BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION
v. : INFORMAL DECISION
COLLECTION DIVISION OF THE : Appeal No. 87-2319
UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, :
STATEMENT OF CASE
This matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission for an informal hearing on XXXXX. Paul F. Iwasaki, Presiding Officer, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present, by telephone and representing the Petitioner, was XXXXX. Present and representing the Respondent was XXXXX. Based upon the testimony and evidence presented at the hearing, the Tax Commission hereby makes its:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The tax in question is sales tax.
2. The period in question is XXXXX.
3. The Petitioner's representative testified that during XXXXX he was employed as a civil engineer, however, was laid off in XXXXX. He further testified that in XXXXX he moved back to XXXXX.
4. Petitioner's representative returned to the United States and Utah in XXXXX. The Representative testified that while in XXXXX he became associated with a company that made wet suits and agreed to be their United States distributor.
5. The Petitioner's representative testified that upon his return to Utah in XXXXX he set up shop in the basement of his home and had attempted to sell the wet suits. He testified that he did not sell any of the wet suits and thus did not have any income from the sale of those suits.
6. The Petitioner's representative's income tax returns for XXXXX, specifically Schedule C which is attached to those returns, represented that "XXXXX" was the name of the business which the Petitioner's representative owned and that for XXXXX the business received $$$$$ in gross receipts or sales. The Schedule C for XXXXX showed gross receipts or sales in the amount of $$$$$.
7. Based upon the above listed amounts, a sales tax deficiency was determined.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
There is levied a tax on the purchaser for the amount paid or charged on retail sales of tangible personal property made within the state. (Utah Code Ann. §59-12-103.)
Each vendor shall pay or collect and remit the sales and use taxes imposed if within the state the vendor has or utilizes an office, distribution house, sales house, warehouse, service enterprise, or other place of business. (Utah Code Ann. §59-12-107.)
DECISION AND ORDER
In the present case, the Petitioner claims that no sales tax was due because he made no sales during the periods in question and that he was absent from the United States for at least one of those years. That testimony is in direct conflict with the information provided on Schedule C of his income tax returns for the years in question and which he represented as being true by affixing his signature thereto.
Based upon the evidence provided, the Tax Commission finds that the Petitioner has failed to meet his burden of proof in establishing that sales tax was not due and owing, and affirms the determination of the Collection Division. Due to the fact that for some unexplained reason this matter sat idle in the Appeals Division from XXXXX, to the date of this decision, interest from that date to the date of this decision shall not accrue. It is so ordered.
DATED this 24 day of April, 1991.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
R. H. Hansen Roger O. Tew
Joe B. Pacheco G. Blaine Davis