The following special rules are established in respect to the apportionment of income of long-term construction contractors:
Receipts | Expenditures | |
End of 1st income year | $2,500,000 | $2,400,000 |
End of 2nd income year | 4,500,000 | 4,100,000 |
Totals | $7,000,000 | $6,500,000 |
1st Year | 2nd Year | |||
Beginning | Ending | Beginning | Ending | |
Construction Costs | 0 | $1,000,000 | ||
Progress billings | $ 600,000 | |||
Balance 12/31-(1/1) | $ 400,000 | $400,000 | ||
Construction Costs - | ||||
Total from beg. of project | $5,000,000 | |||
Progress billings-Total from beg. of project | $4,000,000 | |||
Balance 12/31 | $1,000,000 | |||
Balance beg. of year | $ 400,000 | |||
Total | $1,400,000 | |||
Ave (1/2) - Value used | ||||
In property factor | $ 700,000 |
Note: It may be necessary to use monthly averages if yearly averages do not properly reflect the average value of the taxpayer's equity; see Section 40-27-1, Article IV.12, Code of Ala. 1975, and Alabama Rule 810-27-1-.12.
Example: A taxpayer engaged in a long-term contract in Alabama sends several key employees to Alabama to supervise the project. The taxpayer, for unemployment tax purposes, reports these employees to the state where the main office is maintained and where the employees reside. For payroll factor purposes and in accordance with Section 40-27-1, Code of Ala. 1975, and Alabama Rule 810-27-1-.14, the compensation is assigned to the numerator of Alabama.
1st Year | 2nd Year | 3rd Year | |
Gross receipts | $1,000,000 | $4,000,000 | $3,000,000 |
The gross receipts to be reflected in both the numerator and denominator of the sales factor for each of the three years are the amounts shown.
Example: A taxpayer which had elected the percentage of completion method of accounting entered into a long-term construction contract. At the end of its current income year (the second since starting the project), it estimated that the project was 30% completed. The bid price for the project was $9,000,000 and it had received $2,500,000 from progress billings as of the end of its current income year. The amount of gross receipts to be included in the sales factor for the current income year is $2,700,000 (30% of $9,000,000), regardless of whether the taxpayer uses the accrual method or the cash method of accounting for receipts and disbursements.
1970 | 1971 | 1972 | |
Apportionment % % of Construction Costs of Contract | 30% | 20% | 40% |
M each year to total construction costs -(100%) | 20% | 50% | 30% |
The corporation's net income subject to tax in this state for 1972 is computed as follows:
Business Income | $500,000 |
Apportion 40% to this state | $200,000 |
Add: Income from Contract M* | $252,000 |
Total business income derived from sources within this state | 452,000 |
Add: Nonbusiness income allocated to this state | 8,000 |
Net income subject to tax in this state | $460,000 |
*Income from Contract M apportioned to this state:
1970 | 1971 | 1972 | Total | |
Apportionment % | 30% | 20% | 40% | |
% of Construction Costs | 20% | 50% | 30% | 100% |
Product | 6% | 10% | 12% | 28% |
28% of $900,000 = $252,000
The corporation's net income subject to tax in this state for 1972 is computed as follows:
Business Income | $500,000 |
Apportion 40% to this state | $200,000 |
Add: Income from Contract M* | 108,000 |
Total business income derived from sources within this state | $308,000 |
Add: Nonbusiness income allocated to this state | 8,000 |
Net income subject to tax | $316,000 |
*Income from Contract M apportioned to this state:
1970 | 1971 | 1972 | Total | |
Apportionment % | 0 | 0 | 40% | |
% of Construction Costs | 20% | 50% | 30% | 100% |
Product | 0 | 0 | 12% | 12% |
12% of $900,000 = $108,000
Note: Only 12% is used to determine the income derived from sources within this state since the corporation was not subject to tax in this state prior to 1972.
The corporation's net income subject to tax in this state for 1972 is computed as follows:
Business Income | $500,000 |
Apportion 40% to this state | $200,000 |
Add: Income from Contract L* | 738,000 |
Total business income derived from sources within this state | $938,000 |
Add: Nonbusiness income allocated to this state | 8,000 |
Net income subject to tax | $946,000 |
*Income from Contract L apportioned to this state:
1970 | 1971 | 1972 | Total | |
Apportionment % | 100% | 100% | 40% | |
% of Construction Costs | 20% | 50% | 30% | 100% |
Product | 20% | 50% | 12% | 82% |
82% of $900,000 = $738,000
Example: A construction contractor qualified to do business in this state had elected the completed contract method of accounting for long-term contracts. It was engaged in two long-term contracts. Contract L in this state was started in 1971 and completed at a profit of $900,000 on 12/16/73. The taxpayer withdrew on 12/31/73. Contract M in state X was started in 1972 and was incomplete on 12/31/73. The apportionment percentages of the taxpayer, as determined at Paragraph (4) of this rule, and percentages of construction costs, as determined in subparagraph (5)(b) of this rule, for each year during which Contract M in state X was in progress are as follows:
1971 | 1972 | 1973 | Total | |
Apportionment % % of Construction Costs: | 30% | 20% | 40% | |
Contract L, this state | 20% | 50% | 30% | 100% |
Contract M, state X | 0 | 10% | 25% | 35% |
The corporation had other business income (net of expenses) of $500,000 during 1972 and $300,000 during 1973. The gross contract price of Contract M (state X) was $1,000,000, and it was estimated to be 35% completed on 12/31/73. Total expenditures to date for Contract M (state X) were $300,000 for the period ended 12/31/73.
The measure of tax for the taxable year ended 12/31/73 is computed as follows:
Taxable Year 1973 | ||
Income Year 1972 | Income Year 1973 | |
Business Income | $500,000 | $300,000 |
Apportionment % to this state | 20% | 40% |
Amount Apportioned to this state Add: Income from contracts: | $100,000 | $120,000 |
L* (this state) | $252,000 | |
M**(state X) | 6,000 | |
Total business income derived from sources within this state | $100,000 | $378,000 |
*Income from Contract L apportioned to this state:
1971 | 972 | 1973 | Total | |
Apportionment % | 30% | 20% | 40% | |
% of Construction Costs | 20% | 50% | 30% | 100% |
Product | 6% | 10% | 12% | 28% |
28% of $900,000=$252,000
**Income from Contract M apportioned to this state:
1971 | 1972 | 1973 | Total | |
Apportionment % | 0 | 20% | 40% | |
% of Construction Costs | 0 | 10% | 25% | 35% |
Product | 0 | 2% | 10% | 12% |
12% of 50,000***= $6,000
*** Computation of apportionable income from Contract M based on percentage of completion method:
Total Contract Price | $1,000,000 |
Estimated to be 35% completed | $ 350,000 |
Less: total expenditures to date | 300,000 |
Apportionable income | $ 50,000 |
Ala. Admin. Code r. 810-27-1-.18.02
Authors: Kathleen Abrams, Holly H. Coon, Christina Hall, CPA, Jennifer Reynolds
Statutory Authority:Code of Ala. 1975, §§ 40-2A-7(a)(5), 40-18-57; Rules 810-27-1-.09 through 810-27-1-.14.