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
G. Blaine Davis, Administrative Law Judge
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.
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;"
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
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