In General Mills, Inc. v. Commissioner of Revenue, 440 Mass. 154, 795 N.E.2d 552 (2003), cert. denied 541 U.S. 973, 124 S. Ct. 1878, 158 L. Ed. 2d 468 (2004) the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court reinforced this principle, finding that the Commissioner had properly treated a Section 338 Election as an asset sale for state tax purposes: State law operates to include all gross income determined under the Internal Revenue Code except income that is expressly excluded. There is no statute that denies recognition of an election under 338(h)(10) or otherwise excludes income resulting from such an election from the state definition of gross income....The election is therefore recognized. Similarly, differential treatment of income requires specific statutory authority, and...no statute...permits or requires differential treatment of its Federal and State gross income. (Id. at 566.)