TGS-NOPEC GEOPHYSICAL CO. v. Combs, 340 S.W.3d 432

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether receipts from licensing seismic data are sources from the use of a license in Texas	TGS argues revenues arise from sale of data, not use of a license	Comptroller argues revenues are from use of a license in Texas	Receipts are not from the use of a license; sourced under catch-all (6) and allocated by payor domicile
Whether the term 'use of a license' should be read in the statutory context rather than as a license-transfer mechanism	Language ambiguous; context shows data use, not license use	Subsection (4) applies to licenses used in Texas	Interpretation based on statute context; not simply the mechanism of licensing
Whether Comptroller regulations prescribing use-based sourcing for licenses are consistent with the statute	Regulations mis-treat data licensing as use-based	Regulations reflect legislative intent for licenses to be sourced by use	Regulations inconsistent with the statute’s specific naming of intangibles; not controlling

Bullock v. National Bancshares Corp., 584 S.W.2d 268 (Tex. 1979) (franchise tax subject to apportionment based on Texas business activity)
Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. Calvert, 414 S.W.2d 172 (Tex. 1967) (intangibles taxation and location of payor principles)
In re M.N., 262 S.W.3d 799 (Tex. 2008) (statutory construction; words interpreted in context)
Pub. Util. Comm'n v. Gulf States Utils. Co., 809 S.W.2d 201 (Tex. 1991) (agency deference and statutory interpretation framework)
Mega Child Care, 145 S.W.3d 170 (Tex. 2004) (contextual statutory construction and deference to agency)
City of Sunset Valley, 146 S.W.3d 637 (Tex. 2004) (interpretation of ambiguous statutory terms in context)
Rodriguez v. Service Lloyds Ins. Co., 997 S.W.2d 248 (Tex. 1999) (limits on deference to agency interpretations)