Decisions & Orders
Decision & Orders (D&O) are written statements to implement a decision after an administrative hearing with the Administrative Hearings Office (AHO).
D&O are the result of a timely filed protest (Section 7-1-24 NMSA 1978) that cannot be resolved informally between the taxpayer and the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department (Tax & Rev) that is sent to hearing with the AHO. Within 30 days after the hearing, the AHO hearing officer issues a D&O in writing to Tax & Rev and the taxpayer that includes:
(1) an order granting or denying the relief requested or granting or denying a part of the relief requested, as appropriate.
(2) findings of fact and law and a thorough discussion of the reasoning used to support the order with citations to the record and applicable law.
(3) information on the right to appeal the D&O to the court of appeals within 30 days after the date of the decision and of the consequences of a failure to appeal. Appeals are decided based on the evidence and arguments presented at the administrative hearing (Section 7-1-25 NMSA 1978).
Starting July 1, 2015, the AHO was no longer administratively tied to Tax & Rev (Section 7-1B-1 through 7-1B-10 NMSA 1978).
Disclaimer: A Decision & Order pertains to a specific set of facts and law for a specific taxpayer. A Decision & Order does not establish legal precedent or policy followed or applied by Tax & Rev.
Click on “READ MORE” to show content and download link.
If you are unable to download a file in a hyperlink right click the hyperlink and click “open link in new tab”or open from the files below.
If the folders are not displayed or you are having any issues with file links and/or sharing URLs clear your browser cache or refresh your browser by pressing Ctrl-F5.
Ken Miller Real Estate
07/15/1998 98-37 Taxpayer was audited by the Department and given a 60-day notice pursuant to Section 7-9-43 that all NTTCs and other evidence to support the taxpayers deductions must be provided to the auditor by January 2, 1998. On December 31, 1998 the Department...
Mark Sisson
07/15/1998 98-39 Taxpayer protested the imposition of penalty and interest on the grounds that he is unable to pay. Inability to pay is not a basis for compromising or abating an assessment. Grounds existed for both imposition of penalty and interest. Protest...
Rauscher, Pierce, Refnes, Inc.
07/06/1998 98-36 Taxpayer is a securities broker-dealer. Taxpayer protested assessment of gross receipts tax, claiming its receipts from dealer concessions for its role in handling purchases of mutual fund shares for its customers are exempt as receipts from the sale...
John F. Gilliam Jr. & Martha L. Gilliam
06/18/1998 98-35 The Department had seized the assets of the taxpayer's bank account pursuant to two Warrants of Levy served upon the Taxpayer's bank on the same day. The Department's letter informing the Taxpayer of the Department's action only referred to one of the...
Jim D. Dodson
06/15/1998 98-34 TP, first-year resident incorrectly allocated income on his New Mexico personal income tax return and was assessed for the additional tax, penalty and interest. TP argued that 1) the instructions for completing the return were confusing; 2) a...
Luis Tamayo & Amanda Llerena
06/02/1998 98-33 TP was assessed interest for the failure to pay the gross receipts tax on income earned as independent contractors. TP requested that the interest be abated because his failure to pay the tax was unintentional and it would create a hardship for his...
M. L. Roush Construction
05/27/1998 98-31 TP, a licensed contractor, constructed three homes, lived in them for a short period of time and then sold them. TP protested the assessment of gross receipts tax, arguing 1) the sales were isolated and occasional; 2) because he paid gross receipts...
Charles L. Forkner
05/26/1998 98-32 TP was assessed gross receipts tax upon commissions received as a commodities futures broker. Taxpayer argued that imposition of tax was barred because commodities futures trades were transactions in interstate commerce and because the comprehensive...
Centex Corporation
05/26/1998 98-30 TP claimed a refund for an overpayment of corporate income taxes that were offset against a prior tax liability of penalty & interest for late estimated payments. TP argued that the penalty & interest was not due under the provisions of...
Connie Schaekel
05/18/1998 98-29 TP failed to pay the gross receipts tax on income earned as an independent contractor based on incorrect advice from an accountant. TP claimed that the assessment of interest would create a financial hardship for her. Protest denied. Back to Tax...
Maize Elford-White
05/15/1998 98-28 P had not understood that she was subject to gross receipts tax and did not pay it for that reason. TP requested relief from assessment of gross receipts tax, penalty and interest in return for her agreement to pay future taxes after date of...
Gary & Feliz Tixier
04/29/1998 98-27 TP argued that the gross receipts on his commissions were unfair. TP also claims that he should not be assessed for penalty and interest because the department did not notify him in a timely manner and that paying it would create a hardship. Protest...
Kids Love to Dance
04/27/1998 98-26 TP argued that the assessment of penalty & interest was excessive and that it should only be assessed for criminal activity. TP also argued that the department did not make an effort to provide her with accurate information. Protest denied. Back...
Pete Sisneros as corporate officer of Comfort Air Systems, Inc.
04/24/1998 98-25 TP argued that he was unaware that his withholding taxes were unpaid and that the department’s assessments were based on incorrect information. TP also argued that the department should have notified him in a timely manner. Protest denied. Back to Tax...
Jobe Concrete Products, Inc.
04/23/1998 98-24 TP argued that the NM Legislature intended the 1997 amendment to 7-9-43 to be retroactive. TP also claimed that they were not negligent. Protest denied. Back to Tax Decisions & Orders
Los Alamos Public Schools
04/22/1998 98-23 TP was assessed for penalty for late reporting and payment of taxes using a special payment method required under Section 7-1-13.1. TP argued that they should not be considered negligent because they made a good faith effort to comply with statutory...
James M. and Dona H. Curl
04/21/1998 98-22 TP argued that as a subcontractor they were not responsible for paying the GRT and requiring them to do so would be “double taxation”. TP also argued that they relied on their accountant for tax advice. Protest denied. Back to Tax Decisions &...
Tedken Oil Co.
04/17/1998 98-20 TP was denied a refund because the statute of limitations for claiming the refund had expired. TP argued that the department’s failure to advise taxpayers on how the petroleum products loading fee is applied should stop the department from denying the...
Tedken Oil Co.
04/17/1998 98-20 TP was denied a refund because the statute of limitations for claiming the refund had expired. TP argued that the department’s failure to advise taxpayers on how the petroleum products loading fee is applied should estop the department from denying...
AAA Air and Water Filter Systems
04/17/1998 98-21 TP claimed that she was an employee and that her receipts were wages and exempt under Section 7-9-17. TP argued that there would be a double taxation if she were assessed for the GRT on her receipts. Protest denied. Back to Tax Decisions &...