BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX
COMMISSION
_________________________________
In Re: ) FINDINGS
OF FACT,
: CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW,
XXXXX ) AND FINAL DECISION
:
: Appeal No.
90-1108
: 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 were
XXXXX and 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 tax.
2.
The period in question is the second quarter of XXXXX.
3.
Petitioner's employee who was primarily responsible for filing sales tax
returns was on extended maternity leave during and after the period in
question. Because this employee's pregnancy was difficult, the maternity leave
was longer than Petitioner had expected.
Petitioner had originally expected the employee to be able to return to
work in time to file and pay the sales tax prepayment for the period in
question. The employee was not able,
however, to return in time to make the prepayment.
4.
During the same period, the employee who had been trained as the original
employee's backup resigned from employment with Petitioner. A new employee was, therefore, assigned to
the duties of the original employee, but the new employee had not had adequate
training. Additionally, others in the
office who may have advised this new employee were transferred to new jobs or
involved in other aspects of a change in Petitioner's organization.
5.
On XXXXX, Petitioner's largest division was sold to a newly formed partnership
which necessitated a separation between Petitioner's records and those of the
sold division, which included the reporting of sales and use taxes. All of these occurrences combined with the
new employee's lack of knowledge contributed to the new employee's failure to
make the prepayment in a timely manner.
6.
Petitioner timely received a prepayment tax return from the Tax Commission, but
Petitioner contends that the new employee did not recognize it as a prepayment
return. The original employee returned
to work for Petitioner in XXXXX but did not realize that the prepayment had not
been made for the period in question and was at that time past due.
7.
A letter from the Auditing Division of the Tax Commission, dated XXXXX,
notified Petitioner that the prepayment for the period in question had not been
made and also notified Petitioner of the imposition of penalty and interest
charges because of the nonpayment.
8.
For the second quarter of XXXXX, Petitioner was also untimely in remitting a
prepayment. The penalty for that
untimely prepayment was waived.
9.
Petitioner timely made the prepayment for the second quarter of XXXXX.
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
Petitioner
had been required in the past to make the necessary prepayment and has already
had the penalty previously waived for an untimely remittance of a
Prepayment. Petitioner was on notice
that the prepayment was due and Petitioner had a duty to ensure that whichever
employee was managing the remittance of sales taxes was aware of the prepayment
requirement and would make the prepayment in a timely fashion.
Based
upon the foregoing, the Tax Commission finds that sufficient cause has not been
shown which would justify a waiver of the penalty and interest associated with
the second quarter of XXXXX. It is so
ordered.
DATED
this l5 day of February, 1991.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
R. H. Hansen Roger
O. Tew
Chairman Commissioner
Joe B.
Pacheco G.
Blaine Davis
Commissioner Commissioner