Massachusetts Eases Up on its Advance Payment Requirement

Charles Maniace
December 20, 2021

In a surprise move, the Massachusetts legislature swiftly adopted a new law easing the sales and use tax compliance burden of their new “Advance Payment” requirement that was imposed on certain large taxpayers beginning last April.

As initially reported in December 2020 and then again in March 2021, Massachusetts created a set of unique filing requirements, which it refers to as “Advance Payment.” Under these new rules, any taxpayer whose cumulative Massachusetts sales and use tax liability exceeded $150,000 in the immediately preceding year is now required to make a sales tax payment on the 25th of the month equal to actual tax collected between the 1st and 21st of that same month. The Advance Payment need not be accompanied by a tax return. While there are no shortage of states requiring sales tax “prepayments” from certain taxpayers, the Massachusetts requirement to compute and remit actual tax collected is far more challenging and disruptive to existing compliance processes. 

However, just before the new requirement was slated to take effect, the Massachusetts Department of Revenue (DOR) granted taxpayers a short partial reprieve. When the DOR published the final version of Technical Information Release (TIR) 21-4 detailing the mechanics of the new rule, it added what could best be characterized as a temporary “safe harbor.” Specifically, so long as an obligated taxpayer remitted a payment on the 25th of the month equal to 80% of the tax collected in the prior month, the state would automatically waive the 5% penalty for underpayment of taxes. But the TIR was clear that safe harbor would only extend for the remainder of calendar year 2021. Starting in 2022, taxpayers would be responsible for knowing exactly how much tax they collected between the 1st and the 21st and remitting precisely that amount to the DOR.

As the calendar turned to December and the safe harbor was set to expire, the Massachusetts legislature introduced a wide-ranging COVID recovery bill (HB 4269), which was passed and signed by both chambers in 11 short days. Contained therein was provision that materially altered the new Advance Payment requirement in a way that provides taxpayers considerable relief. Rather than simply extending the Safe Harbor, the legislature decided that large taxpayers who met the threshold requirement had two choices when complying with the Advance Payment. They could either:

  1. Remit the actual tax collected between the 1st and the 21st of the month on the 25th, OR
  2. Remit not less than 80% of the tax collected during the immediately preceding filing period.

Essentially, Massachusetts made it an entirely legitimate option to base the Advance Payment on 80% of the remittance in the previous month. While somewhat different from extending the safe harbor, the practical effect of this new provision is substantially the same – taxpayers will not be penalized for underpayment so long as their Advance Payment meets the 80% threshold.

This change is undoubtedly welcome by many of the organizations required to make Advance Payments in Massachusetts, who were otherwise facing January filings with no Safe Harbor protection. However, not everyone will be completely enthralled with the new option. Many taxpayers would argue that a better measure of the Advance Payment would have been 80% of the tax remitted in that same month for the prior year. This is particularly true for companies that have significant seasonal fluctuations in sales volume. Imagine a national retailer who experiences a sales spike in the month of December followed by a precipitous drop in January. Nonetheless, when making their January Advance Payment under the second option it will be based on 80% of the tax collected during their December spike. While any overpayment will be credited towards the liability due at the end of the month, no taxpayer is excited about sending more money to the DOR than is absolutely needed. While nothing prevents a particular company from switching between the two options, the fact remains remitting based on actual collections in the way envisioned by Massachusetts is an enormous challenge.

Take Action

Learn more about how Sovos is a leader for sales and use tax by checking out the IDC MarketScape for Sales and Use Tax report.

Sign up for Email Updates

Stay up to date with the latest tax and compliance updates that may impact your business.


Charles Maniace

Charles Maniace is Vice President – Regulatory Analysis & Design at Sovos, a leading global provider of software that safeguards businesses from the burden and risk of modern tax. An attorney by trade, Chuck leads a team of attorneys and tax professionals responsible for all the tax and regulatory content that keeps Sovos customers continually compliant. Over his 15 year career in tax and regulatory automation, he has provided analysis to the Wall Street Journal, NBC and more.
Share This Post
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on email

May 25, 2022
IPT – Goods in Transit Location of Risk

For Insurance Premium Tax, location of risk is vital in determining the correct tax. In this episode of the Sovos Expert Series, Anita Blanusic asks Russell Brown, Senior Consulting Manager to explain the location of risk for goods in transit and how it’s determined. Listen as he answers the following questions: What is goods in […]

May 25, 2022
Meet the Expert: Hooda Greig, Compliance Services Manager – IPT

Meet the Expert is our series of blogs where we share more about the team behind our innovative software and managed services. As a global organisation with indirect tax experts across all regions, our dedicated team are often the first to know about new regulatory changes and the latest developments on tax regimes across the world, […]

North America Sales & Use Tax
May 24, 2022
3 Reasons for Automated Sales Tax Compliance

At this point, knowing that increasingly complex sales tax requirements exist is not the issue. Organizations know that they’re facing more complicated rules and regulations, but it’s more a matter of taking the time to invest in the necessary tools to properly face those challenges. With an automated sales tax compliance solution, businesses can better […]

North America Tax Information Reporting
May 24, 2022
Insurance Statutory Reporting Due Dates

Insurance statutory reporting filing due dates for the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) are spread across the calendar year causing a jumble of different deadlines that apply to certain insurers. The quarterly and annual filings can be easier to remember, but the additional filings certain insurers are required to submit can be tricky to […]

EMEA VAT & Fiscal Reporting
May 24, 2022
The Effect of Inflation on VAT Rates

It’s no surprise that inflation is on the forefront of everyone’s mind, with prices continuing to sky-rocket month by month. Data from the United Kingdom shows that the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) inflation jumped to a 40-year high of 9% in the past 12 months. Governments around the world are looking for ways to reduce […]