In an unpublished decision, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania has upheld the application of the “Philadelphia Super Credit.” A three judge panel headed by President Judge Pellegrini dismissed the Motion filed by the Petitioners in Berks County Tax Collection Committee, et al. v. The Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development, No. 378 M.D. 2012, which attempted to have the Court reject the Super Credit in favor of the apportionment method. See http://www.pacourts.us/OpPosting/Cwealth/out/378MD12_1-7-13.pdf Cipriani & Werner attorney, Jeffrey McGuire, submitted an amicus brief on behalf of the Pennsylvania Institute of Public Accountants (“PICPA”). The Commonwealth Court adopted much of the reasoning of the PICPA in reaching the holding.
Although not a “win” in the sense that the PICPA was not really asserting a position on how the credit should be calculated, the Court adopted the positions with regard to the current state of the law and, in particular, the viability of the Court’s prior holding in Dunmire v. Applied Business Controls Inc., 440 A.2d 638 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1981) asserted in the PICPA’s amicus brief. As the PICPA stated in its blog on January 14, 2013, “the Commonwealth Court came up big for some Pennsylvania taxpayers this week.” See http://cpanow.picpa.org/
An amicus brief is a brief filed by an interested party who is not one of the named litigants. The amicus brief is filed with the permission of the court. The PICPA files amicus briefs in cases of legal significance which affect CPAs or their clients. The PICPA is also interested in issues affecting the achievement of a business and employment environment in Pennsylvania that affords fairness.
For those who wish to know, the Super Credit applies to individuals who work in Philadelphia but live outside the city and also have additional jobs outside the city. These taxpayers are entitled to a credit for the entire wage tax paid in the city against the amount they owe for wages earned outside the city.