|
 
|
| AHTD | Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department |
| BTR | below the rack |
| CID | Criminal Investigation Division |
| CNG | compressed natural gas |
| DF&A | Department of Finance and Administration |
| DMVS | Department of Motor Vehicle Safety |
| EDI | electronic data interchange |
| EFT | electronic funds transfer |
| EIS | Excise Issue Specialist |
| FEIN | Federal Employee Identification Numbers |
| FHWA | Federal Highway Administration |
| FTA | Federation of Tax Administrators |
| GDOR | Georgia Department of Revenue |
| GDOT | Georgia Department of Transportation |
| IFTA | International Fuel Tax Agreement |
| IRP | International Registration Plan |
| IRC | Internal Revenue Code |
| IRS | Internal Revenue Service |
| MFTS | Motor Fuel Tracking System |
| ODOT | Oregon Department of Transportation |
| PTO | power take-off |
| STP | Surface Transportation Program |
| TSA | Transportation Security Administration |
| USDOT | U.S. Department of Transportation |
| VDOT | Virginia Department of Transportation |
On March 24, 2003, Sherri Alston, Director of the Federal Highway Administration's Office of Transportation Policy Studies, welcomed participants to the 23rd meeting of the Joint Federal/State Motor Fuel Tax Compliance Project steering committee. Attachment 1 provides the meeting agenda and Attachment 2 lists those in attendance.
Ms. Alston described the purpose of the meeting and invited participants to introduce themselves and indicate their affiliation and interest in the project.
Ms. Alston then introduced Chip Nottingham, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Associate Administrator for Policy. Before discussing the status of the current transportation reauthorization bill, Mr. Nottingham described his background at the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), which has the third largest State-maintained system of roadways in the United States. Mr. Nottingham described the changes in fuel tax collection that occurred during his administration and the resulting improved fund revenue.
Mr. Nottingham indicated that the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) is currently synthesizing comments and intends to present its reauthorization proposal to Congress soon. He outlined the reauthorization process for the new six-year bill, which FHWA hopes Congress will accept before the September 30, 2003 deadline. In preparing the document, FHWA had discussions with committees interested in fuel tax and found that the Senate Finance and House Ways and Means Committees were committed to addressing the subject of fuel tax compliance. He also voiced the need for directing funding to strengthen enforcement of existing laws in addition to investigating new programs. Mr. Nottingham ended his remarks and invited questions.
Wayne Rhoads (Mississippi DOT) asked Mr. Nottingham how the administration is referring to the bill. Mr. Nottingham responded that the unofficial name of the bill is SAFTEA. Ray Barnhart (Barnhart & Associates), David Breidenbach (Marathon Ashland Petroleum LLC), and Ted Lackner (New York State Department of Taxation and Finance) commented on general funding issues for State and Federal programs. Mr. Nottingham responded that the fuel tax evasion issue does not have to have a "one-size-fits-all" solution.
Mr. Nottingham returned the floor to Ms. Alston, who provided an update on FHWA activities, which included the following:
Following her summary of FHWA activities, Ms. Alston introduced Mr. Richard Little, a Senior Program Analyst in the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) Motor Fuels Excise Issue area. Mr. Little explained that Roy Lively, Excise Files Information Reporting System (ExFIRS) Manager and Ricky Stiff (Headquarters Program Manager, Excise Tax) were unable to attend the meeting. Mr. Little proceeded with an IRS update through a slide presentation. He began by presenting the organizational structure of the Motor Fuels Excise Issue Specialists (EIS).
He explained the current alternative motor fuel issues addressed during the last year, including biodiesel fuel. The IRS regards biodiesel as a taxable fuel; however, since biodiesel does not contain paraffin, it is considered an "excluded liquid" and is not taxed under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) section 4081(a). Currently, biodiesel is taxed only when blended with another fuel or delivered into the fuel supply tank of a truck or train.
Mr. Little also discussed qualified ethanol fuel (E-85) as another alternative motor fuel. The use of E-85 has become complicated in regard to taxes and tax credits. A tax has been imposed on E-85, which is generally taxed by the retailer. The person who paid the Federal tax receives the gasoline credit. However, certain wholesale distributors who sell gasoline for E-85 production may take the credit.
Mr. Little then discussed the use of compressed natural gas (CNG). The IRC section 4041(a)(3) imposes a tax on CNG that is sold for use or used as a fuel in a motor vehicle or motorboat. Sale of natural gas is not subject to the tax. Thus, a utility company selling natural gas that is converted to CNG by the customer is not subject to tax. Sale of CNG to a State or local government can be exempt from tax, but a sale by them (for non exempt purposes) is not exempt from tax under IRC section 4041(g)(2).
Mr. Little addressed the issue of who is liable for inland waterway tax. The person that actually operates the water vessel is liable for the tax even though that person may not be responsible for control and direction of the vessel.
The aviation fuel issue was addressed in two different ways: examinations of "H" registrants (importer or producer of aviation fuel) and below-the-rack (BTR) compliance initiatives. Anyone who deals with aviation fuel must be registered with the IRS. Compliance initiatives involve sending in fuel compliance officers that perform fuel compliance "sweeps". This can include taking fuel samples and determining if the sample matches the invoice delivery location. In some cases, jet fuel and diesel are found blended together.
Mr. Little then discussed imported taxable fuel, which is fuel that is taxed upon entry into the United States. There is an exemption for bulk transfers to registered entities but tax is imposed on the enterer who is generally the importer of record. A principal concern is import of products from Canada under names other than "diesel" and "gasoline" (i.e., "mineral spirits"). Currently, an auditing technique is being developed to determine if tax is being collected on these alternatively labeled fuels.
The discussion then shifted to the Excise Summary Terminal Activity Reporting System (ExSTARS) data perfection team goals. Mr. Little is the IRS representative on this team whose goal is to ensure that all data being submitted to ExSTARS are accurate. This team works with filers in verifying information and making necessary corrections. The electronic data interchange (EDI) guide is then revised to reflect corrections, additional requirements, and clarifications. Revision of the EDI guide is currently underway.
Mr. Little concluded his presentation and invited questions from the floor.
Joe O'Gorman (New Jersey Division of Taxation) and David Breidenbach (Marathon Ashland Petroleum LLC) asked Mr. Little about electronic reporting and penalties for nonfiling. Al Howard (Al Howard Consultants) commented on background checks for personnel working with data.
Sherry Alston thanked Mr. Little and introduced Roger Bair (Indiana Department of Revenue) who made a special presentation of an ongoing criminal investigation of a current evasion case.
Mr. Bair began the presentation with a discussion of the regulations for dyeing fuel at the terminal. He indicated that this method succeeded for a while, but those who wished to defeat the regulation worked to find a way to "un-dye" the dyed fuel. Having identified dye as the problem and determined that un-dyeing was not an easy option, they figured out a way to get to the dye before it was added to the fuel.
Mr. Bair first showed slides of dye injectors and the anti-tampering methods in place (e.g., seals to prevent access, sealed handles, strong padlocks) and a typical terminal and the injector equipment it houses. Mr. Bair then showed a surveillance film of a driver fueling a truck and tampering with the dye. Mr. Bair hopes to catch this offender with clear fuel and a bill of lading for dyed fuel.
Unfortunately, it is extremely difficult to apprehend those responsible for this tampering. Those responsible for fuel tampering can be charged with tax evasion since undyed fuel is not taxed. This fuel altering can be prevented but the industry must work to make the dye equipment completely tamperproof.
LaVan Griffith (Office of the Inspector General, USDOT) indicated that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) might be able to help in identifying regulations to use in prosecuting the offender. Ted Lackner (NY State Department of Taxation and Finance) asked Mr. Bair about the offender's bills of lading. Rich Little (IRS) and Wayne Rhoads (Mississippi DOT Enforcement) asked about the specific charges against the individual in the surveillance film. David Breidenbach (Marathon Ashland Petroleum LLC) and Al Howard (Al Howard Consultants) raised the issue of tamper-proof equipment. Mr. Breidenbach and Mr. Howard indicated that Treasury's revocation of the law that made it a crime to tamper with the equipment had a significant impact. Mr. Howard indicated that making the injectors tamper proof would have been expensive for the industry. Everyone agreed that making the equipment tamper proof was a key issue.
Linda Morris (FHWA Office of Transportation Policy Studies) served as the substitute presenter for the Florida Task Force. The Florida Task Force met in October 2002 in Atlanta (joint meeting with the North Carolina Task Force), and will meet in April 2003 in New Orleans. The Florida Task Force includes the following States: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, and Mississippi. (Arkansas's comprehensive report is included with the Texas Task Force.)
Alabama – There is a current legislative proposal to eliminate the two-cent inspection fee and add this to the motor fuel tax rate. There were changes also proposed to aviation fuel tax rates to eliminate the minimum and maximum rates and set them at three cents per gallon for av-gas and one cent per gallon for jet fuel. There were no changes to the taxation point, and there are no new programs for electronic filing or automated fuel tracking. There are no major legal cases pending. Travel restrictions will prevent Alabama's attendance at the FTA meetings or FHWA Task Force meetings.
Florida – This year's legislative package includes several fuel tax proposals, including moving part of the local option tax to the rack, requiring licensing and reporting by biodiesel producers, and requiring a new minimum penalty for retailers, carriers, and those who refuse to file electronically. Fuel tax may be next in the integrated system using SAP software. Florida is approaching full compliance by wholesaler licensees with electronic filing requirements, and terminal suppliers are now testing electronic filing. There was one court case involving a fuel license applicant with a felony conviction whose wife and son tried to get a license after he was denied.
Louisiana – There is no new major legislation expected this year but a committee is being formed to develop tax-at-the-rack legislation. They also are reviewing their current law on shipping papers and may be making some changes by rule. There were no new tracking or reporting programs and no major cases to report.
Mississippi – There is no new legislation expected but there was a bill to rescind the farmer's exemption from dyed diesel; however, this died in committee. A bulk plant manager pled guilty to four counts of tax evasion and creating false invoices of exempt sales to the government. This also led to another active case involving farmer exemptions, which totals approximately $65,000 in State tax evasion. They recently have developed a new training program for auditors that includes a complex practice case.
Jimmy Archer, representative of the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, reported that the Texas Task Force met on July 30, 2002 in Albuquerque, New Mexico and on February 27, 2003 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Several members of the California Task Force also met in Albuquerque. The Texas Task Force includes Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. The Texas Task Force meeting also included the Navajo Tax Commission from Arizona.
Arkansas – The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) reported that Arkansas has passed legislation requiring that all motor fuel reports be submitted electronically and that all motor fuel taxes be remitted by electronic funds transfer (EFT). A team of employees from both the AHTD and the Department of Finance and Administration (DF&A) requested proposals for the development of a fuel tracking system that would allow them to monitor more closely the flow of fuel into, through, and out of Arkansas. Both agencies accepted a proposal from Lockheed Martin (submitted May 1998), and Lockheed Martin, AHTD, and DF&A signed a three-party contract, effective June 15, 1998. AHTD pays for the contract and has used a total of approximately $1 million in funds to offset the contract expenditures.
This fuel tracking system is working very well, but they are far behind in reviewing discrepancies. The main issue seems to be the incorrect Federal Employee Identification Numbers (FEIN) that occur because of the frequent mergers of major oil companies.
Arkansas developed an EDI Implementation Guide that was approved by the Federation of Tax Administrators (FTA). The January 2000 tax reports initiated full implementation of all aspects of the Motor Fuel Tracking System (MFTS). They maintained a dual system of EDI and paper returns until June 2001, and in July 2001, all paper returns were eliminated.
The Arkansas DF&A reported that the Arkansas legislature began its session January 13, but there is very little motor fuel tax legislation being proposed. The major items that may be examined include a proposed sales tax to help the State's budget and a reorganization of the number of State departments from 50 to approximately 10.
Navajo Tax Commission (Window Rock, Arizona) – The Fuel Excise Tax went into effect October 1, 1999, and generates approximately $12 million per year in revenue. That revenue had been going into the General Fund, but beginning in October 2002, the net revenue goes into a roads fund for construction and maintenance of roads within the Navajo Nation. The Navajo Tax Commission has been working closely with New Mexico. New Mexico provided information about fuel tax distributors whose State reports showed that they had deducted gallons that they claimed were delivered within the Navajo Nation. The Navajo Tax Commission compared their records with the reports and issued assessments for the difference in the gallons. The Tax Commission hopes to secure intergovernmental agreements with Colorado and the IRS. Allowing such agreements will require legislation.
New Mexico – Leslie Montgomery of the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department reported that Frank Shaffer is the new Bureau Chief for the Fuel Tax and Commercial Vehicle Audit. Linda Palmer is now the Bureau Chief of Corporate Income Tax, Nexus, and Gross Receipts Tax Audits. There were no legislative changes to fuel taxes or petroleum product loading fees programs for this fiscal year. In June, they met with the oil well service industry in Hobbs, New Mexico to discuss special fuel refunds for off-highway and power take-off (PTO) fuel. There will be no refunds to holders of special fuel bulk permits. Carriers must apply for a refund and provide a listing of equipment used off-highway and/or with PTO or non-automotive apparatus. The Department will review and pre-approve carriers to apply for refunds. Approximately 25 companies have applied and have been approved. The law became effective July 1, 2001. Reefer fuel may be a problem, and, if there is no separate supply tank, they may not qualify.
Oklahoma – The Oklahoma Tax Commission reported that they have started using the Federal Highway Administration automated reporting system and have revised reports from January 2002. They are looking into their rules on motor fuel tax refunds, specifically in the area of determining a good method for idle time refunds and concrete pumping trucks. The budget continues to be an issue and has had an impact on the field audit process by severely limiting travel and the audit selection process. Field auditors have assisted in central processing and the mailroom to fill in for temporary workers who were dismissed. Biodiesel has been a topic of discussion at the NETASK (Nebraska Task Force) meetings.
Oklahoma has completed an Access database for all motor fuel reports and payments. They are developing an Oracle-based integrated system to interface with motor fuel. Legislation has been introduced to hold a vote of the people on increasing motor fuel taxes. Gasoline is currently 16 cents per gallon and diesel is 13 cents per gallon. This legislation would raise both tax types to 21 cents per gallon.
Texas – The Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Criminal Investigations Division (CID) reported on the criminal cases, notable cases, dyed diesel fuel violations, and legislation. There were 25 motor fuel tax cases opened in FY2002 and 16 cases closed. The total restitution for FY2002 was $428,313. There are 34 active cases, as of March 2003. Notable cases included that of Brian and Bruce Nicholson who pleaded guilty to mail fraud and wire fraud in May 2002. In August 2002, they were sentenced to Federal prison and ordered to pay $5.5 million in restitution. A second notable case involved Abiodun Durojaiye, who was indicted for felony theft in a case involving Emmanuel Ololade, a State employee, currently serving a 28-year sentence for processing false motor fuel tax refund claims.
Texas has conducted fewer roadblocks and more on-site inspections for dyed diesel fuel. They are concentrating on specific industries such as concrete companies and gravel haulers. They have identified more violations of dyed diesel with fewer inspections (18 violations in 1169 inspections).
The Texas Legislature began their biennial session in January 2003, and there is a proposal for moving the tax to the rack.
The Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Audit Division, reported that, in 2001, they divided the State into four geographic regions for the purpose of managing and assigning motor fuel tax audits. The four regions equally cover taxpayers holding Texas motor fuel tax permits based on population density. Four regional supervisors oversee each of the regions and work on assigning audits, assisting the auditors, reviewing completed audits, and forwarding these audits to the Regional Processing Center.
There are 15 permanently assigned auditors with experience ranging from 20 or more years to auditors having no motor fuel experience. All of the auditors had training in 2001 and follow-up training in February 2002. The training programs and the realignment of the motor fuel audit program are producing good results. For FY2002, Texas performed 323 motor fuel tax audits with a total tax charge of $5.9 million. A total of 11,795 auditor hours were used on these assignments.
Ed King, California State Board of Equalization, reported that the California Task Force had only one meeting since the last report, primarily due to budgetary constraints upon the member States. The Task Force met on April 14, 2002 in Portland, Oregon and will meet on April 13, 2003 in San Antonio, Texas. The California Task Force includes Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico, Oregon, Texas, Nevada, and Utah. The member States remain in contact through conference calls and work on joint investigations and audits.
Arizona – Arizona continues to support and pursue fuel tax evasion in cooperation with other States and Federal agencies. Through Joint Project Task Force committee meetings and exchange of information agreements, they are identifying potential tax-evasion schemes and focusing on particular areas of possible tax evasion during audit procedures. During the past year, Arizona has increased their efforts in verification of import/export data for other States. Arizona meets with and exchanges information with other States and the Navajo Tax Commission in an effort to prevent the movement of non-taxed fuel.
Arizona has accessed two years of STP funding to establish a fuel tax evasion unit. The unit consists of two enforcement officers and a financial investigative officer.
Arizona has steadily worked through the legislative process to move the collection point of fuel taxes to the terminal rack during 1998. A dyed fuel program also was adopted that year. In 2000, criminal penalties for tax evasion and associated issues were enacted. Arizona is currently working on electronic fund transfer for payment of fuel taxes, with a target implementation date during 2003.
With the creation of the Fuel Tax Evasion Unit, a formal dyed fuel testing program has begun. In addition, they are working on establishing an education program, a web page, a telephone hotline, brochures and posters to alert the public to tax evasion and encourage reporting of events. Arizona is working with fuel-related organizations in an effort to collaborate with industry in their outreach efforts.
California – California moved the point of taxation for motor vehicle fuel from first distribution to the terminal rack effective January 1, 2002. This places the State's point of taxation in line with the Federal point of taxation and also with the State's point of taxation for diesel fuel. California has taxed diesel fuel at the rack since July 1, 1995.
Concurrent with the change in motor-fuel taxation, California began using a series of new tax returns for suppliers, terminal operators, and bulk carriers. Terminal and bulk carrier reporting are modeled after the IRS 720 series reports. Supplier tax returns utilize uniform schedules for reporting.
Uniform scheduling is being extended to additional tax forms during the spring of 2003. These include returns filed by exempt bus operators (diesel), and diesel ultimate vendors, exempt sellers, and exempt users claim forms.
California also undertook an electronic filing initiative with the change in the motor vehicle fuel tax. They currently accept supplier, terminal operator, and bulk carrier returns/reports filed using the X12 v.4030 format (FTA standard), as well as terminal and carrier reports filed using X12 v.4010 (ExSTARS standard). They are currently testing a flat file format for smaller taxpayers that cannot participate using the X12 format. This should be available in the spring of 2003. Also, during the spring of 2003, the flat file format will be made available to bus operators and diesel refund claimants. These taxpayers will not be offered the option of filing with the X12 format. The State will offer Excel spreadsheet templates for creating flat files.
They are currently working with all of the major taxpayers to get them on-line. They now have most of the major taxpayers filing electronically or completing the testing process. The software vendor Zytax has developed and is marketing a software package to file California returns/reports in X12. They are expecting additional software vendors who market to the smaller companies, especially ultimate vendors, to develop packages based on the flat-file standards.
They continue to partner with the IRS, California Air Resources Board, and Department of Measurement Standards in conducting a dyed fuel inspection program. During the fiscal year ending June 30, 2002, California conducted 18,487 inspections and identified 68 violations resulting in billings of $87,723.
Nevada – Nevada had nothing to report.
New Mexico – The New Mexico 2003 legislative session ended March 22, 2003 with no new statutes for motor fuels. Many proposals, such as taxing at the rack, were tabled because this session established the Blue Ribbon Tax Reform Commission. This commission is to study New Mexico's tax system and recommend improvements to modernize the system and be conducive to economic growth. The commission is to make its recommendations by September 1, 2003.
New Mexico had no new enforcement action for the year. This year's legislature funded a new Fraud Bureau, which will have 16 auditors and investigators, along with Alvan Romero as the Director of the Bureau.
New contacts for the State of New Mexico include the following:
Utah – The Motor Fuel and International Fuel Tax Agreement (IFTA) audit groups have been combined under the supervision of Andy Coffman, the former IFTA audit group manager. The consolidation became effective on January 1, 2003. Cross-training of auditors began in late 2002.
The STP funds received from the Utah Department of Transportation continue to be used to support one audit position and one Senior Audit Technician position formerly paid for from grant funds.
Staff are manually verifying import reports. Unreported imports are being referred to the audit staff for further investigation, and audit staff continue to participate in joint audits with neighboring States.
Quinton Hess, Oregon DOT, reported that the Northwest Task Force met in Anchorage, Alaska September 22, 2002 and will meet in San Antonio, Texas on April 13, 2003. The Northwest Task Force includes Alaska, California, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming.
Alaska – Alaska had nothing to report.
Idaho – Three Idaho tribes are suing Idaho over Idaho's fuel tax law (Federal court case # CIV 02-185-S-BLW). Idaho law says the incidence of the tax is on the fuel distributor and, therefore, the distributor has to charge the Native American retailer the Idaho fuel tax when fuel is sold to the tribally owned retail outlet. Idaho lost the first round in district court and has appealed the adverse decision to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. It does not appear that the State of Idaho will win this case. There are refund claims from the tribes totaling $11 million plus interest (7 percent per year from 1996). There was no new legislation in 2003, only budget cuts.
There were no new cases of tax evasion, just the same import/export issues. Idaho has been successful in court and has two cases still pending. Idaho expects to recover the largest part of the fuel tax deficiencies, one for $200,000 and one for $50,000.
In the area of dyed diesel, Idaho had one case that was referred to the IRS. The IRS issued large dyed diesel penalty assessments to four individuals (non-Native Americans) who had operated a fuel station on a reservation. The individuals were dumping dyed diesel and contaminated fuel into the "undyed" diesel tank at the retail outlet and charging the street price ($1.48 per gallon) for the inferior/untaxed fuel. Idaho will issue State tax assessments as soon as the IRS assessments are routed through the disclosure office at the IRS.
There were no new developments in the area of electronic commerce. Idaho still offers its in-house developed software free to fuel distributors who will file their fuel tax returns electronically by diskette (Ida-Fuel) or via EDI. Idaho has a one-time $2,500 credit for fuel distributors who file electronically. Idaho has been recognized nationally in government technology magazines for its customer friendly e-filing system.
The States cannot do much about tax evasion and compliance unless more FHWA grant money is available. State budgets are being depleted and Idaho is down to basic services for fuel tax programs. Tax evasion projects and compliance efforts are not considered essential services.
Montana – There are no new developments in the area of Native American issues. Montana uses gas tax revenue-sharing agreements with the Tribes that have worked out well. There are also no new issues regarding tax evasion.
The only bill that has an impact on fuel taxes makes permanent the statute that allows Montana to pull over diesel-powered vehicles weighing less than 26,000 pounds; however, there must be probable cause to do so.
Montana now has access to a Custom's database that provides information about products crossing the border. Not all tariff codes are available but they are working to resolve that issue. If anyone has a listing of tariff codes, Montana would appreciate receiving it.
Montana is presently building a motor-fuel distributor system that will automatically do fuel cross-matching in addition to handling web-based electronic filing and electronic filing using XML and X12 format.
Oregon – In the area of Native American issues, in September 2002, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) entered into a formal motor-fuel tax agreement with the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. The agreement calls for the Tribes to file reports and pay all applicable Oregon motor fuel taxes in exchange for an annual refund based on the per capita fuel usage of all Tribal members. In addition, the Tribes are allowed a refund of taxes on fuel used in Tribal vehicles on the reservation.
Oregon's legislature is currently in session. ODOT introduced fuel-tax-related bills dealing with exports, license suspensions, and bonding. All three are supported by industry and are expected to pass. Other bills related to motor-fuel taxes have an impact on card-lock operations and allow a bad debt deduction.
A limited EFT program is offered. Oregon is exploring the use of e-commerce for tax reporting. Tax evasion primarily centers on the unlicensed use and sale of use fuel. Oregon and Washington have been working together to stop unlawful importing of motor vehicle fuels from Oregon into Washington.
Washington – Native American issues/border issues center on unlawful importing from Oregon and Canada. Several search warrants were issued in November 2002 on businesses that were not on Tribal trust land or reservation properties. Large assessments have been issued and arrest warrants are pending at the County Prosecuting Office. Recently, Washington noticed some fuel being unlawfully imported from Canada to Tribal Reservations. The motor carrier was notified to immediately cease such activities or the operating authorities would be revoked and they would be held liable for the tax. The activity has ceased but Washington will be closely monitoring the ports of entry to see if other carriers are hauling fuel.
Legislation has been introduced, and has passed both the House and Senate, that will allow the Washington State Patrol to seize the fuel, seize the truck, and arrest the driver when the fuel is being unlawfully transported in the State.
In the area of tax evasion, dyed-diesel violations are continuing. Unlawful importation from Oregon and Canada is a continuing issue. Late last summer, the Washington State Patrol and IRS CID served a search warrant on a business located near the Canadian border. Customs documentation reflected 12 loads being unlawfully imported. (IRS has been kept informed when the Federal tax is also being evaded.) The owner of the business pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of tax evasion, with the stipulation that all civil penalties be paid (100 percent of the tax due is the civil penalty).
A contractor is currently studying the feasibility of developing an electronic tax return, including the detail schedules.
NETASK consists of Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Wisconsin and Wyoming. They will meet jointly with PUBLICUS in May 2003 in St. Louis, Missouri.
Iowa – The legislature is in session with many proposals such as, mandating the use of ethanol, or E-85 and biodiesel incentives. This is has not yet been finalized. There is a problem with a Nebraska distributor exporting and importing fuel to Iowa. Tracking the flow of alcohol is a consistent problem. Changing personnel and mergers in the industry causes many incorrect and amended returns. Ongoing issues include tax and tracking of biodiesel, tracking alcohol, car manufacturers paying fuel tax on imports in tanks, and idle time refunds.
Kansas – In April 2002, the Kansas Department of Revenue took joint administrative, enforcement, and criminal action against a Kansas distributor and a Nebraska importer who were making sales of motor vehicle fuel to retail stations located on tribal reservations. Enforcement action consisted of seizure of bank accounts, motor vehicles, transporters, and tank wagons. Both cases were immediately appealed.
The case involving the Kansas distributor resulted in an agreement whereby they ceased further enforcement action and released all seized assets. The distributor agreed to place the outstanding tax, penalty, and interest due in escrow, and to remit taxes on sales to retailers on tribal reservations going forward, pending resolution of the case pending in US District Court.
In the case of the Nebraska importer, a preliminary injunction was issued that stayed the department from taking any additional enforcement action against the Nebraska importer, as a result of the appeal and preliminary hearing. After approximately six months of hearings and deliberations, the Kansas Department of Revenue was ordered to release and return two transporters seized during the enforcement action. The case is currently pending before the 10th Circuit of Appeals.
The 2002 Kansas Legislature passed HB 3011 that will increase the motor-fuel tax rate by $.01 per gallon effective July 1, 2003. Gasoline will be $.24, diesel $.26, and liquid petroleum will be $.23. Kansas HB 2344 has been introduced, which would allow imposition of a local motor fuel tax after election approval, not to exceed $.03 per gallon. The outcome is yet to be determined. Kansas HB 2110 also has been introduced, which would remove the sales tax exemption on motor vehicle fuel. The outcome is yet to be determined.
Minnesota – Minnesota has no legislation proposed and the dyed fuel enforcement activities are greatly reduced during the winter months. Minnesota conducted one two-day saturation with other agencies that resulted in no dyed fuel violations but distribution of brochures explaining the law.
Missouri – There is no new legislation pending in Missouri. Missouri is still working with the weight enforcement and IRS checking on road vehicles for dyed fuel. Revenue, as with other State agencies, is facing financial difficulty. There is now a proposal on the table to cut 50 percent of all highway money.
Nebraska – The legislature is in session until June, and there are several proposals that would have an impact on the highway fund, but it is too soon to predict the outcome. They have been concentrating on cross-matching data, issuing penalties for failure to obtain diversion permits, and doing in-depth desk reviews or audits of refund claims.
North Dakota – The North Dakota legislature is still in session. At this time, the only legislation affecting motor fuels is a possible mandate for the use of biodiesel and possible tax reductions for diesel containing biodiesel as well as production incentives for any new plant. Proposed mandates to require the use of ethanol failed. There are no particular enforcement activities at this time.
Wyoming – Prior to March 1, 2003, anyone not licensed as an "Exporter Only" had to pay the Wyoming tax on fuel pulled for export at a Wyoming terminal and come back for the refund. In other words, import fuel could not be distributed into this State licensed as an "Exporter Only." This meant that suppliers sometimes had to charge both the Wyoming tax and the destination State's tax when the fuel was sold for export to those not licensed to only export fuel. As of March 1, 2003, motor fuel sold at a Wyoming terminal rack and directly exported, other than in the fuel supply tank of a motor vehicle, by a person licensed as an exporter in this State, is exempt from the license tax. Those licensed as distributors/importers/exporters no longer have to come back for the refund of the tax.
Roger Bair reported for the PUBLICUS Task Force, which includes Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.
Illinois – No report was submitted.
Indiana – In 2002, the Indiana Department of Revenue, CID personnel inspected 3,447 trucks for dyed-fuel violations. These inspections resulted in 23 violations. Also, the Indiana State Police Motor Carrier Division inspectors reported an additional 33 violations. During dyed-fuel inspections, the Indiana Department of Revenue discovered several violations of oversize/overweight permit violations. Investigations were initiated after it was discovered that companies were not obtaining permits for every overweight load transported as required by State law. These investigations resulted in civil base-tax assessments in excess of $800,000. In late 2002, the oversize/overweight permit investigations were turned over to the Civil Audit Division because the criminal penalty associated with these violations is inconsequential. In the latter half of 2002, Indiana had a series of investigations in forged International Registration Plan (IRP) sixty-day registration permits and cab cards. One individual has been arrested for forgery.
During 2002, the Indiana Department of Revenue CID managed a project to identify gasoline wholesalers that were purchasing ethanol from an ethanol production plant within the State of Indiana. It was possible that the gasoline wholesalers were blending the ethanol with gasoline without reporting and remitting gasoline tax on the ethanol purchases. This project is still ongoing, but does not appear to have uncovered any ethanol purchases where the tax has not been remitted.
Kentucky – Kentucky's report is provided with the North Carolina task force.
Michigan – Although unable to attend the meeting in May, Michigan reported several items. Effective April 1, 2003, Michigan no longer has a six-cent per gallon diesel fuel discount at the pump for licensed motor carriers. The full tax rate of 15 cents per gallon will be charged at the pump. This also eliminates the surcharge line on the IFTA return. Also effective April 1, 2003, fuel vendors, diesel retail dealers, and industrial process resellers will not be licensed in Michigan. All taxes will be paid at the rack. They are currently working with the ACS, and State and Local Solutions, to develop an automated filing program for the licensed supplier and terminal operators. Electronic filing for suppliers and terminal operators had been mandated for the April 2003 return due on May 20. Most of the licensees will comply by that date and the balance within 60 days. Along with the electronic filing, they will begin a gallons tracking program.
Missouri – Missouri's report is included in the Nebraska Task Force Report.
Ohio – Ohio is dealing with legal issues regarding the dyed fuel enforcement programs. New legislation is expected and enforcement efforts are expected to resume this year.
West Virginia - In 2002, West Virginia took 2,563 samples of fuel resulting in 13 citations. They exceeded the required number of IFTA audits for 2002. Sixty-four audits were required and 70 audits were completed. Tax-at-the-rack legislation is to be introduced to the legislature this year. As of January 2003, the bill had been passed but not signed. West Virginia joined the IFTA Clearinghouse in January 2003. Dyed diesel inspections were put on hold due to inclement weather. IFTA and IRP audit candidates have been selected for 2003. There are several audits in process in the area of excise and consumer sales tax and motor fuels.
Wisconsin – With the use of FHWA STP funds, Wisconsin is continuing the redesign of its motor fuel tax system. Wisconsin Excise Tax Reporting and Auditing System (WiXTRAS) should be running by the end of 2003.
Massachusetts hosted a Task Force meeting in Boxborough on October 25, 2002. All New England States were in attendance along with representatives from the IRS. The New England Task Force consists of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
Connecticut – The Connecticut motor fuel rate of tax on diesel fuel increased from 18 cents per gallon to 26 cents per gallon effective August 1, 2002. The trucking lobby was upset with this rate increase. The current rate of tax on gasoline remains at 25 cents per gallon. They continue to charge a five percent petroleum tax on the first sale of petroleum in Connecticut in addition to the motor fuel tax rate. They completed 155 audits related to motor fuel activities that resulted in assessments totaling approximately $5 million during the period July 2002 through March 2003. Tax Division Chief Rosemary Cleary and Tax Unit Manager William McKeller attended the FTA National Motor Fuel Conference in Anchorage, Alaska in September 2002. They are expecting large budget deficits in Connecticut and have had a reduction in staff levels by layoff and early retirement programs. They have not lost any motor fuel examiners as of this date but may in the future. William McKeller is retiring effective April 1, 2003.
Maine – A fuel tax indexing bill that would increase or decrease the fuel tax based on inflation factors has passed and becomes effective July 1, 2003. The special fuel rate will increase from 0.23 to 0.257 and the gasoline rate will increase from 0.22 to 0.246. Each year thereafter the rate is adjusted effective July 1. Along with the increase, there will be a floor stock tax return due from all distributors, suppliers, and retailers for the tax difference in rates.
There are other bills pending dealing with fuel tax. They include those that would: repeal the indexing of motor fuel taxes; amend the constitution so that fuel taxes can be used for more purposes; rename "gasoline tax" to "road services fee"; exempt biodiesel fuel from the special fuel tax; exempt renewable fuel from the gas tax; and remove the indexing of motor fuels and make both gas and diesel rates equal at 24 cents.
The Special Enforcement Unit performed 514 dyed fuel inspections. Out of these, two samples were sent to the lab for testing and both came back as dyed fuel and summonses and fines were applied. Fifty Special Fuel Supplier audits were completed. These were a mixture of both field and desk audits and also included both in-State and out-of-State accounts. Eleven gasoline distributor audits were completed. These were primarily in-State accounts with a few larger accounts being reviewed via mail. Along with the reviews of monthly returns, "annual shrinkage returns" were reviewed for both special fuel and gasoline. Thirty-six off-highway refund filers were reviewed with substantial assessments. These returns have recently been automated, which should improve the audit program. A total of $130,000 has been assessed on these accounts.
Massachusetts – Massachusetts has completed 68 special fuel and gasoline audits since July 1, 2002 with a total assessment of $3.5 million. They have no pending legislation with respect to fuels. The State will join with the Mid-Atlantic Region to host a joint task force meeting at the FTA Northeast Regional Meeting in Washington D.C. in June.
New Hampshire – There are currently two proposed bills in the legislature that, if passed, will affect the audit bureau. Senate bill 47 reduces the amount of refund (shrinkage) each retail dealer is allowed; the actual loss capped at 0.75%. House bill 697 makes a variety of changes in the laws relating to licensure, penalties, and enforcement. It also establishes notice requirements for dyed special fuel. Continued staff diligence was reflected in more audit assessments this year. A recent assessment was completed on a large corporation yielding approximately $500,000. They will continue to focus on larger corporations later this year. They are participating in the Canadian/USA enforcement efforts.
Rhode Island – There are no new audit issues to report. They continue to audit the local distributors and special distributors. They have assigned two out-of-State audits of large distributors. They continue to find Uniform Oil Response and Prevention Fees due on barge shipments into the State. They are gathering information from terminal and carrier reports and compare returns.
Vermont – Diesel tax revenues have maintained the increase noticed after the law change effective July 1, 2000 when the point of taxation to the distributor level was changed. The State continues to rely on the STIP funds to supplement the FHWA evasion grant to maintain the efforts in audits of motor fuel and diesel distributors. They have focused their audit efforts on diesel distributors as they are collecting the tax and not remitting it correctly, or in some cases, not remitting it at all. They have required bonds of the diesel distributors effective January 1, 2003 to protect the State's revenues. They are hoping that the evasion program will continue to be funded by Congress at an increased level.
Joe O'Gorman from the New Jersey Division of Taxation reported on the New Jersey Task Force. This Task Force includes Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington, DC.
Delaware – Delaware reported that they are conducting several joint investigations.
Maryland – Maryland reported that the General Assembly is in session and considering three relevant topics: updating the dyed-fuel law, increasing gasoline tax, and imposing a sales tax.
New Jersey – New Jersey reported that there is a new licensing period. They also reported that there is pending dyed fuel legislation that, if signed, will be in effect in for September. They have hired auditors, and are conducting several joint cases with IRS and other parties.
New York – New York reported that MTBE will be banned as of 2004.
Pennsylvania – Pennsylvania reported that tax rates dropped.
Washington, D.C. – Washington, DC had nothing to report.
Linda Morris reported for Julian Fitzgerald on the North Carolina Task Force. This task force consists of Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia.
Georgia – State Tax Commissioner Jerry Jackson has submitted his resignation effective late March 2003. The Georgia Department of Revenue (GDOR) and the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) recently signed a Cooperative Agreement for enforcement and compliance of the motor fuel and motor carrier laws, rules, and regulations. The two-year agreement will provide $757,000 for the hiring of contract auditors and field enforcement personnel to follow-up on leads pertaining to the evasion of motor fuel by licensed distributors and motor carrier road use taxes.
The Georgia Motor Fuel Tax Unit has implemented a Statewide toll-free motor fuel tax evasion hotline for those individuals who want to report alleged motor fuel tax evasion to the State of Georgia. Potential informants have the ability to call the hotline number, call the Motor Fuel Tax (MFT) Administrator on his direct line, and report potential tax evasion schemes by completing a motor fuel tax evasion report form on the Internet and electronically scan it to the MFT Administrator. The informant also may download the motor fuel tax evasion reporting form and send it directly to the MFT Administrator.
House bill 504 has been introduced in the Georgia General Assembly that would remove the 3 percent sales tax and 1 percent sales tax from the sales tax return. Licensed distributors would collect the 4 percent pre-paid taxes and report those collections on the monthly distributor tax return. The licensed distributors in Georgia would continue to collect the 7.5 cents per gallon excise tax rate on the distributor tax return. The 4 percent pre-paid tax would be based on a six-month average retail-selling price for each fuel type. It is believed that moving the 4 percent pre-paid tax to the distributor level will significantly reduce the possibility of tax evasion at the retail level. The bill has the support of the Georgia Oilmen's Association and the Retail Dealers Association.
The red dyed diesel fuel inspection program has been out of service for over a year. A new Department of Motor Vehicle Safety (DMVS) has been established to conduct safety inspections, oversize/overweight inspections, IFTA and IRP registration requirements, and dyed diesel fuel inspections at weigh stations. The DMVS is currently ordering supplies and should be conducting red dyed fuel inspections at all weigh stations in Georgia in the near future.
The IRS has been retraining those DMVS law enforcement officers who previously went through IRS Dyed Fuel Inspection Training. Due to retirements and promotions it is expected that additional officers will need to become certified to allow Statewide enforcement to continue. Future IRS training classes are being contemplated sometime this year.
Kentucky – Although Kentucky has been operating under a restricted budget, enforcement efforts have not been hampered. However, non-enforcement activities (travel and conferences) have been curtailed. The Kentucky Revenue Cabinet and the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet entered into a pilot motor-fuels tax-audit program. The pilot project capitalizes on Transportation Cabinet personnel resources and Revenue Cabinet experience. The results have been promising, but certain administrative issues remain.
The auditors continue to find blended kerosene, falsely claimed exemptions, and import/export discrepancies. Recently they have noticed an increase in non-taxed highway school-bus fuel. In Kentucky, school-bus fuel is State taxable even though it is exempt from Federal tax.
The rash of bankrupting motor fuel dealers seems to have slowed. The common cause cited was direct competition with hyper marketers and widely fluctuating fuel prices. To address the bankruptcy issue and to assist fuel dealers in obtaining surety coverage in the wake of 9/11, the legislature expanded the financial instruments allowed and added corporate officer liability. Licensed dealers now may use letters of credit and compensating balances in lieu of surety bonds. Additionally, if they remit payment electronically, they may reduce their required financial instrument coverage from a three-month to a two-month liability and avoid corporate officer liability.
North Carolina – The North Carolina Department of Revenue Motor Fuels Tax Division has focused significant attention on reducing accounts receivable. These accounts exceed $5 million. The Division does not have a separate collection staff and therefore the audit staff is responsible for clearing the assessments. To enhance the collection processes, the Division was offered assistance from the Raleigh Field Collection Unit. A decision will be made to determine if the account is collectable or if it qualifies for a write-off based on the Department's write-off policy.
The Division continues the monthly on-road investigations into the misuse of dyed diesel fuel. North Carolina stopped 4,711 vehicles; of these, 4,676 diesel trucks were sampled for evidence of dyed fuel. North Carolina assessed 90 dyed diesel penalties totaling $90,000. Several large out-of-State IFTA audits were conducted during the year, as well as about 250 in-State IFTA audits. The net assessment for 2002 exceeded the 2001 net assessments by 150 percent. During this year, the examination's team began the process of terminal operator and supplier audits. These examinations will continue through the middle of 2003.
The Division identified various potential evasion areas and has developed a plan to address those areas of concern. Also included in the plan are additional resources needed to accomplish the goals as defined in the plan. At this time, the Division has not received final approval for the resources. They are proceeding with investigations into risk areas while awaiting approval of the plan and resources.
In the area of proposed legislation, North Carolina has reported the following:
In the area of technology, the Division is in the final stages of completing an Internet application, which will allow the taxpayers to file the IFTA returns on-line and pay by credit card on-line. The Division is moving forward with exploring various fuel-tracking systems, which will allow the Division to focus on unreported and under-reported fuel brought into the State. The estimated timeframe for this project to begin is fall 2003. The Division continues to cross-match siting information obtained from the DMV with the information reported on taxpayers' IFTA returns to verify adequate miles are being reported based on the sitings.
South Carolina – Despite significant budget cuts, South Carolina has continued to place emphasis on the motor fuel tax compliance initiatives, including audits of taxpayers, dyed fuel enforcement, retail outlet inspections, and diversion transaction resolution. They have continued to support the FTA motor fuel training efforts by providing assistance in development of training materials and providing classroom instruction. South Carolina has been developing a business case to support the implementation of an electronic filing system for motor fuel tax returns. They believe that having access to return data information in an electronic format will be of great benefit to their efforts to insure compliance in motor fuel tax reporting.
Tennessee – Tennessee recently implemented an EDI program for all motor fuel filers. The three-phase implementation included getting the distributor accounts filed electronically (this phase is 95% complete), getting the remainder of the accounts filed electronically (phase 2, which is expected to be completed later this year) and implementing a tracking program (phase 3, which was to begin this year but is abandoned now because of budget constraints). The EDI program has many query tools that can be used to track the fuel.
In the area of audit activities, Tennessee has nine office-audit employees and six field- audit employees. During 2002, the office staff performed approximately 1,000 in-house audits of various motor fuel tax returns and issued approximately 3,000 refunds. The State of Tennessee currently uses the National Motor Fuel Diversion Registry as the central reporting area for all diversions in or out of the State. They receive approximately 200 each month and periodically check these against the returns to ensure the filers are reporting them correctly.
The field audit staff performed 103 audits during the year. Included in this number are 26 sales/use tax audits performed while doing motor fuel tax audits. Total assessments for the year amounted to approximately $3 million.
In the area of enforcement activities, the Special Investigations Section reported the following:
The Tennessee Department of Revenue replaced Eddie McCormack, who had retired, with Ray Grigsby.
Virginia – The Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles Motor Carrier Enforcement Division reported several investigations in their activity report summary. Ninety-eight percent of the activity is fuel tax related. There are currently a total of 257 investigations that have been assigned case numbers (236 regulatory and 21 criminal). 703 total summonses were issued including 97 total overweight citations. The total assessment was approximately $150,000. There were no rental tax investigations performed and a total of $22,000 was collected from past due liquidated damages and road tax. Non-tax related civil assessments totaled $97,879.
Virginia is mandating electronic filing which will assist many of the State's efforts in cross-matching.
West Virginia – West Virginia's report is included with the PUBLICUS Task Force.
Following the task force reports, Cindy Anders-Robb (Federation of Tax Administrators) reported on current activities. Ms. Anders-Robb identified members of the Uniformity Committee and its subcommittees and the issues they are addressing. The subcommittees include the following:
Ms. Anders-Robb discussed several motor fuel tax conferences, including the FTA Motor Fuels Northeastern Region meeting (June 8-10 in Washington, DC) and the Southern Region meeting (May 18-20 in Biloxi, Mississippi). She discussed FTA/FHWA training for States, which includes Motor Fuel Tax Basic Training (next course is August 3-6), Motor Fuel Tax Advanced Training, and Motor Fuel Tax Investigation Training (next course is August 10-13).
Following Ms. Anders-Robb's presentation, which included photos of the Alaska pipeline and nearby wildlife, Ms. Alston introduced Wayne Rhoads of the Mississippi Department of Transportation, who discussed the formation of the Gulf States Fuel Transportation Enforcement Task Force.
Before beginning his presentation, Mr. Rhoads encouraged everyone to visit Biloxi. He then discussed revenue reporting based on float time and the need for real-time enforcement reporting. He noted the need for uniform electronic bills of lading whenever anything is loaded, and mentioned the need to monitor this in a centralized data processing area.
Mr. Rhoads showed excerpts of a video that included comments from Mark Johnson (Transportation Security Administration), who discussed TSA's interest in tax evasion, which is reaching across all modes of transportation to prevent terrorism. Mr. Johnson proposed the idea that some diverted revenue may be funding terrorist activities.
The video also included comments from Cindy Fontenot (Louisiana), Kevin Kelly (New York), Jennifer McGinnis, John Calabrese (IRS), David Skinner (Florida Department of Revenue), Vic Yarbrough, Pat Thompson, Ray Barnhart (Barnhart and Associates), and Bill Warden.
The video showed clips of tax evasion, including selling bad gasoline. The video also discussed the importance of the steering committee and the people they work with.
Linda Morris returned to discuss the Canadian/US Motor Fuel Tax Compliance Initiative, which is a multi-jurisdictional task force created under the auspices of the Canadian Fuel Tax Project and Joint Federal/State Motor Fuel Tax Compliance Project. This initiative includes the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, IRS, Canada Customs and Revenue, provincial taxing agencies from Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and various U.S. State revenue agencies.
This initiative, which is intended to combat fuel-tax evasion occurring between Canada and the United States, began when Quebec's IFTA audits discovered carriers using dyed fuel in their fuel tanks. The result of this was that Quebec-based carriers were receiving fraudulent credits on their IFTA returns and carriers were not paying appropriate provincial and Federal fuel taxes. The objectives of this effort include:
The initiative's guiding principles include:
They are currently working on establishing lines of communication between provinces and States to discuss use of dyed fuel or purchase by a State/providence registered carrier; the location of a retailer selling dyed fuel; any fraudulent invoices; and carriers with multiple permits. They are initiating a coordinated border blitz that would include State auditors and IRS FCOs working together on inspections. They are also identifying areas that need to be changed and developing an implementation plan. For more information of this initiative, contact Brian Williams (Pennsylvania Department of Revenue) or Andre Brisbois (Revenue Quebec).
Linda Morris facilitated a brief discussion about responsibilities at the border. Anders-Robb, and Wayne Rhoads commented on U.S. Customs requirements and State needs for Federal enforcement. Ted Lackner (NY State Department of Taxation and Finance) and Ms. Anders-Robb commented on export and import reports. Al Howard (Al Howard Consultants) added comments about products that cross borders labeled as petroleum products when they are not. Ms. Morris indicated that this is a significant problem, and Mr. Howard expressed interest in the activities that are happening in border States regarding rail, truck, and maritime entries.
Ms. Morris pointed out Mr. Rhoads' successful river monitoring activities in Mississippi, bringing together TSA, US Coast Guard, IRS, Corp of Engineers, Mississippi Bureau of Narcotics, and the Mississippi Department of Wildlife and Fisheries to address the issue along the Mississippi River and the Tennessee Tombigbee River. Mr. Rhoads, Ms. Anders-Robb, and La Van Griffith commented on the need for a uniform manifest/bill of lading to support on-the-road enforcement.
Sherri Alston concluded the meeting and thanked everyone for attending. She said that she was looking forward to seeing everyone at the regional and annual meetings. The date for the next meeting was not determined.
