01-1539
Sales Tax
Signed 5/24/02
BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX
COMMISSION
____________________________________
PETITIONER, ) ORDER
)
Petitioner, ) Appeal No. 01-1539
)
v. ) Account No.
)
TAXPAYER SERVICES
DIVISION ) Tax Type:
Sales Tax
OF THE UTAH STATE TAX )
COMMISSION, ) Tax Year: 2001
)
Respondent. ) Judge: Davis
_____________________________________
Presiding:
G. Blaine Davis,
Administrative Law Judge
Appearances:
For Petitioner: No one appeared
For Respondent: Mr. Laron Lind, Assistant Attorney General
Ms. Julie Halverson, from
the Taxpayer Services Division
Mr. Ed Coleman, from the
Taxpayer Services Division
Ms. Susan Hoggan, from the
Taxpayer Services Division
STATEMENT
OF THE CASE
This matter came before
the Utah State Tax Commission for an Initial Hearing pursuant to the provisions
of Utah Code Ann. '59-1-502.5 on May 8,
2002.
Petitioner was a
resident of Utah, but in order to travel to her new employment in the State of STATE,
she needed a new vehicle. Accordingly,
on April 5, 2001, she purchsed a VEHICLE from COMPANY A in CITY, Utah. At the time of purchase, she did have
questions regarding whether it was necessary to pay Utah Sales Tax because she
would soon be leaving the state and taking the vehicle with her. She called individuals at the Utah State Tax
Commission, and was assured it was necessary to pay Utah Sales Tax on the
vehicle because she was a resident of Utah.
Petitioner also called
individuals at the taxing agency in STATE, and was further told that when she
arrived in STATE it would be necessary to pay an additional fee as an excise
tax in order to register her vehicle after she arrived in STATE.
Petitioner did pay the
sales tax on the vehicle in Utah in an amount of $$$$$, and then approximately
one month later, went to STATE, driving on the new car sticker which had been
issued by the dealer. When she arrived
in STATE, she registered her vehicle in that state and was required to pay an
excise tax in an amount of $$$$$ in order to register her vehicle.
Petitioner has now
requested a refund of the sales tax because she does not feel it is fair to
have to pay two taxes on her new vehicle.
APPLICABLE
LAW
Utah Code Ann.
§59-12-103 imposes a sales and use tax upon all retail sales of tangible
personal property made within this state.
Utah Code Ann. §59-12-104
does provide an exemption for:
(9) sales of vehicles of a type required to be registered
under the motor vehicle laws of this state which are made to bona fide
nonresidents of this state and are not afterwards registered or used in
this state except as necessary to transport them to the borders of this state.
Utah Code Ann. §59-12-110(2)(e)(I)
provides "that refunds of sales tax may be made if "the sale or use
was exempt from sales and use taxes under §59-12-104 on the date of
purchase;"
DISCUSSION
On
the date Petitioner purchased the vehicle, she was a resident of the State of
Utah. Section 59-12-103 imposes a sale
upon all retail sales of tangible personal property made within this
state. The purchase of the vehicle by
Petitioner was a purchase of tangible personal property within this state. Therefore, the taxation of the vehicle is
clearly appropriate unless an exemption applies.
Utah Code Ann. §59-12-104
does provide an exemption for vehicles which are sold to "bona fide
nonresidents of this state", but Petitioner has acknowledged that she was
a resident of this state.
Petitioner
also argued that it was a double tax upon her to have to pay the sales tax in
Utah, and the excise tax in STATE.
However, those are two different taxes and are not based upon the same
transaction. The Utah tax was based
upon the sales transaction at the time she purchased the vehicle, whereas the
excise tax is imposed upon any vehicle the first time it is registered in the
State of STATE. Although there was no
testimony offered on that issue, the STATE tax would apparently have been
imposed even if Petitioner had owned the car for several years. Therefore, this is not double taxation
because the taxes were not imposed upon the same transaction or occurrence.
DECISION
AND ORDER
Based upon the
foregoing, the purchase of a vehicle in the State of Utah while Petitioner was
a resident of this state was a taxable transaction, and there is no exemption
provided for by law. Accordingly, the
denial of a refund of the sales tax by Respondent was appropriate. The request for refund and the Petition for
Redetermination are hereby denied. It
is so ordered.
This decision does not
limit a party's right to a Formal Hearing.
However, this Decision and Order will become the Final Decision and
Order of the Commission unless any party to this case files a written request
within thirty (30) days of the date of this decision to proceed to a Formal
Hearing. Such a request shall be mailed
to the address listed below and must include the Petitioner's name, address,
and appeal number:
Utah
State Tax Commission
Appeals
Division
210
North 1950 West
Salt
Lake City, Utah 84134
Failure to request a
Formal Hearing will preclude any further appeal rights in this matter.
DATED this 24th day of May ,
2002.
____________________________________
G. Blaine Davis
Administrative Law Judge
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
The Commission has
reviewed this case and the undersigned concur in this decision.
DATED this 24th day of May ,
2002.
Pam Hendrickson R.
Bruce Johnson
Commission Chair Commissioner
Palmer DePaulis Marc
B. Johnson
Commissioner Commissioner