Profile

Ray Stevens advises clients in all phases of state and local tax (SALT) including tax planning, tax controversy, alcohol beverage control and tax incentives for economic development.

Mr. Stevens also has significant experience in tax litigation. He originated and successfully argued the theory of law taxing royalty income from intangibles in Geoffrey v. South Carolina Department of Revenue, a theory of law now simply known in SALT matters as a “Geoffrey issue.” Additionally, Mr. Stevens successfully briefed and argued Spencer v. South Carolina Tax Com’n before the United States Supreme Court.

Mr. Stevens was previously the director of the South Carolina Department of Revenue, a post he held in Governor Mark Sanford’s cabinet for five years. In addition, he served on the South Carolina Tax Realignment Commission (TRAC) in its completion of a study of the state’s taxing system and submission to the General Assembly of a comprehensive tax restructuring plan.

Prior to joining the Department of Revenue, Mr. Stevens served as a judge for ten years on the South Carolina Administrative Law Court. He also served as the Director of the South Carolina Attorney General’s Tax Division litigating tax controversies at both the trial and appellate levels.

Experience Highlights

• Served as a member of the South Carolina Coordinating Council for Economic Development for more than five years
• Served as Chair of the South Carolina Enterprise Zone Subcommittee for more than four years
• Advises corporate clients on tax controversies, mergers and acquisitions, economic development efforts, joint ventures and other matters

Experience

Spencer v. South Carolina Tax Com’n, 281 S.C. 492, 316 S.E.2d 386 (May 15, 1984), Certiorari Granted by 469 U.S. 879, 105 S.Ct. 242, (Oct. 1984), Judgment Affirmed by Spencer v. South Carolina Tax Commission, 471 U.S. 82, 105 S.Ct. 1859 (Mar 27, 1985), Rehearing Denied by 471 U.S. 1112, 105 S.Ct. 2349 (May 13, 1985). The SC Supreme Court established that 42 USC § 1983 could not be used in state court to recover taxes paid and correspondingly established that attorney fees could not be obtained against the State under the companion federal statute of 42 USC § 1988. Briefing and oral argument made to the U.S. Supreme Court resulting in a decision affirming the SC Supreme Court by a 4 to 4 decision with Justice Powell abstaining.

Geoffrey, Inc. v. South Carolina Tax Com’n, 313 S.C. 15, 437 S.E.2d 13 (Jul 06, 1993), Certiorari Denied by 510 U.S. 992, 114 S.Ct. 550, (Nov 29, 1993). The decision established that due process is not violated by taxing an entity that utilizes an intangible (e.g., a trademark) in South Carolina to produce income even when the entity has no employees no office, and no physical presence in the State.

M. Lowenstein Corp. v. South Carolina Tax Com’n, 298 S.C. 93, 378 S.E.2d 272 (Ct. App. Mar 13, 1989). This decision determined that due process is not violated by taxing the interest income of a taxpayer so long as the interest income is part of the taxpayer’s unitary business and so long as a portion of the unitary business is carried on in South Carolina.

South Carolina Tax Com’n v. Gaston Copper Recycling Corp., 316 S.C. 163, 447 S.E.2d 843 (1994). This case decided that the Freedom of Information Act does not prevent an agency from disclosing allegedly confidential contract documents and pollution investigation documents when those documents are voluntarily given to a state agency in an effort to lower a tax assessment.

Westvaco Corporation v. South Carolina Department of Revenue, 321 SC 59, 467 SE2d 739 (1995). Constitutionality of Local Option Sales Tax (LOST) upheld since the statute did not violate the constitutional provision requiring uniformity in levying of taxes, and did not violate constitutional requirement that an act relate to one subject and for that subject to be expressed in the title of the act.

NCR Corporation v. South Carolina Tax Comm’n, 312 SC 52, 439 SE2d 254 (1993). Determined NCR’s taxable income by factoring into the apportionment formula the proportionate contribution made by NCR’s foreign subsidiaries and finding that taxation of such income did not create a disparity to a degree constituting a violation of due process.

News

• Avoiding the Cliff? Highlights of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (H.R. 8)
  Tax Alert
  January 3, 2013
• South Carolina Bill Calls on Congress to Approve Streamlining Legislation
  Tax Analysts
  February 18, 2011
• South Carolina Revenue Director Joins Parker Poe
  Ray Stevens Set to Grow Law Firm’s State and Local Tax Practice
  December 13, 2010

Events & Speaking Engagements

• Federalism in the State Tax System
  Association of Corporate Counsel, Charleston, SC
• Fundamentals of Federal Taxation of Partnerships, Corporations and Estates
  Visiting Professor, Midlands Technical College, Columbia, SC
• Duties and Functions of County Officials in South Carolina Property Taxation and Application of the Revenue Procedures Act Before the South Carolina Department of Revenue
  Guest Lecturer, University of South Carolina School of Law, State and Local Tax
• South Carolina Income Tax and Economic Tax Incentives, Recent Tax Developments in South Carolina
  North Carolina/South Carolina Tax Bar, Kiawah Island, SC
• Developments in South Carolina Sales Tax and State Tax Issues in South Carolina
  Council on State Taxation, Charlotte, NC
• Best Practices in State Tax Litigation
  Council on State Taxation, Phoenix, AZ
• Bridge the Gap on Administrative Law
  South Carolina Bar
• Litigating Before the ALJD
  South Carolina Bar Annual Convention, Governmental Section
• That Was the Year That Was – Review of Changes in Administrative Law
  South Carolina Bar
• Remedies and Procedures for Suits Against State Officials
  Greenville County Tax Bar
• Administrative Procedures Before the South Carolina Department of Revenue
  Greenville County Tax Bar
• Tax Practice Under the Revenue Procedures Act
  Columbia Tax Study Group
• 42 USC § 1983 in State Court Tax Disputes
  Federation of Tax Administrators
• Collecting Taxes Under An Automatic Stay Due To Bankruptcy
  Southeastern Association of Tax Attorneys
• Nexus and Jurisdiction for Taxation Of Delaware Holding Companies
  Southeastern Association of Tax Attorneys
• Moot Court Presentation on Taxation of Intangibles and Geoffrey v. South Carolina: Is the Camel’s Nose Under the Tent?
  Vanderbilt University’s Paul J. Hartman Tax Forum
• Intangibles and the Creation of Nexus for Income Tax Purposes
  Ohio Tax Conference
• Taxes and the Bottom Line: New Tax Appeal Process
  South Carolina Chamber of Commerce
• Anatomy of a State Tax Dispute: Best Practices in Contested Litigation
  Council On State Taxation (COST) 43rd Annual Meeting, Orlando, FL
• Hot Topics in State Taxation
  Tax Executives Institute, Charlotte, NC
• Apportionment: Render to the States Only What is Theirs
  Georgetown Law 35th Annual Advanced State and Local Tax Institute, Washington, D.C.

Publications

“Geoffrey v. South Carolina Tax Commission: Is the Camel’s Nose Under the Tent?” Tax Management, Multistate Tax Report, 1995

“Delaware Subsidiaries Can Still Reduce Tax But More Planning Needed,” The Journal of Multistate Taxation, March/April 1992

“The Use of Title 42 USC §1983 in State Tax Litigation,” Revenue Administration, 1988

Memberships

• Southeastern Association of Tax Administrators
  Industry Council Chairperson; Former Vice President
• Federation of Tax Administrators
  Former Executive Board Member
• Richland-Lexington District 5 Budget Advisory Committee
  Past Co-Chairman