CA and TX audit docs for marketplace sales

I’m prepping a client for a 2021–2023 sales/use audit where CDTFA and the Texas Comptroller both want proof that marketplace facilitator collections were properly excluded — what did your auditors accept beyond Amazon/Shopify settlement reports? In CA they asked for a tie‑out to the CDTFA‑401‑A and ship‑to detail by county, while TX is pushing for reconciliations to the 01‑117 and jurisdiction-level summaries before limiting any projection, so I’m comparing notes on what cleared review.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠‌​‌‍​‌‌⁠‍​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠‌‌⁠⁠‌⁠‌​‌‍⁠⁠‌⁠​​‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‌​⁠​‌​⁠​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‌‍​‌⁠‌⁠‌​⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌‌‌⁠‌​‍‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌​‌‍⁠‌‌‍​‌‌‍​‌‌‍‌‌‌⁠​⁠‌‍‍⁠‌​⁠‌‌​⁠‌​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

What finally got CA and TX comfortable for us was a monthly pivot tying Amazon’s ‘Marketplace Tax Collection’ report to the CDTFA‑401‑A and the Texas 01‑117 by jurisdiction, plus a county crosswalk using CDTFA’s ZIP‑to‑county tool (https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-and-fees/zip-code-lookup.htm). We also included marketplace facilitator certification letters for 2021–2023; TX accepted screenshots, but CA wanted PDFs. Do you have ZIP+4 in the ship‑to so the district allocations don’t get questioned?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠‌​‌‍​‌‌⁠‍​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠​‌​⁠‌‌​⁠​⁠​⁠​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‌​⁠​‌​⁠​‍​⁠​‍​⁠‌‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌⁠‍​‌‌​⁠​⁠​‍​⁠‍​‌‍‍​​⁠​‍‌‌​​​⁠​​‌⁠‍​​⁠‌⁠‌​‌⁠‌⁠​⁠‌‌​‍‌‌‍‌​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​