| Article 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS |
| Article 2. IMPOSITION, RATE, AND COMPUTATION; EXEMPTIONS |
| Article 3. RETURNS AND FURNISHING OF INFORMATION |
| Article 4. PAYMENT: DEFICIENCIES, ASSESSMENT, AND COLLECTION |
| Article 5. CURRENT INCOME TAX PAYMENT |
| Article 6. LOCAL INCOME TAXES |
| Article 7. SETOFF DEBT COLLECTION |
REFS & ANNOS
TITLE 48 Chapter 7 NOTE
CROSS REFERENCES. --Penalty for disclosure of information obtained by person, corporation, or others engaged in business of preparing federal or state income tax returns or assisting in such preparation, § 16-11-81. Opportunity for taxpayers to contribute to Georgia Greenspace Trust Fund, § 36-22-4. Establishment of plans to provide tax deferral benefits for state, county, or other employees, § 45-18-30 et seq.
LAW REVIEWS. --For article, "Federal-Georgia Income Tax Differences: More Than Just a Nuisance," see 20 Ga. St. B.J. 20 (1983).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
EDITOR'S NOTES. --In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, Ch. 92-30 through 92-33, which was subsequently repealed but was succeeded by provisions in this chapter, are included in the annotations for this chapter.
MUCH OF THE STATE INCOME TAX LAW IS PATTERNED UPON THE UNITED STATES INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1954. Carter v. Oxford, 102 Ga. App. 762, 118 S.E.2d 216 (1960), aff'd, 216 Ga. 821, 120 S.E.2d 298 (1961) (decided under former Code 1933, Ch. 92-30 through 92-33).
NO INTENT TO TAX INCOME EARNED OUTSIDE STATE BY DOMESTIC CORPORATION. --It is not the purpose and intent of former Code 1933, Ch. 92-30 through 92-33 to tax the net income of a domestic corporation derived from property owned or business done outside the territorial limits of this state, although this may constitutionally be done, as regards a domestic corporation. Interstate Bond Co. v. State Revenue Comm'n, 50 Ga. App. 744, 179 S.E. 559 (1935) (decided under former Code 1933, Ch. 92-30 through 92-33).
"DOING BUSINESS" CONSTRUED. --"Doing business" in order to incur tax liability under statutes imposing taxes on persons doing business in a state means that a foreign corporation must transact some substantial part of the corporation's ordinary business there, and that it must be continuous in character as distinguished from a mere casual or occasional transaction. A series of transactions is not necessarily conclusive on the question of whether the corporation is doing business. Redwine v. United States Tobacco Co., 209 Ga. 725, 75 S.E.2d 556 (1953) (decided under former Code 1933, Ch. 92-30 through 92-33).
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
EDITOR'S NOTES. --In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, opinions under former Code 1933, Ch. 92-99, which was subsequently repealed but was succeeded by provisions in this chapter, are included in the annotations for this chapter.
ELEMENTS OF PROOF OF CRIMINAL VIOLATION OF INCOME TAX LAWS. --To sustain a criminal prosecution for violation of the state income tax laws, it must be shown that the violator is subject to the requirements of the laws; that after actual notice the violator failed to comply with the request of the commissioner, and that the violator resides in the county where the proceedings are instituted. 1945-47 Op. Att'y Gen. p. 564 (rendered under former Code 1933, Ch. 92-30 through 92-33).
RESEARCH REFERENCES
ALR. --Constitutionality, construction, and application provisions of state tax law for conformity with federal income tax law or administrative and judicial interpretation, 42 ALR2d 797.
Damages for breach of contract as affected by income tax considerations, 50 ALR4th 452.
LAW REVIEWS. --For article, "Federal-Georgia Income Tax Differences: More Than Just a Nuisance," see 20 Ga. St. B.J. 20 (1983).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
EDITOR'S NOTES. --In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former Code 1933, Ch. 92-30 through 92-33, which was subsequently repealed but was succeeded by provisions in this chapter, are included in the annotations for this chapter.
MUCH OF THE STATE INCOME TAX LAW IS PATTERNED UPON THE UNITED STATES INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1954. Carter v. Oxford, 102 Ga. App. 762, 118 S.E.2d 216 (1960), aff'd, 216 Ga. 821, 120 S.E.2d 298 (1961) (decided under former Code 1933, Ch. 92-30 through 92-33).
NO INTENT TO TAX INCOME EARNED OUTSIDE STATE BY DOMESTIC CORPORATION. --It is not the purpose and intent of former Code 1933, Ch. 92-30 through 92-33 to tax the net income of a domestic corporation derived from property owned or business done outside the territorial limits of this state, although this may constitutionally be done, as regards a domestic corporation. Interstate Bond Co. v. State Revenue Comm'n, 50 Ga. App. 744, 179 S.E. 559 (1935) (decided under former Code 1933, Ch. 92-30 through 92-33).
"DOING BUSINESS" CONSTRUED. --"Doing business" in order to incur tax liability under statutes imposing taxes on persons doing business in a state means that a foreign corporation must transact some substantial part of the corporation's ordinary business there, and that it must be continuous in character as distinguished from a mere casual or occasional transaction. A series of transactions is not necessarily conclusive on the question of whether the corporation is doing business. Redwine v. United States Tobacco Co., 209 Ga. 725, 75 S.E.2d 556 (1953) (decided under former Code 1933, Ch. 92-30 through 92-33).
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
EDITOR'S NOTES. --In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, opinions under former Code 1933, Ch. 92-99, which was subsequently repealed but was succeeded by provisions in this chapter, are included in the annotations for this chapter.
ELEMENTS OF PROOF OF CRIMINAL VIOLATION OF INCOME TAX LAWS. --To sustain a criminal prosecution for violation of the state income tax laws, it must be shown that the violator is subject to the requirements of the laws; that after actual notice the violator failed to comply with the request of the commissioner, and that the violator resides in the county where the proceedings are instituted. 1945-47 Op. Att'y Gen. p. 564 (rendered under former Code 1933, Ch. 92-30 through 92-33).
RESEARCH REFERENCES
ALR. --Constitutionality, construction, and application provisions of state tax law for conformity with federal income tax law or administrative and judicial interpretation, 42 ALR2d 797.
Damages for breach of contract as affected by income tax considerations, 50 ALR4th 452.