General Mills, Inc. v. Commissioner of Revenue, A18-1660
b'These cases involve separate appeals of separate decisions by the Minnesota Tax Court. However, both appeals involve similar issues involving the Minnesota Credit for Increasing Research Activities (\\u201cMinnesota R&D Credit\\u201d).\\n\\nThe Minnesota R&D Credit is a formula set forth in Minn. Stat. \\xa7 290.068 (2018). It allows a credit based on the excess of a taxpayer\\u2019s Minnesota \\u201cqualified research expenses\\u201d over a \\u201cbase amount.\\u201d A corresponding federal credit in the Internal Revenue Code, see 26 U.S.C. \\xa7 41(c) (2018), defines \\u201cbase amount\\u201d in part as \\u201cthe fixed-base percentage\\u201d times \\u201cthe average annual gross receipts of the taxpayer for the 4 taxable years preceding\\u201d the credit year. In turn, \\u201cthe fixed-base percentage is the percentage which the aggregate qualified research expenses of the taxpayer for\\u201d the 1984 to 1988 taxable years \\u201cis of the aggregate gross receipts of the taxpayer for such taxable years.\\u201d Id. \\xa7 41(c)(3).\\n\\nIn Case No. A18-1160, General Mills, Inc. filed an amended Minnesota tax return for 2011, which calculated General Mills\\u2019 Minnesota R&D Credit, and sought a refund in the amount of $949,236 plus interest. In Case No. A18-1740, International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) filed an amended Minnesota tax return for 2011, which calculated IBM\\u2019s Minnesota R&D Credit, and sought a refund in the amount of $4,395,399 plus interest. In each case, the taxpayer contended, first, that the Minnesota definition of the base amount did not include a federal provision that sets a minimum for the base amount, see 26 U.S.C. \\xa7 41(c)(2); and, second, that the appropriate divisor for the fixed-base percentage was the aggregate worldwide gross receipts for 1984 through 1988, rather than the aggregate Minnesota gross receipts for those years.\\n\\nThe Commissioner denied both refund claims in their entirety. Both General Mills and IBM appealed. In each case, the taxpayer and Commissioner filed cross-motions for summary judgment. In each case, the Tax Court found in favor of the Commissioner with respect to the minimum base amount issue, but in favor of the taxpayer with respect to the fixed-base-percentage issue.\\n\\nIn both cases, the taxpayer and the Commissioner appealed to the supreme court, where the issues are (1) whether the Minnesota R&D Credit incorporates the federal minimum base amount in its definition of \\u201cbase amount,\\u201d and (2) whether the fixed-base percentage for the Minnesota R&D Credit is calculated based on aggregate worldwide receipts or aggregated Minnesota receipts. (Minnesota Tax Court)'