BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION
Petitioner, : FINDINGS OF FACT,
: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,
v. : AND FINAL DECISION
COLLECTION DIVISION OF THE : Appeal No. 90-0117
UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, :
: Account No. XXXXX
STATEMENT OF CASE
This matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission for a formal hearing on XXXXX. Joseph G. Linford, Presiding Officer, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present and representing the Petitioner were XXXXX.
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 fourth quarter of XXXXX.
3. Upon receiving their XXXXX bank statement, Petitioner called the Tax Commission offices to find out why their check for the period in question had not been cashed. They were told three separate times that there was no problem and that the account did not show any outstanding balances. Petitioner's bank informed the Petitioner that the check had been returned by the bank for lack of signature and not lack of funds. The check sent to the Tax Commission does not have a signature on it, however, the carbon copies of the check in Petitioner's possession do have a signature on them. It is not known why the check itself has no signature, but its carbon copies do. The signatures are carbon signatures and not original ones.
4. By letter dated XXXXX, the Tax Commission waived the penalty amounts for the period in question. Petitioner now requests a waiver of the interest amount.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Utah Code Ann. §§59-1-401 and59-1-402 provide that penalties and interest shall be assessed for the late filing or payment of taxes.
2. Utah Code Ann. §59-1-401(8) provides that upon reasonable cause shown, the Commission may waive or reduce penalties and interest assessed under the above statutes.
3. Such reasonable cause has not been shown in this case. The penalty has already been waived. Interest should not be waived because the State has not had the use of the funds in question for a period of time and should be compensated for that loss of use. Petitioner questions why interest continued to accrue even after Petitioner paid the tax amounts in question after learning of the difficulty with the original check. Interest continues to accrue because any payments are applied first to penalty amounts, then to interest, and lastly to tax amounts, so in this case there would have been some tax amount remaining upon which interest has continued to accrue to this date.
DECISION AND ORDER
Based upon the foregoing, it is the decision and order of the Utah State Tax Commission that Petitioner's request for waiver of interest is denied.
DATED this 28 day of August, 1990.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION
R. H. Hansen Roger O. Tew
Joe B. Pacheco G. Blaine Davis