BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX
COMMISSION
_____________________________________
XXXXX
Petitioner, : FINDINGS OF FACT,
v. : CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
: AND FINAL
DECISION
AUDIT DIVISION
OF THE :
STATE TAX
COMMISSION OF UTAH, ) Appeal No. 87-1567
: Audit
Period XXXXX
Respondent :
_____________________________________
This
matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission for a formal hearing on the
XXXXX. James E. Harward, Hearing
Officer, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Tax Commission. The Petitioner was represented by
XXXXX. The Respondent was represented
by XXXXX. The Hearing Officer took
evidence and arguments as it relates to the issues at hand. Based upon that evidence and arguments and
the recommendation of the Presiding Officer, the Tax Commission makes its:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1.
The tax in question is sales tax.
2.
The period in question is XXXXX.
3.
The Petitioner purchased a XXXXX, Serial Number XXXXX in XXXXX for $$$$$.
4.
The Petitioner did not pay sales tax at the time of the purchase of the
vehicle.
5.
The Petitioner financed the vehicle through XXXXX. As evidence of that transaction, Exhibit 2 is a promissory note
indicating that XXXXX, promises to pay XXXXX the amount of $$$$$.
6.
The Tax Commission finds no persuasive evidence that the relationship between
XXXXX and XXXXX was anything other than an outright finance of the purchase of
the XXXXX. The letter dated XXXXX
stating that the arrangement was a lease is unpersuasive in that there are no
lease documents to substantiate that claim.
7.
The vehicle in question was purchased personally by the Petitioner for use in
his position as constable for XXXXX; however, when the Petitioners duties as
constable are terminated the van is and continues to be the sole personal
property of the Petitioner and is not the property of the precinct or any other
subdivision of the State of Utah.
8.
The van is paid for out of proceeds and earnings of the Petitioner.
9.
The Petitioner is not a subdivision of the State of Utah.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1.
Sales to the State or any of its subdivisions are exempt from taxation. (Utah
Code Ann.59-12-104(2).)
2.
Any purchases by a precinct are exempt from taxation. Utah State Constitution Article 11 Section 4.
3.
All fees collected by the constable are his own personal property and is not
the property of the precinct. (See Rich
vs Industrial Commission 80 Utah 511, 513 15 Pacific Second 641 and 642.
DECISION AND ORDER
The
Tax Commission after reviewing the facts and evidence finds that the purchase
of the XXXXX by the Petitioner was not an exempt transaction under the
statute. The purchase of the vehicle
was personal and not for or on behalf of the precinct. In addition the Tax Commission finds that
the purchase of the vehicle initially was in fact a purchase and not a
lease. Insufficient evidence or
documentation has been submitted to lead the Commission to believe that in fact
the lease was in existence between XXXXX and the Petitioner. Finally, the Tax Commission finds no basis
for the claim of estoppel on behalf of the Petitioner. The audit and assessment of this matter in
XXXXX does not estop the collection of the tax in question. Therefore, the Petitioner's request is
denied and the assessment of the Auditing Division is affirmed.
DATED
this 15 day of May, 1989.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
R. H. Hansen Roger
O. Tew
Chairman Commissioner
Joe B.
Pacheco G.
Blaine Davis
Commissioner Commissioner
^^