Are You Overpaying Sales Tax on Software Licenses?

Tax Services

June 22, 2026

Are You Overpaying Sales Tax on Software Licenses?

What Multistate Companies Need to Know About the Multiple Points of Use Rule

If your company licenses software and has employees in more than one state, there’s a good chance you’re paying more sales tax than the law requires—and you may be able to get that money back.

 

Most companies assume their software vendors are handling sales tax correctly. After all, tax is calculated automatically, it shows up on the invoice, and someone at the vendor presumably set it up properly. In practice, however, this assumption fails regularly—and the result is consistent overpayment by the buyer.

The reason comes down to a mismatch between how vendors apply tax and how U.S. sales tax law actually works for multistate software purchases.

 

The Rule Vendors Usually Get Wrong

 

U.S. sales tax is set entirely at the state level—there is no single national rule. Each state decides for itself whether software is taxable, at what rate and under what conditions. Some states tax software broadly. Others exempt it entirely, particularly when delivered electronically. Many fall somewhere in between.

This creates a problem when a company uses software across multiple states. The legally correct approach is to ask: “How much of this software is being used in each state?” Then, you apply each state’s rules only to that portion of the software. That’s the essence of the multiple points of use (MPU) rule. “Points of use” simply means the states where your employees or devices are actually using the software.

What vendors typically do instead is far simpler: They look at where the invoice is billed—usually the buyer’s headquarters—and apply that state’s tax rate to the entire purchase. If your employees are spread across states with lower rates or no software tax at all, you are being overcharged.

How an MPU Analysis Works

Step 1

Map Your Users

Identify which states your employees or devices are in and each state’s share of total users.

Step 2

Allocate the Cost

Split your total software spend across states based on those percentages.

Step 3

Apply Each State’s Rules

Each state’s share is taxed (or not) under that state’s specific law.

To make this concrete: Imagine a company headquartered in New York with 1,000 employees—400 in New York, 300 in Florida, 200 in California, and 100 in Texas. On a $1 million software license, the correct MPU split would allocate $400,000 to New York (taxable), $300,000 to Florida (electronically delivered software generally exempt), $200,000 to California (also generally exempt for electronically delivered software), and $100,000 to Texas (taxable).

Under a billing-address approach, the vendor applies New York’s full rate to all $1 million. Under the correct MPU approach, $500,000 of that purchase may be partially or fully exempt. The difference in tax owed can be substantial, and organizations with the right fact patterns have obtained multimillion-dollar refunds.

 

Whom This Affects Most

 
  • Headquarters in a high-tax state with employees in states that are more favorable for software taxation, such as Florida or California
  • Large or distributed workforces—the more employees across more states, the bigger the gap between what’s charged and what’s owed
  • Heavy enterprise software spenders, where a single enterprise resource planning, collaboration or data platform contract taxed at the wrong rate produces a material overpayment
  • Financial services and hedge funds, which also purchase large volumes of data and information services (market data feeds, research subscriptions, compliance databases) that are frequently overtaxed under the same billing-address logic
  • Companies post-merger or acquisition, where billing addresses often no longer reflect the combined entity’s actual employee footprint

The Refund Opportunity—Why This Matters Financially

Multimillion-dollar refunds recovered by organizations with significant multistate software spend

3–4 year lookback period available in most states to recover prior overpayments

Software + Data Services—Eligible spend categories such as licenses, maintenance agreements, and information and data subscriptions

The financial stakes are real. Organizations that have conducted MPU reviews have obtained multimillion-dollar sales tax refunds, with recovery size tied directly to the volume of software spend and the geographic spread of their workforce. Most states permit refund claims on a three-to-four-year lookback—meaning years of accumulated overpayments may be recoverable.

In our experience, the most common causes of overpayment are:

  • Vendors applying tax based solely on invoice billing location rather than actual user locations
  • Software and maintenance agreements taxed at high-rate state levels despite significant employee populations in lower-tax or exempt states
  • Data and information services (market feeds, research subscriptions, compliance tools) incorrectly taxed, particularly for financial services and hedge fund firms
 

A comprehensive review can identify refund opportunities across software licenses, maintenance and support agreements, and information and data service subscriptions.

 

A Real-World Example

 

A multistate company purchased enterprise software licenses and maintenance agreements, with all invoices billed to its corporate headquarters. The vendor applied the headquarters state’s full sales tax rate to the entire invoice amount each time.

In reality, the company’s employees—the people actually using the software—were spread across more than a dozen states, a significant share of them in states with little or no software tax. None of that geography was reflected in what the company paid.

A review was conducted covering the previous three years. The review mapped users by state, reallocated software costs proportionally and applied each state’s rules to its share.

The results:

Multimillion-dollar recovery in overpaid sales tax—along with a restructured invoicing approach that reduced the company’s ongoing software tax exposure going forward.

The Refund Opportunity—Why This Matters Financially

Reduced Tax Bill

Reallocating usage to lower-tax or exempt states cut the company’s ongoing software tax cost.

Recovered Overpayments

Refund claims filed across multiple states for tax incorrectly charged over a multiyear lookback period.

Extended to Data Services

The same approach was applied to market data and research subscriptions, unlocking additional recovery.

The method was then applied prospectively: Vendors were provided with accurate user-location data and asked to restructure future invoices to reflect correct MPU allocations, preventing the same error from recurring.

Disclaimer: The previous company example illustrates the specific facts of that matter, including the company’s software expenditure, workforce distribution and applicable state tax laws. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. The existence or magnitude of any refund opportunity depends entirely on each organization’s individual circumstances. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal or tax advice.

 

Stop Overpaying Going Forward

 

Recovering prior overpayments is valuable, but the more durable benefit of an MPU engagement is prospective: establishing the right tax treatment going forward so the same errors do not recur. In practice, this means working with vendors to change how invoices are structured:

  • Document user-location data and share it with vendors: Vendors can apply MPU allocations only if they know where the buyer’s users are located. Establishing a process to provide this data—and update it as headcounts shift—is the foundation of correct prospective treatment.
  • Request MPU-allocated invoices: Buyers can formally ask vendors to restructure invoices to reflect proper MPU allocations, applying tax only to the portion of the purchase attributed to taxable states. Many vendors will accommodate this request when presented with the legal basis and clear user data.
  • Embed MPU tracking into internal processes: Employee counts shift through hiring, attrition, relocations and acquisitions. Companies that update user-location data periodically and recalculate allocations as headcounts change preserve the benefits of the initial restructuring.
 

For organizations that have already recovered historical overpayments, this prospective work ensures the recovery is not a one-time event but the beginning of a structurally corrected tax position.

 

What Organizations Should Do Now

 

The first step is simply to assess whether the issue exists. For most multistate companies with meaningful software spend, it does. A review typically involves pulling together major software and data service contracts, mapping employee locations by state, comparing how tax was actually charged against how it should have been charged under MPU rules, identifying states where refund claims can be filed—most allow a three-to-four-year lookback—and restructuring vendor invoicing going forward.

 

Key Takeaways

 
  • Software tax should follow where your users are, not where your invoice is billed.
  • Vendors default to billing-address taxation, which systematically overcharges multistate buyers.
  • If you have employees in states that don’t tax software—such as California or Florida—you may be entitled to a refund.
  • The same logic applies to data and information services, not just software licenses.
  • Most states allow refund claims going back three to four years.
  • Fixing the invoicing structure going forward prevents the error from compounding further.

How Kroll Can Help

Kroll’s Sales and Use Tax Services team is highly experienced in securing MPU-related overpayments across a range of industries. Our process is end to end: We handle the data analysis, the state-by-state legal determination, the preparation of refund claims and the follow-through with state tax authorities. We work on a contingency basis—no upfront fees, with compensation tied solely to refunds actually recovered.

No Upfront Cost

Contingency-Based Engagement

Our fees are earned only on refunds successfully recovered—zero financial risk to your organization.

End-to-end Support

Fully Managed Process

We handle data collection and allocation analysis through refund claim filing and state follow-through.

Audit-ready Defensibility

Documentation That Holds Up

Every claim is supported by detailed, state-specific analysis built to withstand scrutiny from tax authorities.

Deep State-level Expertise

Rules and Exceptions, per State

Software tax treatment varies dramatically across jurisdictions. Our team knows the nuances in every taxing state.

Ready to Find Out What’s Recoverable?

Contact Kroll’s Sales and Use Tax Services team for a no-obligation assessment.

Stay Ahead with Kroll

Tax Services

Built upon the foundation of its renowned valuation business, Kroll's Tax Service practice follows a detailed and responsive approach to capturing value for clients.

Sales and Use Tax Services

Kroll provides a comprehensive suite of sales and use tax services to assist companies in complying with its sales and use tax obligations.