BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION
: FINDINGS OF FACT,
v. : CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
: AND FINAL DECISION
COLLECTION DIVISION OF THE :
UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, : Appeal No. 88-2536
This matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission pursuant to the Rules of Administrative Procedure and the Administrative Procedures Act for formal adjudicative proceedings on the XXXXX. James E. Harward, Presiding Officer, heard the matter for and in behalf of the Tax Commission. XXXXX appeared representing the Petitioners. XXXXX appeared representing the Respondent.
Based on the evidence and arguments presented at the hearing and the recommendation of the Hearing Officer, the Tax Commission makes its:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The tax in question is the illegal drug stamp tax.
2. The period in question is XXXXX.
3. The Petitioner did not contest the assessment. The Petitioner has requested leniency in consideration of the circumstances which govern the ability to pay his assessment.
4. The Petitioner, XXXXX, is presently incarcerated in jail and on a work release program. He is released in the morning and must return at night. He is presently earning $$$$$ bi-weekly. The Petitioners have XXXXX children ages XXXXX. The Petitioners have no checking or savings account. The Petitioner, XXXXX, has a XXXXX grade education and is a XXXXX by trade.
5. The Petitioner, XXXXX, works for XXXXX for $$$$$ an hour and XXXXX is attempting to keep a small store open but receives no wages from that. XXXXX has a XXXXX grade education with no trade or skills.
6. The Petitioners' automobiles and cash were seized by the State in the drug raid.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The tax assessment was properly calculated and computed according to Utah Code Ann. §§59-19-103 and59-19-106.
2. The Commission has jurisdiction to redetermine the entire amount of the deficiency and of all amounts assessed. (Utah Code Ann. §59-1-702(3).)
DECISION AND ORDER
The Petitioners have admitted to not having stamps on the illegal drugs in their possession. They have requested, however, that in light of their financial circumstances the assessment of $$$$$ be abated on the grounds that they barely have enough money to survive let alone pay any outstanding tax responsibility.
The tax and penalty were properly assessed according to statute. Now, because of fines, penalties, and confiscation of their property as a result of their activity in illegal drugs, the Petitioners seek some mitigation of the tax and penalty assessment. The Commission recognizes that it has jurisdiction to abate any portion to the extent that they feel the assessment is excessive in amount. However, the Commission finds that the assessment of the tax and penalty is not excessive; that it is the amount that the Legislature intended to be assessed under the circumstances. Further, the Tax Commission finds that with the income of the Petitioners that after the fines and obligations to the courts are completed, that a payment agreement may be made with the Tax Commission for the repayment of the assessment. The circumstances surrounding the economics of the Petitioners are not sufficient mitigating circumstances for the waiver or abatement of any of the tax and penalty. Therefore, it is the decision of the Utah State Tax Commission that the Petitioners' request be denied and that the assessment be affirmed in total. It is so ordered.
DATED this 19 day of June, 1989.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
R. H. Hansen Roger O. Tew
Joe B. Pacheco G. Blaine Davis