Skip to Main Content

insightsarticles

New GST/HST rules in Canada: What U.S.
e-commerce
businesses need to know  

06.16.21

Read this if your company does business in Canada. 

Major changes are coming to Canada’s Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Services Tax (GST/HST) on the online supply of goods and services. The rules, which apply as from July 1, 2021, will affect U.S.-based businesses selling or facilitating sales to private individuals in Canada. With just over a month remaining before the rules become effective, such businesses should begin immediately to prepare for their new GST/HST registration and collection responsibilities.

What are the GST/HST changes in Canada?

Currently, only nonresidents that carry on business in Canada are generally required to register for and collect GST/HST (levied at the federal level in Canada) on taxable supplies of goods and services made in Canada. If the nonresident does not conduct business in Canada, it need not register for or collect GST/HST.

The impending rules aim to level the playing field between Canadian businesses (which must charge GST/HST on the supply of goods and services) and foreign suppliers by ensuring that GST/HST applies to all goods and services used in Canada, regardless of how they are supplied or whether the supplier is Canadian or nonresident. The rules will significantly impact nonresident vendors and online platform operators, in that foreign businesses will be required to register for GST/HST, collect GST/HST from customers, and report and remit tax to the Canadian tax authorities. Three types of supplies by foreign businesses will be affected:

  • Supplies of digital services
  • Supplies of accommodation made through an accommodation platform (AP)
  • Online supplies of goods through a fulfilment warehouse

Digital services

Foreign businesses and platforms that do not have a physical place of business in Canada but that supply goods and services online to Canadian consumers and/or non-GST/HST-registered businesses (i.e., B2C transactions) will be required to register for GST/HST, resulting in an obligation to collect, remit and report tax. The tax rate will be the rate applicable in the province where the consumer is resident.

Nonresident businesses will have to register for GST/HST purposes when their sales exceed CAD 30,000 (approximately USD 25,000) over a 12-month period or they may register voluntarily where the threshold is not exceeded. A simplified online registration will be available for these businesses, but it will not be possible for the nonresident business to reclaim GST/HST incurred on its own purchases. If nonresident businesses wish to recover GST/HST paid on business expenses, they may be able to register under the regular GST/HST regime.

Accommodation platforms

An AP is a digital platform that facilitates the supply of short-term rental accommodations (i.e., rentals for less than one month) to private customers for a price of at least of CAD 20 (approximately USD 16) per day (e.g., Airbnb, VRBO, etc.).

Nonresident APs will be required to register for GST/HST, and to collect, remit and report tax on the rental charges in cases where the owner of the property is not GST/HST-registered. Where the property owner is GST/HST registered, the AP will not be responsible for GST/HST; instead, the property owner will be required to collect/remit GST/HST on the rental charges. The GST/HST rate will be the rate applicable in the province where the property is located.

APs subject to these changes should register for GST/HST under the simplified online registration.

Fulfilment warehouses and websites

GST/HST registration will be required for the following types of transactions in cases where the nonresident business’ sales to consumers exceed, or are expected to exceed, CAD 30,000 over a 12-month period:

  • Direct sales of goods by a nonresident business directly (i.e., not via a distribution platform) through its website to Canadian consumers: In this case, the nonresident business will have to register, charge and account for GST/HST. 
  • Sales of goods by a nonresident business through a distribution platform to consumers in Canada: The distribution platform operator will be required to register for GST/HST and account for GST/HST in Canada. It should be noted that no GST/HST will be due on the service fee charged by the distribution platform operator to nonresident businesses.
  • Online sales of goods by a nonresident business (but not through a distribution platform) to customers, where the goods are located in a Canadian fulfilment warehouse: The nonresident business will be required to register for GST/HST and will need to keep records on its foreign vendors and submit these to the Canadian tax authorities. These information returns will give the tax authorities insight into which nonresident businesses need to be GST/HST-registered.

Nonresident businesses that carry out the above transactions will have to register under the standard GST/HST rules rather than under the new simplified regime and will generally be able to reclaim GST/HST incurred on their purchases.

Potential Provincial Sales Tax (PST) implications

In addition to having GST/HST registration and collection obligations, nonresident vendors also may be required to register for PST. Currently, British Columbia, Manitoba, Quebec, and Saskatchewan impose a PST, and three of these provinces (i.e., British Colombia, Quebec, and Saskatchewan) have introduced rules requiring nonresident vendors selling to customers in these provinces to register for PST purposes. The rules vary by province and will need to be considered in addition to the new GST/HST rules.

How will the changes impact nonresident sellers?

As noted above, the Canadian rule changes will significantly affect U.S.-based businesses selling or facilitating the sale of goods and services online to consumers located in Canada. With just over a month left before the rules become effective, any U.S.-based business that may be impacted should take immediate steps to:

  • Understand the Canadian rules and how they will apply;
  • Assess the impact of the rules on supply chains;
  • Consider the impact on pricing due to the GST/HST and the varying PST rates applied in in the aforementioned provinces;
  • Identify any adjustments that can be made (where possible) to mitigate the impact of the rules;
  • Be prepared to comply with new GST/HST obligations, including additional registrations, charging and collecting GST/HST, filing tax and/or information returns, etc.; and
  • Update and adapt accounting and billing systems and master data records to identify when GST/HST should be applied and the appropriate rates in multiple jurisdictions.

Failure to comply with the rules could result in the imposition of interest and penalties on the historic GST/HST liability. In addition to the GST/HST implications in Canada, business selling goods that are imported into these jurisdictions must also take into account any customs implications because any compliance deficiencies could result in imported goods being delayed in customs, causing customers to be frustrated by shipping delays.

For questions about your specific situation, please contact the International Tax team. We’re here to help. 

Related Professionals

Principals

  • Sno Barry
    Principal
    Manufacturing, Real Estate
    T 207.991.5191
  • Michel Caouette
    Principal
    Construction, Family Office, Telecom-munications
    T 207.541.2254
  • David Erb
    Principal
    Manufacturing, Technology
    T 207.541.2255

On November 8, 2022, Massachusetts voters approved a constitutional amendment to alter the state’s flat 5% income tax to add a 4% surtax on annual income exceeding $1 million. The so-called “millionaires tax,” also referred to as the “Fair Share Amendment,” is effective for tax years beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2023. The annual income level subject to the surtax would be adjusted yearly to reflect increases in the cost of living.

This measure is expected to bring in revenue of between $1.2 and $2 billion annually. The proceeds from the increased tax collections will support state budgets in the areas of education, roads, bridges, and public transportation. The measure passed with 52% voter support and is the sixth attempt to change the state’s flat income tax rate since 1962. This amendment is expected to affect about 0.6% of the state’s population, or about 20,000 taxpayers.

If you expect your income to exceed $1 million in 2023 and have questions regarding the recent legislation, please contact a member of our state and local tax team.

Article
Massachusetts voters pass "Millionaires tax"

Thanks to a little-known law, eligible Massachusetts taxpayers will receive a tax credit in the form of a refund this fall—just in time for holiday shopping. Chapter 62F of the Massachusetts General Laws, a voter passed initiative from 1986, states that if state tax revenue collections exceed a cap tied to wage and salary growth, the surplus must be returned to the taxpayers. This tax credit was only triggered once before – 35 years ago.

According to the Mass.gov website, in Fiscal Year 2022, state tax revenues exceeded the cap by $2.941 billion—the sum of which will be returned to taxpayers by check or direct deposit in the coming months.

Governor Baker stated that a preliminary estimate of the refunds will be approximately 13% of the taxpayer’s personal income tax liability in 2021, though they will update that estimate in late October, once all 2021 tax returns have been filed.

More details on the tax refund:

  • Taxpayers, both resident and non-resident, who have filed a 2021 state tax return on or before September 15, 2023, are eligible for the refund.
  • The expected time frame for the issuance of refunds is expected to begin November 2022.
  • Individual refunds may be reduced by refund intercepts, such as unpaid child support or unpaid tax liability.
  • Massachusetts taxpayers can use this online refund estimator to calculate their estimated refund using information from their 2021 tax returns.

If you have questions, please contact a member of our state and local tax team.

Article
Chapter 62F law to give Massachusetts taxpayers a bonus refund

Read this if you are a New Hampshire resident or do business across state lines.

On June 17, 2022, New Hampshire’s Governor, Chris Sununu, signed House Bill 1097 (HB1097) into law. This new legislation asserts that income earned and received by residents of the State of New Hampshire for services entirely performed within the state may not be subject to income taxation in any other state.

The signing of this bill was in response to the US Supreme Court declining to hear a case in which the state of New Hampshire sued the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This case stemmed from the Commonwealth issuing temporary and early guidance as the pandemic forced New Hampshire workers who would normally commute to Massachusetts to work from home. The early guidance directed employers to maintain the status quo: Keep withholding income tax on your employees in the same manner that you were, even if the workers may not be physically coming into the Commonwealth.

Even though the Massachusetts Department of Revenue lifted the emergency telecommuting rules effective September 2021, New Hampshire lawmakers wanted to prevent any future personal income taxation of its residents who work remotely for a company in another state. For more context, read the July 2021 article from our state and local tax team about the dispute between Massachusetts and New Hampshire.

New Hampshire’s recently passed legislation was an example of its desire to protect its favorable business climate, defined in part by its lack of personal income tax, from the perceived overreach of its neighboring states. Although the telecommuting rules imposed by Massachusetts are no longer effective, House Bill 1097 was introduced to discourage any subsequent taxation of New Hampshire residents who are performing work solely in the Granite State.

This issue of interstate taxation is not unique to New Hampshire and Massachusetts, as dozens of other states have issued temporary regulations and requested guidance from the Supreme Court. As these issues rise in prominence, it will be important for both employee and employer taxpayers to review the guidance issued by each state to confirm the applicable tax treatment is proper.

If you have questions about how the tax law changes may affect you, please contact a member of our state and local tax team.

Article
New Hampshire says no to income taxation by neighboring states

Read this if you are a business owner or responsible for your company’s accounts.

US businesses have been hit by the perfect storm. As the pandemic continues to disrupt supply chains and plague much of the global economy, the war in Europe further complicates the landscape, disrupting major supplies of energy and other commodities. In the US, price inflation has accelerated the Federal Reserve’s plans to raise interest rates and commence quantitative tightening, making debt more expensive. The stock market has declined sharply, and the prospect of a recession is on the rise. Further, US consumer demand may be cooling despite a strong labor market and low unemployment.

As a result of these and other pressures, many businesses are rethinking their supply chains and countries of operation as they also search for opportunities to free up or preserve cash in the face of uncertain headwinds.

Income tax accounting methods

Adopting or changing income tax accounting methods can provide taxpayers opportunities for timing the recognition of items of taxable income and expense, which determines when cash is needed to pay tax liabilities.

In general, accounting methods either result in the acceleration or deferral of an item or items of taxable income or deductible expense, but they don’t alter the total amount of income or expense that is recognized during the lifetime of a business. As interest rates rise and debt becomes more expensive, many businesses want to preserve their cash. One way to do this is to defer their tax liabilities through their choice of accounting methods.

Some of the more common accounting methods to consider center around the following:

  • Advance payments. Taxpayers may be able to defer recognizing advance payments as taxable income for one year instead of paying the tax when the payments are received.
  • Prepaid and accrued expenses. Some prepaid expenses can be deducted when paid instead of being capitalized. Some accrued expenses can be deducted in the year of accrual as long as they are paid within a certain period of time after year end.
  • Costs incurred to acquire or build certain tangible property. Qualifying costs may be deducted in full in the current year instead of being capitalized and amortized over an extended period. Absent an extension, under current law, the 100% deduction is scheduled to decrease by 20% per year beginning in 2023.  
  • Inventory capitalization. Taxpayers can optimize uniform capitalization methods for direct and indirect costs of inventory, including using or changing to various simplified and non-simplified methods and making certain elections to reduce administrative burden.
  • Inventory valuation. Taxpayers can optimize inventory valuation methods. For example, adopting to (or making changes within) the last-in, first-out (LIFO) method of valuing inventory generally will result in higher cost of goods sold deductions when costs are increasing.
  • Structured lease arrangements. Options exist to maximize tax cash flow related to certain lease arrangements, for example, for taxpayers evaluating a sale vs. lease transaction or structuring a lease arrangement with deferred or advance rents.

Improving cash flow: Revisiting your tax accounting methods

Optimizing tax accounting methods can be a great option for businesses that need cash to make investments in property, people, and technology as they address supply chain disruptions, tight labor markets, and evolving business and consumer landscapes. Moreover, many of the investments that businesses make are ripe for accounting methods opportunities—such as full expensing of capital expenditures in new plant and property to reposition supply chains closer to operations or determining the treatment of investments in new technology enhancements.

For prepared businesses looking to weather the storm, revisiting their tax accounting methods could free up cash for a period of years, which would be useful in the event of a recession that might diminish sales and squeeze profit margins before businesses are able to right-size costs.

While an individual accounting method may or may not materially impact the cash flow of a company, the impact can be magnified as more favorable accounting methods are adopted. Taxpayers should consider engaging in accounting methods planning as part of any acquisition due diligence as well as part of their regular cash flow planning activities.  

Impact of deploying an accounting method

The estimated impact of an accounting method is typically measured by multiplying the deferred or accelerated amount of income or expense by the marginal tax rate of the business or its investors.
For example, assume a business is subject to a marginal tax rate of 30%, considering all of the jurisdictions in which it operates. If the business qualifies and elects to defer the recognition of $10 million of advance payments, this will result in the deferral of $3 million of tax. Although that $3 million may become payable in the following taxable year, if another $10 million of advance payments are received in the following year the business would again be able to defer $3 million of tax.

Continuing this pattern of deferral from one year to the next would not only preserve cash but, due to the time value of money, potentially generate savings in the form of forgone interest expense on debt that the business either didn’t need to borrow or was able to pay down with the freed-up cash. This opportunity becomes increasingly more valuable with rising interest rates, as the ability to pay significant portions of the eventual liability from the accumulation of forgone interest expense can materialize over a relatively short period of time, i.e. the time value of money increases as interest rates rise.

Accounting method changes

Generally, taxpayers wanting to change a tax accounting method must file a Form 3115 Application for Change in Accounting Method with the IRS under one of two procedures:

  • The “automatic” change procedure, which requires the taxpayer to file the Form 3115 with the IRS as well as attach the form to the federal tax return for the year of change; or
  • The “nonautomatic” change procedure, which requires advance IRS consent. The Form 3115 for nonautomatic changes must be filed during the year of change.

In addition, certain planning opportunities may be implemented without a Form 3115 by analyzing the underlying facts.

Next steps for businesses

Taxpayers should keep in mind that tax accounting method changes falling under the automatic change procedure can still be made for the 2021 tax year with the 2021 federal return and can be filed currently for the 2022 tax year.

Nonautomatic procedure change requests for the 2022 tax year are recommended to be filed with the IRS as early as possible before year end to give the IRS sufficient time to review and approve the request by the time the federal income tax return is to be filed.

Engaging in discussions now is the key to successful planning for the current taxable year and beyond. Whether a Form 3115 application is necessary or whether the underlying facts can be addressed to unlock the accounting methods opportunity, the options are best addressed in advance to ensure that a quality and holistic roadmap is designed. Analyzing the opportunity to deploy accounting methods for cash savings begins with a discussion and review of a business’s existing accounting methods.

Please contact our Tax Consulting and Compliance team if you have questions or concerns about your specific situation. We’re here to help.

Article
When interest rates rise, optimizing tax accounting methods can drive cash savings

Read this if you are a solar energy investor, developer, or installer. 

Solar energy is a popular choice for businesses looking to reduce their carbon footprint through alternative energy sources. In addition to supporting a company’s environmental, social and governance (ESG) strategy, converting to solar energy can potentially lock-in lower energy rates. Further, Section 48 of the Internal Revenue Code provides businesses that invest in solar energy a 26% Investment Tax Credit (ITC) on qualifying solar property placed in service before January 1, 2026—but only if construction begins on the property before January 1, 2023. Otherwise, the credit is phased down to as low as 10%.

The IRS has provided special rules to determine when construction begins on solar energy property for ITC purposes. Businesses seeking to maximize the available tax credits should consider beginning solar projects before the end of 2022 to be able to take advantage of the 26% ITC rate.

Phasedown of ITC for solar energy property

Under current rules, the ITC percentage for qualifying solar energy property is determined based on when construction begins, and the credit is taken in the year the qualifying property is placed in service.

For property placed in service prior to January 1, 2026, the credit is as follows: 

  • 26%, if construction begins after December 31, 2019, and prior to January 1, 2023;
  • 22%, if construction begins after December 31, 2022, and prior to January 1, 2024; or
  • 10%, if construction begins after December 31, 2023.

For property placed in service after December 31, 2025, the credit is 10% regardless of when construction begins. Unused credits may be carried back one year and carried forward 20 years.

Legislative developments

The Biden Administration has indicated its support of clean energy incentives. While the Build Back Better proposals approved by the US House of Representatives in 2021 would have modified the ITC and extended the credit to qualifying solar projects for which construction begins before 2027, the legislation was not passed by the Senate. Therefore, the above phasedown of the credit remains in force. Solar energy developers and businesses planning to invest in solar energy projects should continue to monitor potential legislative developments in this area.

Determining when construction begins

The IRS issued Notice 2018-59 to provide specific guidance on when construction begins for purposes of determining the solar ITC percentage. The notice provides two methods a taxpayer can use to establish when construction begins: (i) the physical work test, or (ii) the five percent safe harbor. Both methods include a continuity requirement.

Physical work test

Construction begins under the physical work test when the taxpayer begins physical work of a significant nature on the project. The analysis is based on the nature of the work performed—not the amount or cost of the work—with no minimum requirements. Physical work can occur on-site or off-site and includes, for example, manufacturing components, inverters, transformers, or other power conditioning equipment. The notice clarifies that physical work does not include preliminary activities (as defined) or work to produce components of energy property that are included in existing inventory or that are typically held in inventory by a vendor.  

Five percent safe harbor 

Under the five percent safe harbor, construction begins when the taxpayer pays or incurs five percent or more of the total cost of the solar energy property. Whether a cost has been incurred for this purpose is based on the taxpayer’s method of accounting. The notice provides special rules for solar energy projects consisting of multiple qualifying properties.

Continuity requirement

Both the physical work test and the five percent safe harbor include a continuity requirement, under which the taxpayer must show continuous progress toward completing the project. This means maintaining a continuous program of construction under the physical work test and satisfying a continuous efforts test under the five percent safe harbor. Whether the continuity requirement is satisfied under either method is determined based on the relevant facts and circumstances.

Notice 2018-59 also provides a continuity safe harbor, which allows solar projects to satisfy the continuity requirement if the project is placed in service by the end of the calendar year that is no more than four calendar years after the year construction began. In response to the pandemic and associated supply chain issues, the IRS issued Notice 2021-14 to extend the continuity safe harbor to six years for projects for which construction began during calendar year 2016, 2017, 2018, or 2019, and to five years for projects where construction began in 2020.

Timeline pressure

Solar energy developers and businesses investing in solar energy projects are on a tight timeline to determine whether they want to begin construction on projects in their pipeline before the end of 2022 to be able to take advantage of the 26% ITC rate.

Given the persistence of supply chain and workforce issues and the potential rush to begin construction prior to the end of the year, taxpayers should keep in mind that contractors and equipment may not be available or could be difficult to secure in time to meet the year-end beginning of construction deadline. In addition, supply chain and inventory issues may drive cost increases and thus cost overruns that must be considered when analyzing when construction begins using the five percent safe harbor.

If you have questions on this or other renewable energy tax topics, please contact our Renewable Energy team. We’re here to help.

Article
Year-end planning for the solar energy investment tax credit

Read this if you are interested in tax policy and infrastructure.

The Biden Administration has made tax policy a legislative priority, and the Treasury Department’s Green Book released in May provides additional details on these tax policy proposals. Congressional Democrats have also indicated their interest in tax legislation. The question is: Will we see federal tax legislation in the near future? To answer this question, we need to look at the Administration’s and Congress’ infrastructure legislative plans.

Infrastructure one

President Biden has been negotiating an infrastructure package with members of both parties. Although a bipartisan agreement fizzled in July, new life seems to have been breathed into a new agreement. During the week of July 26, 2021, the Senate reached bipartisan agreement on a $1 trillion package that includes roads, bridges, rail, airports, electric vehicles, clean water, and broadband internet, with revenue offsets such as new cryptocurrency information reporting requirements and an excise tax on chemicals. On August 10, 2021, the Senate voted 69 to 30 to pass the bill.

House consideration of the package is expected in coming weeks. Some progressive Democratic members of the House, however, have indicated that they may not vote in favor of this package unless a far larger second infrastructure package is ultimately approved.

This first infrastructure package is reportedly “paid for” outside income tax increases, which means that this infrastructure bill generally would not include the Administration’s tax proposals. There would likely be little to no Republican support for the package if the Administration’s tax priorities were included.

There does, however, continue to be strong interest by the Administration in moving forward with its tax policy priorities. That’s where a second infrastructure package comes in.

Infrastructure two

A second infrastructure package, referred to in the press as “human infrastructure,” is intended to address more intangible priorities, such as extension of the child care tax credit, healthcare, immigration and climate change. It is expected that the Administration’s and Congress’ tax policy priorities would be included in this bill. At this time, this estimated $3.5 trillion package does not enjoy bipartisan support. The package would be expected to pass the House, as House rules require only a simple majority for passage. Its path through the Senate, however, remains unclear.

In general, legislation needs only a simple majority to pass the Senate. Under current Senate rules, any senator may filibuster a piece of legislation, which amounts to unlimited speech and debate and, if unstopped, can effectively derail legislation. However, if 60 senators agree, they may vote to invoke “cloture,” which will end the filibuster and move the legislation to a substantive vote. (Cloture was invoked for Infrastructure One by a 67-33 vote.) It is expected that a second infrastructure bill would not pick up any Republican Senate votes, and there likely would be a Republican filibuster. Without any Republican support, cloture would be virtually impossible. 

There is, though, a procedural option available in the Senate to bypass the filibuster/cloture rules. Under the “budget reconciliation” process, legislation can pass the Senate with a simple majority without the threat of filibuster. While the budget reconciliation process also applies in the House, because there is no filibuster threat, the House does not need the procedure to advance legislation to a simple majority vote. 

Reconciliation bills must involve spending, revenue, or debt. There is a limit to the number of bills that may pass the Senate under budget reconciliation each year. The American Rescue Plan enacted in March 2021 utilized the budget reconciliation process to pass the Senate. The Senate parliamentarian has indicated that additional reconciliation bills may pass the Senate this year. Despite further availability of the budget reconciliation process in the Senate this year, passage of Infrastructure two is not a foregone conclusion. 

For a bill to pass the Senate under the budget reconciliation process, it needs only to garner a simple majority of votes, which, with the current Senate makeup, means 50 Democrats voting in favor, plus a 51st vote cast by Vice President Harris. There are, however, moderate Democratic senators who have indicated in recent weeks that they may not be willing to use the budget reconciliation process to advance any further legislation, at least in the short term.  

Nonetheless, on August 11, 2021, the Senate approved a budget resolution on party lines; this budget resolution will serve as the framework with which Infrastructure two will be considered on its merits. House Speaker Pelosi previously indicated that the House will not vote on a first infrastructure bill until the Senate takes procedural steps regarding Infrastructure two, so this crucial step makes the future of both packages brighter in both chambers of Congress.

Likelihood of a 2021 tax bill?

Infrastructure two is expected to be the vehicle in which tax policy priorities are included. With passage of the budget resolution in the Senate, this step certainly makes the prospects of ultimate passage much better. What remains unclear is what the underlying provisions will look like, as there remains some discomfort on the part of some moderate senators with its $3.5 trillion price tag.

All eyes are focused on two moderate Democratic senators: Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia. While Sinema has been instrumental in helping to reach a bipartisan deal on Infrastructure one, she indicated the week of July 26, 2021 that she does not currently support the price tag of the second bill. Manchin has also indicated displeasure with the bill’s cost. Without the support of both senators, a second bill would likely stall.

There is still plenty of time on the legislative calendar for negotiation and minds to change. Some issues members of Congress will consider are the price tag of any second infrastructure bill, whether they want to be the sole detractor within their party and whether there may be opportunity to address the policy issues in future legislation. 

Timing of a possible tax bill?

Although Congress is expected to take up consideration of Infrastructure two in the fall, whether it ultimately passes and what provisions it will contain is unclear. Senators Sinema and Manchin are two to watch over the coming weeks. 

What would be included?

The Green Book is a good starting point to understand the Administration’s tax policy priorities. Congress will have its priorities as well. If we do see tax legislation, some major provisions that can be expected to be included in a bill include increases in the corporate tax rate, individual tax rates, and capital gains rates, as well as estate tax changes and changes to international tax policy.

Article
2021 federal tax legislation? A review of the state of play

Read this if you are a timber harvester, hauler, or timberland owner.

The USDA recently announced its Pandemic Assistance for Timber Harvesters and Haulers (PATHH) initiative to provide financial assistance to timber harvesting and hauling businesses as a result of the pandemic. Businesses may be eligible for up to $125,000 in financial assistance through this initiative. 

Who qualifies for the assistance?

To qualify for assistance under PATHH, the business must have experienced a loss of at least 10% of gross revenue from January, 1, 2020 through December 1, 2020 as compared to the same period in 2019. Also, individuals or legal entities must be a timber harvesting or timber hauling businesses where 50% or more of its revenue is derived from one of the following:

  • Cutting timber
  • Transporting timber
  • Processing wood on-site on the forest land

What is the timeline for applying for the assistance?

Timber harvesting or timber hauling businesses can apply for financial assistance through the USDA from July 22, 2021 through October 15, 2021

Visit the USDA website for more information on the program, requirements, and how to apply.
If you have any questions about your specific situation, please contact our Natural Resources team. We’re here to help. 

Article
Temporary USDA assistance program for timber harvesters and haulers