BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION
Petitioner, : FINDINGS OF FACT,
: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,
v. : AND FINAL DECISION
COLLECTION DIVISION OF THE : Appeal No. 89-2622
UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, : Account No. XXXXX
STATEMENT OF CASE
This matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission for a formal telephone hearing on XXXXX. Joseph G. Linford, Presiding Officer, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present and representing the Petitioner was XXXXX. Respondent was not represented at the hearing.
Based upon the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, the Tax Commission hereby makes its:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The tax in question is sales and use tax.
2. The period in question is the second quarter of XXXXX.
3. Petitioner was required to make a prepayment of its sales and use tax for the period in question but did not do so in a timely manner. This also occurred for the same quarter in the years XXXXX and XXXXX, and for both of those years the Commission granted a waiver of the penalty. In the Commission's letter dated XXXXX, which waived the penalty for the second quarter of XXXXX, the following paragraph is included:
XXXXX will be liable for making
timely pre-payments on the XXXXX quarter of sales tax in the future.
4. Petitioner feels that since the above provision was in the letter dated XXXXX, which is well beyond the due date for the prepayment for the second quarter of XXXXX, Petitioner should not be held to that "agreement" for the period in question. Petitioner therefore, requests that penalty in this case be waived.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Tax Commission is granted the authority to waive, reduce, or compromise penalties and interest upon a showing of reasonable cause. (Utah Code Ann. §59-1-401(8).)
DECISION AND ORDER
Reasonable cause has not been shown for waiver of the penalty in this case. By this time, the Petitioner should have been well aware of the requirement to pay the prepayment and should have been complying with that requirement. This is a requirement of the law independent of any so called "agreement" which might have postdated the due date for the prepayment for the period in question. Petitioner knew or should have known of this requirement with or without any "agreement" stated in the XXXXX, letter. It should also be noted that this "agreement" was not so much an agreement as a reiteration by the Tax Commission of the requirement for the Petitioner to make the prepayment as required by law.
Based upon the foregoing, it is the decision and order of the Utah State Tax Commission that Petitioner's request for waiver of penalty is denied.
DATED this 20th day of August, 1990.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
R. H. Hansen Roger O. Tew
Joe B. Pacheco G. Blaine Davis