Sales Tax

Signed 1/23/03








Petitioner, )

) Appeal No. 02-1770

v. ) Account No. #####


) Tax Type: Sales Tax

RESPONDENT, ) Presiding: Phan

Respondent. )




Jane Phan, Administrative Law Judge


For Petitioner: RESPONDENT REP

For Respondent: Clark Snelson, Assistant Attorney General

Stan Allen, Assistant Director Taxpayer Services

Ken Lefevre, Tax Compliance Agent




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 January 15, 2003.

This matter is before the Utah State Tax Commission due to the Request for Revocation of Sales Tax License, filed by Petitioner on November 27, 2002. Petitioner requests revocation of sales tax license number ##### pursuant to Utah Code Ann. '59-12-106(1) on the grounds that Respondent has failed to comply with the laws of the Utah Sales Tax Act.

As of the hearing, Respondent owed $$$$$ in sales tax, penalties and interest. Interest continues to accrue on the unpaid balance. The deficiency goes back to the fourth quarter of 1997. Respondent had entered into two payment agreements with Petitioner, but had failed to make the payments for either agreement. Petitioner pointed out that the fourth quarter sales tax for 2002 would be due at the end of the month and Petitioner felt it could not allow the business to incur additional deficiencies. Petitioner points out that Respondent collected the tax from its customers and the sales tax is the State's money. Petitioner may not operate its business using the State's money.

Respondent's representative explained that he was trying to pay the tax, but the business was struggling financially. He had a problem with former employees and then with the general economic down turn over the past year his customers were reducing the amount of their purchases or dropping off altogether, as well as taking longer to pay Respondent for the product. Respondent indicated that he was planning to refinance his house to pay the bulk of the deficiency and then make payments on the remainder. He felt that it would take several weeks to make the arrangements for the refinance.

Because there was already additional time built into the process and they were concerned that Respondent's representations would be followed through, Petitioner asked that an Order from the Initial Hearing be issued revoking the license. This would give Respondent thirty days until the order was final to obtain the refinance and make payment arrangements for the remainder, or, if additional time was needed, Respondent could request a Formal Hearing.


The commission shall, on a reasonable notice and after a hearing, revoke the license of any person violating any provision of this chapter and no license may be issued to such person until the taxpayer has complied with the requirements of this chapter. Any person required by this chapter to collect sales or use tax within this state without having secured a license to do so, is guilty of a criminal violation as provided in Section 59-1-401. (Utah Code Ann. '59-12-106(1).)


This account is substantially delinquent and has been for many years in violation of the provisions of the Sales Tax Act. There are more than sufficient grounds to require revocation of the sales tax license.

Based on the foregoing the Utah State Tax Commission hereby revokes sales tax license number ##### for failure to comply with the provisions of the Sales Tax Act.

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 23rd day of January , 2003.



Jane Phan

Administrative Law Judge





The Commission has reviewed this case and the undersigned concur in this decision.

DATED this 23rd day of January , 2003.



Pam Hendrickson R. Bruce Johnson

Commission Chair Commissioner






Palmer DePaulis Marc B. Johnson

Commissioner Commissioner