Search News


Browse Archives

News

Threat to Online Learning -- From New York's Tax Department?

February 23, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

In a move that could prove a harbinger of things to come, a New York agency now contends that a distance education course is subject to state sales tax.

While it does not carry the weight of law, the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance’s January 29 opinion has potentially far-reaching implications, given the state’s role as a trend setter for other states. The department asserts that an e-course offered by SkillSoft Corporation, a New Hampshire-based company, should be subject to sales tax as “software” purchased by the student. In so ruling, the department has justified an unprecedented tax on educational services, according to a tax consultant familiar with the case.

“State governments are strapped for money, and this represents an administrative ruling that appears to me to broaden the tax base,” said Melanie Hill, a tax specialist with Dow Lohnes Price Tax Consulting Group LLC.

“I think it’s a sign of our times that states are looking to pick up revenue they haven’t before,” she added.

SkillSoft provides various online courses to prepare students for certification in information technology fields. Students who take the online courses have limited human interaction with instructors, except for a “mentoring” service that allows students to contact experts in the field. The presence of a mentoring service, however, “does not appear” sufficient to classify the course as a non-taxable educational experience, according to the department.

It’s not uncommon in some states, including New York, for software designed for educational purposes to be subject to sales tax. Students taking classes through SkillSoft, however, are not given a tangible piece of software they can use after the conclusion of the course; they are merely given access to the course online.

Even so, the department maintained that accessing the software online “constitutes a transfer of possession of the software, because the customer gains constructive possession of the software, and gains the ‘right to use, or control or direct the use of’ the software. … This is true even if no ‘copy’ of the software is transferred to the customer.’ ”

Hill called the department’s definition of “software” a “mischaracterization.”

“It’s not software in [the sense] that each person is using this as software over and over,” she said. “It’s more like an educational experience where you do it once and you’re done.”

The lack of human interaction in the online course appears to have been a key piece of the department’s justification for taxation. Indeed, the department held that some of the courses were tax exempt in instances where SkillSoft provided video-based training online. In declaring such an exemption, the state gave a further indication that some form of human interaction -- however remote -- helps push a distance learning course into the realm of a non-taxable educational experience.

While the opinion does not carry the weight of law, an audit could subject SkillSoft to back taxes if the opinion goes unchallenged, Hill said.

SkillSoft officials did not respond to an interview request Friday.

Michael P. Lambert, executive director of the Distance Education and Training Council, said he thought the opinion wouldn’t withstand a legal challenge. On the other hand, Lambert said the opinion represents a potentially troubling evolution of tax law in the burgeoning world of online education.

“There’s no settled law here, as they like to say; it’s developing,” he said. “We would certainly not want to see it developed where an online school would have to pay taxes to 50 different state jurisdictions.”

“I’ve never heard of people trying to tax an intangible like this, especially tuition for education,” Lambert added. “That’s a novel one, and a bad idea. People are trying to get ahead when they get an education; you don’t want to hold them back by taxing them.”

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Threat to Online Learning -- From New York's Tax Department?

  • Misdirected Taxation
  • Posted by Cristy on February 23, 2009 at 4:04pm EST
  • Taxing online education when online purchases are not subject to sales tax is a bizarre and inappropriate development. We tax in person sales, but not in person education. If taxes are to be imposed for online transactions, it would be appropriate to treat the online transactions similarly to the in person transactions.

  • The Pot, Boiling
  • Posted by Senior Professor on February 23, 2009 at 4:04pm EST
  • Here we have a state whose higher education system is provably the least efficient in the nation seeking to destroy one more thin strand of efficiency that might have escaped its control. Bloat, protectionism, self-interest against the larger cause, you raise the terms to new levels of maeaning.

  • Big surprise, states want more money
  • Posted by John from Ace Online Schools , Editor at AceOnlineSchools.com on February 23, 2009 at 4:04pm EST
  • This is not a good sign, but it isn't really surprising. States are desperate for cash and are trying to tax everything they can right now. I remember a while back stories about states like NY wanting to collect sales tax on all online transactions. Let's hope this does not stifled education in the online space.

  • Posted by Rob on February 23, 2009 at 4:04pm EST
  • Troubling on many levels. Shortsighted and clearly made by agency staffers with very little understanding of online delivery of educational materials. To give primacy to static video delivery over interactive online delivery is simply ridiculous. Just because there is a picture of a human, the video course is assumed to be an educational experience, while a (potentially) multi-media rich online presentation is "software"? Luddism in action.

  • Online courses
  • Posted by Bob on February 23, 2009 at 4:04pm EST
  • This raises many interesting issues, rightfully so, concerning the purpose and mode of online courses. It would not be incorrect to state that many universities and colleges now promote online courses and online programs, mostly staffed by adjuncts, motivated by a desire to improve their bottom line. Minimal efforts are required on the part of the instructor who monitors a pre-developed, pre-packaged course, leaving students pretty much to learn on their own. With the availability that now exists of many resources on the Internet, the role of the instructor often amounts to little more than monitoring student activities and assigning them a grade at the end of the course. It seems that very little can be done to assure that the students enrolled in the course are truly the same ones that post comments or submit the required assignmnets, except, perhaps, a proctored final exam. In reality, online college courses imitate, in structure and style, other educational or training software programs available for purchase.

  • The Problem with Taxers
  • Posted by DFS on February 23, 2009 at 5:00pm EST
  • is that they have so much power and effect, but so little actual knowledge of or concern about the impact.

    After all, it's just "show me the money" to the bureaucrat.

  • Taxing online learning?
  • Posted by Lindna , office manager on February 23, 2009 at 5:15pm EST
  • Leave it to New York. Used to live there and would love to return but can't afford the taxes (no pun intended). What about if the class is part of an on-campus tuition-based program? More and more institutions are offering some online classes in conjunction with their on-campus programs. This seems like grasping at straws to me but I am not surprised that NY would be the first!

  • Commodification of Education
  • Posted by dundermifflin on February 24, 2009 at 8:15am EST
  • Not surprising is right. Taxers who do not understand are just following the lead of all the business first types who think that education is a "product or service" and students are "customers". It should not be a surprise that now the government is moving in the direction of taxing education. It is the logical conclusion of adopting the flawed paradigm.

    ...and you would think business people would know that?!

  • Hopefully this doesn't catch on
  • Posted by Tomm y on March 31, 2009 at 5:00pm EDT
  • I'm enrolled in distance learning courses with American Sentinel University (www.americansentinel.edu) and I chose them specifically because their cost per course was low compared to some of the competitors. Certain schools (who shall remain nameless), weren't even in my price range, but if I had to start paying this additional tax on top of what I'm already spending, I'm not even sure I'd be able to continue to afford my graduate classes. Why would you ADD hurdles to earning higher education degrees?!