in-20260826-IR-045260281NRA: FINAL ORDER DENYING REFUND: 47-20253148

DEPARTMENT OF STATE REVENUE FINAL ORDER DENYING REFUND: 47-20253148 Proportional Use Fuel Tax Credit For Year 2025 HOLDING Out-of-state Taxpayer failed to meet its burden of establishing that it submitted its Proportional Use Credit (“PUC”) refund claims within the quarterly periods for which the proportional credit was claimed. ISSUE

I. Motor Carrier Fuel Tax - Proportional Use Credit Refund.

Authority: IC 6-6-4.1-4.8; IC 6-6-4.1-10; IC 6-8.1-6-7. Taxpayer argues it timely filed a refund claim based on its PUC. STATEMENT OF FACTS Taxpayer is an out-of-state motor carrier that provides trucking services. Taxpayer asserts that it filed its “reports,” or refund claims, for the first quarter of 2025 (“Q1 2025”) and second quarter of 2025 (“Q2 2025”) timely while stating it “failed to email the IFTA [r]eports.” Taxpayer stated that it electronically submitted to the Indiana Department of Revenue (“Department”) “Claim for Proportional Use Credit” (“MCS-1789”) requests for the aforementioned quarters through the Motor Carrier Services' (“MCS”) online portal. Taxpayer sought refunds in motor fuel tax for Q1 2025 and Q2 2025. Taxpayer claimed credit for fuel consumed during these quarters. The Department denied Taxpayer's claims for refunds. The denial letters explained the reason for denying the refunds: Taxpayer disagreed with the decisions and submitted a protest to that effect. In that protest, Taxpayer argued that the Department should “reverse” its denials due its “timely filing of the actual reports in good faith.” Taxpayer waived its right to an administrative hearing while maintaining its protest and provided no additional documentation. This Order Denying Refund results. Additional facts will be provided as necessary.

I. Motor Carrier Fuel Tax - Proportional Use Credit Refund.

DISCUSSION The issue is whether Taxpayer has established that it timely filed its refund claims and quarterly reports with the Department. In its initial refund reviews, the Department determined that Taxpayer's claims were untimely. Taxpayer protests the denials of the refunds. Taxpayer argues that its filed PUC refund claim submissions with the Department before the due date for the taxable periods for which the PUCs were claimed, and the submissions are sufficient for approval of refunds. See IC 6-6-4.1-4.8. The corresponding due date to file a PUC refund claim for Q1 2025, per statute, was April 30, 2025. The corresponding due date to file a PUC refund claim for Q2 2025, per statute, was July 31, 2025. The credit is authorized under IC 6-6-4.1-4.8, which requires the Department to refund tax based on a carrier's “proportional use” of motor fuel. IC 6-6-4.1-4.8(c) provides: IC 6-6-4.1-4.8(d) imposes a “cap” on the dollar amount carriers may be refunded each year. In small part, IC 6-6-4.1-4.8(d) provides: IC 6-6-4.1-4.8(c) provides additional requirements specifically addressing instances in which the total amounts claimed exceed the $3,500,000 limit. IC 6-6-4.1-4.8(b) explains the means by which a carrier is required to submit its claim. In part, the statute provides: IC 6-6-4.1-10 requires that a “carrier shall submit each quarterly report required under this subsection on or before the last day of the month immediately following that quarter.” IC 6-8.1-6-7 permits the Department to consider electronically filed documents; “notwithstanding any other provisions of this title, the commissioner may permit the filing of any return or document by electronic data submission.” The Department is required to address claims submitted on the MCS-1789 form. The form explains that in order to claim the credit, the carrier must, in part, “File the quarterly IFTA-101 or MCFT-101 tax returns on or before the due date shown on the return” and “Submit the [MCS-1789] by the due date on the form.” Per IC 6-6-4.1-4.8, a PUC refund claim must also include the quarterly report that corresponds with the quarter in which the claim is being made. In its protest submission, Taxpayer provided documentation to show that it filed online its Q1 2025 refund claim on April 23, 2025, prior to the deadline of April 30, 2025. However, Taxpayer did not submit any record to show that it filed its Q2 refund claim on or before July 31, 2025. While Taxpayer might have electronically submitted its MCS-1789 forms online for quarterly periods prior to their respective deadlines of April 30, 2025, and July 31, 2025, Taxpayer failed to provide copies of the corresponding quarterly IFTA tax returns before these statutory deadlines. As previously stated, Taxpayer admitted in its protest letter that it failed to timely file with the Department its “IFTA [r]eports.” As such, Taxpayer's PUC refund claims were incomplete at the time of their respective deadlines. Taxpayer's additional claims in its protest regarding its “good faith” actions and comparison of the Department to out-of-state governing entities are not relevant based on the plain reading of IC 6-6-4.1-4.8. Taxpayer is required, as prescribed by the Department, to provide the completed MCS-1789 and a copy of its quarterly tax return on or before the deadline of the relevant tax quarter. The Department's determination that Taxpayer's claim was untimely rests on the fact that Taxpayer, on its own admission, failed to provide this documentation to the Department by the statutory due dates. Calculations and disbursements of PUC to eligible filers are based on timely filing, which allows the Department to adhere to applicable law. Taxpayer has not provided any evidence to the Department establishing that it submitted completed claims before the deadlines. Furthermore, Taxpayer has not referred to any statute, regulation, or court case which would permit the Department to process its PUC refund claims without also providing an MCS-1789 and quarterly tax return by the mandatory deadlines, as required by Indiana law. Taxpayer has not proven that it timely filed completed PUC refund claims with all the documentation required under IC 6-6-4.1-4.8. Therefore, the protest is respectfully denied. FINDING Taxpayer's protest is respectfully denied. June 17, 2026 Replaces Finding Document: New