On March 21, 2019, the Department assessed the Taxpayer for gross receipts tax for periods from 2010 to 2017 as the result of an audit. On February 4, 2019, the Taxpayer filed a formal protest of the assessment. The Taxpayer provides medical professional staffing services to medical facilities. The Taxpayer is located outside the state but placed medical professionals at medical facilities inside New Mexico. The Taxpayer first argued that the it was not subject to gross receipts tax because it performed its ‘recruitment’ services outside the state, but the Hearing Officer determined that this was a far too limited depiction of the services it was selling. In addition to the recruitment of qualified individuals, the medical facilities paid the Taxpayer to have these individuals do work for them in New Mexico, which established that the receipts were from performing services in the state. Secondly, the Taxpayer argued that its receipts were not taxable because they were received in a ‘disclosed agency capacity’ on behalf of a principle, but the Hearing Officer rejected this argument too. In order for there to be a disclosed agency relationship, the Taxpayer would have to have the power to bind a principle in a contract with a third party. In this case, this would mean that the principle, the medical facility, would be contractually obligated to pay the medical professional if the Taxpayer did not pay the medical professional. Further, the medical professional would need to know that if the Taxpayer did not pay them, the medical facility was going to pay them. There was no evidence, however, that this was the case. Since the receipts of the Taxpayer from performing services in New Mexico were not excluded from gross receipts, the Hearing Offer ordered that the Department was correct in issuing the assessment and the protest was denied.