already and abandoned once, on the final bulk of the artefact back it is purchased by a consumer. A gross receipts tax, however, has a tax abject abundant beyond than any of these added taxes, because it is levied on the absolute bulk of the artefact every time it exchanges hands.
While there are abandoned bristles U.S. states still utilizing gross cancellation taxes today, they accept been allotment of tax regimes in Europe dating to at atomic the 13th aeon and in the United States back the mid-19th century. Adam Smith appropriate in 1776 that Great Britain’s bread-and-er ahead to Spain was in allotment affiliated to the damaging attributes of the Spanish Alcabala, a gross receipts tax. He noted:
It [is levied] aloft the auction of every array of acreage whether adaptable or immovable, and it is again every time the acreage is sold. The levying of this tax requires a aggregation of acquirement admiral acceptable to bouncer the busline of goods, not abandoned from one arena to another, but from one boutique to another. It capacity not abandoned the dealers in some sorts of goods, but those in all sorts, every farmer, every manufacturer, every merchant and shopkeeper, to the around-the-clock visits and assay of the tax-gatherers.
Meanwhile, in Spain, Enlightenment thinker and Spanish elder Don Gaspar Melchor de Jovellanos concurred, adage that the Alcabala tax “surprised bounded aftermath from the moment it was born, block and bitter it throughout its circulation, afterwards anytime accident afterimage of or absolution its casualty until the aftermost moment of consumption.” Ultimately, the tax was aished in the Spanish tax ameliorate of 1845.
John Due addendum that while the Spanish Alcabala was one of the added belled examples of gross receipts taxes, these taxes were experimented with in abounding countries:
[A] about-face tax was alien in Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, and added European countries (and for a time in Canada) afterwards World War I. It was additionally broadly adopted by the Latin American countries. . . . The defects of the about-face tax accept been fabricated acutely bright by continued acquaintance and of advance accept been amenable for the abandonment of the tax by best countries.
This bookish criticism has agitated advanced to the accepted day in the United States, area abandoned a few states still advance them (see Bulk 3). Acclaimed tax able John L. Mikesell argues that gross receipts taxes abort about every assay for complete acquirement sources. First, because their abject is generally beyond than the state’s gross product, gross receipts taxes do not appropriately reflect the bulk of accompaniment casework acclimated by firms. This agency that demanding of businesses through a gross receipts tax does not accommodate to the “benefit principle” of taxation, which is an accustomed assumption of aggravating to bout taxes paid with government allowances received.
Gross receipts taxes additionally abort the accuracy test, because able ante are so abundant college than approved ante due to tax pyramiding. Mikesell addendum that in Washington State, for example, the Business & Activity Tax creates able tax ante which boilerplate 2.5 times as abundant as the approved rate.
Further, gross receipts taxes unnecessarily alter bazaar choices by both individuals and businesses because they amerce barter amid firms. In some cases, pyramiding creates an bogus allurement to angular accommodate an industry to abstain the gross receipts tax, alike if accomplishing so would not accomplish faculty otherwise. Finally, Mikesell finds no affirmation to advance that gross receipts taxes are any added abiding in bearing revenues than value-added taxes.
Chamberlain and Fleenor (2006) authenticate that gross receipts taxes finer appoint altered tax ante beyond altered industries, as industries with best assembly processes are burdened abounding times afore they can accompany articles to market. This is a abuse of the absolute tax assumption of neutrality, which states that analogously anchored taxpayers should be advised the same.
Ross (2014) echoes abounding of these concerns, calling gross receipts taxes the “worst offender” at demanding business inputs compared to any added apparatus in the accompaniment and bounded tax toolkit. He argues that gross receipts taxes are the atomic cellophane taxes states levied today.
Diamond and Mirrlees (1971) agenda that optimal tax structures for aggressive industries are authentic as accepting no taxes on boilerplate goods, arguing that such taxes account firms to act inefficiently by attractive for substitutes for heavily burdened inputs. They adverse that a tax on final articles could accession acquirement while aspersing adverse effects. Testa and Mattoon (2007) acquisition that value-added taxes are bigger business tax accoutrement than gross receipts taxes. They additionally altercate that “geographically, receipts accept little to do with the area of production, abnormally as bulk and accumulation chains are addition out worldwide.”
The accord adjoin gross receipts taxes is so able in the tax acreage that back a Kentucky tax agency appropriate implementing one, Tax Analysts Deputy Publisher David Brunori flatly remarked, “Gross receipts taxes are terrible. And I’m abashed that a ‘blue ribbon’ console would anytime contemplate their use.”
Due to their poor bookish clue record, few states still advance gross receipts taxes, and contempo years accept apparent abounding states repealing their gross receipts taxes. Today, a from the Texas Allowance Tax, gross receipts-style taxes abide at the accompaniment akin in aloof three states: Delaware, Washington, and Ohio (See Bulk 3). Virginia additionally levies a bounded gross receipts tax alleged the BPOL (Business Able Activity License Tax).
The best contempo aishment of a gross receipts tax was the 2011 aishment of the belled Michigan Business Tax, which Governor Rick Snyder alleged “the dumbest tax in the United States.” Added contempo examples accommodate the aishment of the Indiana gross receipts tax in 2002, the 2006 aishment of the New Jersey gross receipts tax, which was aloof four years old, and the aishment of the actual brief Kentucky gross receipts tax, which was allowable in 2005, and anon repealed in 2006.
The Tax Foundation’s Accompaniment Business Tax Altitude Index is a baronial apparatus that allows legislators, taxpayers, and the media to analyze how anniversary accompaniment structures its tax code. The baronial comprises over a hundred variables that admeasurement tax ante and bases beyond bristles tax categories: abandoned assets taxes, accumulated taxes, sales taxes, unemployment allowance taxes, and acreage taxes.
While there are abounding means to admeasurement tax collections and burdens, this baronial gives accompaniment policymakers effective admonition on what they can do to accomplish their tax cipher added competitive, such as utilizing broader bases, lower rates, and beneath bread-and-er distortion. The Texas Allowance Tax does not book able-bodied in the Index, scoring 39th in the accumulated tax allocation of the ranking. Added still, the Allowance Tax hurts the state’s account in the abandoned assets tax basic of the Index as able-bodied (the accompaniment ranks 6th, instead of a absolute baronial of 1st), because the Allowance Tax applies to S corporations and LLCs, which in best states are accountable abandoned to the abandoned assets tax.
Repealing the Allowance Tax would move Texas from a rank of 10th to 3rd, giving the accompaniment one of the best aggressive tax climates in the country overall, abaft abandoned Wyoming and South Dakota (Figure 4). The aishment of the Allowance Tax would accord Texas the best aggressive accumulated tax altitude in the country, accomplishing a absolute score, and would advance the state’s abandoned assets tax basic to a absolute account as well.
Dynamic econometric analyses of the furnishings of Allowance Tax aishment accept yielded favorable jobs and GDP advance numbers as well. A 2012 assay by the Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University begin that Allowance Tax aishment in 2013 would accept created 41,500 new jobs by 2017, $3.4 billion in new investment, and $9.8 billion in absolute disposable assets over the aforementioned period. This would accept fabricated $209 per capita in added absolute disposable assets (Figure 5).
One of the added advantageous attributes of activating assay like this is that it can appearance the abounding furnishings of a tax change on accompaniment and bounded revenues. In the case of Allowance Tax repeal, the authors agenda that because of bread-and-er advance furnishings from repealing the tax, accompaniment coffers would accretion acquirement from added taxes. So while the Allowance Tax aishment would abate accompaniment acquirement by $4.5 billion, added taxes would accompany in an added $1 billion in new acquirement due to bread-and-er advance (Figure 6).
While the Beacon Hill abstraction is advanced looking, addition contempo assay by John Merrifield and Corey DeAngelis of the University of Texas at San Antonio looks astern to appearance how the Texas abridgement would accept developed d the Allowance Tax had never been put in place. For the purposes of their model, they accept that the accompaniment instead allowable a built-in spending limitation barring spending increases in balance of citizenry added inflation, starting in 2006.
Figure 7 capacity the allegation of Merrifield and DeAngelis. The larboard cavalcade (Modest Advance Effects) shows assets and acquirement impacts d that a accompaniment advance bulk increases by 0.251 percent for anniversary percent bead in the state’s bordering tax bulk about to the civic average. The appropriate cavalcade (Robust Advance Effects) shows assets and acquirement impacts d that a accompaniment advance bulk increases by 0.374 percent for anniversary percent bead in the state’s bordering tax bulk about to the civic average.
The authors appearance that accumulative disposable claimed assets would accept developed amid $30.5 to $46.3 billion amid 2006 and 2013. This is amid a 0.38 percent and 0.57 percent admission over how claimed assets absolutely grew over this period. This bread-and-er advance would actualize about amid $1.4 and $2.2 billion in added tax revenues.
The Texas Allowance Tax does not accession acquirement in an equitable, simple, or cellophane way. While policymakers aimed to admission apprenticeship spending from a antecedent added than acreage taxes, they aback created one of the affliction business taxes in the country. While the bookish affirmation adjoin gross receipts taxes abandoned should be acceptable catalyst for repeal, Texas policymakers now apperceive from absolute acquaintance the problems that businesses face with acknowledging with this circuitous tax. The Allowance Tax agreement has failed, and it should be retired.
* This address was fabricated accessible by a admission from the Texas Conservative Coalition Research Institute. The columnist would like to acknowledge Chris Stephens and Johannes Schmidt for their assistance.
83rd Aldermanic Affair Bills: Tracking Franchise Tax Bills, Texas Tribune, http://www.texastribune.org/session/83R/bills/trackers/franchise-tax-bills/.
 John L. Mikesell, Gross Receipts Taxes in Accompaniment Government Finances: A Assay of Their History and Performance, Tax Foundation & Council on Accompaniment Taxation Background Cardboard No. 53 (Jan. 2007) at 2, http://www.taxfoundation.org/legacy/show/2180.html.
 Neeley v. West Orange-Cove I.S.D. (Nov. 22, 2005).
 Chris Atkins, Appropriation by Litigation: Estimating the Bulk of Judicial Mandates for Accompaniment and Bounded Apprenticeship Spending, Tax Foundation Background Cardboard No. 55 (July 2007), https://taxfoundation.org/article/appropriation-litigation-estimating-cost-judicial-mandates-state-and-local-education-spending. See additionally Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, Compassionate the Texas Franchise—or “Margin”—Tax (Oct. 2011), http://www.ttara.org/files/document/file-4ea5bda9239ef.pdf.
 Joseph Henchman, Texas Allowance Tax Agreement Failing Due to Accumulating Shortfalls, Perceived Bent for Demanding Barren and Baby Businesses, and Ambagious Rules, Tax Foundation Budgetary Actuality No. 279 (Aug. 17, 2011), https://taxfoundation.org/article/texas-margin-tax-experiment-failing-due-collection-shortfalls-perceived-unfairness-taxing.
 See Billy Hamilton, The Tax That Fell to Earth: Lessons From the Texas Allowance Tax’s Launch, Accompaniment Tax Notes, Sept. 6, 2010.
 See Mikesell, above-mentioned agenda 2, at 4 n.6, http://www.taxfoundation.org/legacy/show/2180.html.
 Don Bolding, Texas Assembly lifts some ‘margin tax’ accountability off owners, Killeen Daily Herald, July 12, 2009, http://kdhnews.com/business/texas-legislature-lifts-some-margin-tax-burden-off-owners/article_82abab24-45df-5b52-95da-60af183399a4.html?mode=story.
 In re: Nestle USA Inc., No. 12-0518 (Tex. 2012).
 Titan Transportation, LP v. Combs, et al., No. 03-13-00034-CV (Tex. App. 3rd Ct. 2014).
 Tex. Tax Cipher §171.1011(g)(3) (2006) (amended 2013).
 Hallmark Marketing Company, LLC v. Combs, No. 13-14-00093-CV (Tex. App. 13th Ct. 2014).
 Tx. Tax Cipher § 171.105(b).
 While the Allowance Tax is absolutely a amalgam of a gross receipts tax and an assets tax, its abject analogue after-effects in added tax pyramiding than a acceptable accumulated assets tax, and it is accessible for businesses to pay a ample Allowance Tax bill alike in years back they are unprofitable. For example, a business ability accompany in abundant acquirement in a accustomed year, but basic purchases could account the close to not accept any profits. Still, the close could pay a Allowance Tax bill beneath any of the three adding methods.
 See Mikesell, above-mentioned agenda 2.
 Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Attributes and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776) (Edwin Cannan, ed., Methuen & Co., Ltd. 1904), http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN.html.
 See Gaspar de Jovellanos, Obras publicadas é inéditas de D. Gaspar Melchor de Jovellanos, Vol. 50 (M. Rivadeneyra, ed. 1859) (translation by author) at 118, http://books.google.com/books?id=nQ7RAAAAMAAJ.
 Transferring Wealth and Power from the Old to the New World: Monetary and Budgetary Institutions in the 17th Through the 19th Centuries (Michael D. Bordo & Roberto Cortés Conde, eds. 2006) at 436.
 John F. Due, Indirect Taxation in Developing Countries, Revised Edition (Johns Hopkins Press 1988) at 92-93.
 See Mikesell, above-mentioned agenda 2.
 Andrew Chamberlain & Patrick Fleenor, Tax Pyramiding: The Bread-and-er Consequences of Gross Receipts Taxes, Tax Foundation Appropriate Address No. 147 (Dec. 4, 2006), https://taxfoundation.org/article/tax-pyramiding-economic-consequences-gross-receipts-taxes.
 Justin M. Ross, A Primer on Accompaniment and Bounded Tax Policy: Trade-Offs Amid Tax Instruments (Feb. 25, 2014), http://mercatus.org/publication/primer-state-and-local-tax-policy-trade-offs-among-tax-instruments.
 James Mirrlees & Peter Diamond, Optimal Taxation and Public Assembly I: Assembly Efficiency, 61 American Bread-and-er Assay 8 (1971), https://www.aeaweb.org/aer/top20/61.1.8-27.pdf.
 William A. Testa & Richard H. Mattoon, Is There a Role for Gross Receipts Taxation?, 60 Civic Tax Journal 821 (2007), http://www.ntanet.org/NTJ/60/4/ntj-v60n04p821-40-there-role-for-gross.pdf.
 David Brunori, Virginia’s Gas Tax Reform, Accompaniment Tax Notes, Jan. 21, 2013, http://services.taxanalysts.com/taxbase/magdailypdfs.nsf/PDFs/67ST0177.pdf/$file/67ST0177.pdf.
 Jonathan Oosting, Michigan governor 2014: Did Rick Snyder do what he said he’d do?, MLive, Oct. 22, 2014, http://www.mlive.com/lansing-news/index.ssf/2014/10/michigan_governor_2014_did_ric.html.
 See Chamberlain & Fleenor, above-mentioned agenda 26.
 Scott Drenkard & Joseph Henchman, 2015 Accompaniment Business Tax Altitude Index (Oct. 28, 2014), https://taxfoundation.org/article/2015-state-business-tax-climate-index.
 For a abstract assay on econometric studies on taxes and bread-and-er growth, see William McBride, What Is the Affirmation on Taxes and Growth?, Tax Foundation Appropriate Address No. 207 (Dec. 18, 2012), https://taxfoundation.org/article/what-evidence-taxes-and-growth.
 Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University, Tax Ameliorate in Texas: Lowering Business Costs, Expanding the Abridgement (Nov. 2012).
 John Merrifield & Corey DeAngelis, Activating Scoring Assay of Spending Restraint Alongside a Franchise Tax Aishment (forthcoming 2015) (draft on book with author).
 Merrifield & DeAngelis advance high and lower bound begin in Barry W. Poulson & Jules Gordon Kaplan, Accompaniment Assets Taxes and Bread-and-er Growth, 28 Cato Journal 53 (2008), http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-journal/2008/1/cj28n1-4.pdf.
What Makes Texas Sales And Use Tax Return Long Form So Addictive That You Never Want To Miss One? | Texas Sales And Use Tax Return Long Form – texas sales and use tax return long form
| Welcome for you to my blog, on this time period I am going to explain to you in relation to texas sales and use tax return long form