Debunking Unclaimed Property Reporting Notions

Sherry Hale
November 6, 2018

We have found that many companies who think they are in compliance when it comes to unclaimed property laws and regulations are not fully compliant. It isn’t until they are audited and fined that they find out what they determined to be compliance, wasn’t full compliance in the eyes of the law.

The following notions that many organizations have that just aren’t true and could lead to some serious penalties and fines.

Merely Having Policies & Procedures Does Not Equal Compliance

Having policies and procedures around unclaimed property processes is a great start, but it’s definitely not enough. Unclaimed property laws are constantly changing, which means that you need a system in place that notifies you immediately of these changes, as well as adjusts all of your existing unclaimed property in the same manner. In order for a company to fully comply with unclaimed property laws, they need a comprehensive unclaimed management system that is constantly monitoring their data and making any applicable changes that happen automatically.

Reporting Unclaimed Property is a Courtesy, Not a Requirement

Reporting unclaimed property is not a courtesy, it’s the law. All companies in the U.S., Puerto  Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, and some Canadian provinces, must file unclaimed property according to those jurisdiction laws.

Trying to manage the laws and regulations in all states, on top of due dates for both due diligence and unclaimed property reports, could not only be a headache but also a huge liability, if you’re not familiar with every, states unclaimed property laws. Individual states determine their own criteria when determining deadlines and due dates for the various property types. When organizations fail to manage the reporting process properly, they open themselves up to fines and penalties should they ever be audited. Should an audit occur, it’s a very tedious process that involves a lot of time and could be costly to an organization that doesn’t have all of their t’s crossed and i’s dotted when it comes to adhering to unclaimed property laws.

It’s So Much Easier to Report ALL of Our Unclaimed Property to One State

The act of remitting all of your unclaimed property to one state, even if the property originated from another state, is called reciprocal filing. Not only do we not recommend reciprocal filing, it’s also not a good practice for your company. If one of your prior clients knew that you did everything in your power to return their unclaimed property to them, they would be more likely to do business with your company again in the future. When you file reciprocally, you are relying on another state to determine which state gets what payment. It’s much cleaner and client-friendly if you submit the unclaimed property to the state of the owner’s last known address. It’s the right thing to do and some states, like California don’t even allow reciprocal reporting.

Stay tuned for our next blog post where we will debunk additional unclaimed property notions that you may not have thought about.

Take Action

Get in touch with a Sovos unclaimed property expert to learn more about managing your unclaimed property compliance processes.

 

Sign up for Email Updates

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

Author

Sherry Hale

Sherry Hale assists in managing sales and marketing initiatives. Sherry has a degree in Marketing, Business Management, and HR Management from Mount Mercy University in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. In her free time, she loves spending time with family, volunteering with animal rescue, playing with her own rescue pets, and riding her Harley.
Share this post

North America
June 6, 2024
Observations and Predictions: The Future of Tax and Compliance

When I became the CEO of Sovos one year ago, I knew that I was stepping into an innovative company in an industry primed for a seismic transformation. However, even with this knowledge in place, I must admit that the speed and scope of change over the past year has been extraordinary to witness. Here […]

EMEA IPT
July 8, 2024
Hungary Insurance Premium Tax (IPT): An Overview

Regarding calculating Insurance Premium Tax (IPT), Hungary is the only country in the EU where the regime uses the so-called sliding scale rate model.

North America ShipCompliant
July 3, 2024
The Prospects and Perils of AI in Beverage Alcohol

I recently had the privilege of speaking on a panel at the National Conference of State Liquor Administrators (NCSLA) Annual Conference, a regular meeting of regulators, attorneys and other members of the beverage alcohol industry to discuss important issues affecting our trade. Alongside Claire Mitchell, of Stoel Rives, and Erlinda Doherty, of Vinicola Consulting, and […]

North America ShipCompliant
June 27, 2024
Shifting Focus: How to Make Wine Country Interesting to Millennials

Guest blog written by Susan DeMatei, President, WineGlass Marketing WineGlass Marketing recently conducted a study to explore how Millennials and Gen X feel about wine, wine culture and wine country. The goal was to gain insight into how we can make wine, wine club and wine country appealing to these new audiences. We’ll showcase in-depth […]

North America Sales & Use Tax
June 24, 2024
Illinois to Adjust Sales Tax Nexus Rules in Light of PetMeds Threat

Illinois is poised to change their sourcing rules again, trying to find their way in a world where states apply their sales tax compliance requirements equally to both in-state and remote sellers. With this tweak, they will effectively equalize the responsibilities of remote sellers with no in-state presence, to those that have an Illinois location. […]

EMEA VAT & Fiscal Reporting
June 21, 2024
ViDA Rejected Again – Europe Misses Another Chance to Harmonize e-Invoicing

During the latest ECOFIN meeting on 21 June, Member States met to discuss if they could come to an agreement to implement the VAT in the Digital Age (ViDA) proposals. At the ECOFIN meeting in May, Estonia objected to the platform rules being proposed, instead requesting to make the new deemed supplier rules optional (an […]