93-1408
Sales
Signed
5/24/94
BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX
COMMISSION
____________________________________
COLLECTION
DIVISION OF THE )
UTAH
STATE TAX COMMISSION, : FINDINGS OF FACT,
) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,
Petitioner, : AND FINAL
DECISION
)
v. :
)
XXXXX : Appeal Nos. 93-1408
XXXXX, ) through 93-1409
Respondent. : License Nos.
XXXXX
XXXXX
_____________________________________
STATEMENT OF
CASE
This matter came before the Utah State
Tax Commission pursuant to a petition by the Collection Division of the Utah
State Tax Commission for the revocation of license numbers XXXXX and XXXXX for
failure to comply with the laws of the state of Utah.
A Formal Hearing on the matter was
held on XXXXX. Lisa L. Olpin, Presiding
Officer, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present and representing the Petitioner was
attorney XXXXX. Present and
representing the Respondent was Assistant Attorney General 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.
Two sales and use tax licenses in question are: XXXXX issued to XXXXX
XXXXX and XXXXX issued to XXXXX.
3.
These entities are two separate corporations. According to Tax Commission records, the last return filed under
XXXXX was for the last quarter XXXXX.
The first return filed under XXXXX was for the second quarter
XXXXX. All subsequent filings to the
present have been under XXXXX.
4.
XXXXX, the owner of the two businesses, explained that he is in the
XXXXX building business. He sells XXXXX
materials for the construction of XXXXX buildings.
5. With a re-structuring of the business, Mr.
XXXXX now operates as XXXXX.
6.
Both the Collection Division and Mr. XXXXX stipulated to the tax,
penalty and interest amount due in this case which is approximately $$$$$.
7.
The Collection Division is requesting that the two licenses in question
be revoked for Respondents' failure to comply with the sales and use tax code
requiring remittance of taxes on a quarterly basis.
8.
A review of the sales and use tax account histories in question shows
that both corporations filed timely in nearly every instance. The problem is, and has been, that the
corporations fail to timely pay the tax due with the filed returns.
9.
On account XXXXX for the period XXXXX-XXXXX (8 quarters), Respondent
bounced seven checks. The first three
quarters of XXXXX were paid in full in XXXXX.
The next two quarters were paid on time. Then, the second quarter of XXXXX wasn't paid until the end of
XXXXX. The third quarter of XXXXX is
still outstanding ($$$$$). The fourth
quarter of XXXXX was paid in full on XXXXX.
10.
On account XXXXX for the period XXXXX-XXXXX (7 quarters), Respondent
bounced five checks. No tax was due for
the second, third and fourth quarters of XXXXX. For the first quarter of XXXXX, Respondent paid the taxes due on
XXXXX. The taxes due for the second
quarter of XXXXX are still owing ($$$$$).
Respondent also owes $$$$$ for the third quarter of XXXXX and $$$$$ for
the last quarter of XXXXX.
11.
The account histories for both sales tax licenses show that Mr. XXXXX
habitually sends the sales tax returns on time with a bad check.
12.
According to tax compliance agent XXXXX who has been assigned to these
accounts off and on since XXXXX, Mr. XXXXX eventually pays on the accounts
after a number of months, unfulfilled payment arrangements and numerous
appointments pass by. The continuing
late payments following returned checks is a pattern repeated over and over by
Mr. XXXXX.
13.
Mr. XXXXX did not dispute the fact that he has a poor payment history as
far as timeliness is concerned. He
explained that his cashflow problems are directly related to the type of
business he operates.
14.
Mr. XXXXX sells his goods to contractors who are supposed to pay him at
the completion of a job. If the contractor fails to pay, then Mr. XXXXX cannot
pay his liabilities, including Respondents' taxes.
15.
Mr. XXXXX reports that he owes taxes on Respondents' filed returns
because he has, in fact, sold goods to another. The fact that he reports the sales on the returns, however, does
not mean that he has been paid.
Respondent must wait until the contractor pays him. Hence, if there is any holdup in receiving
money due him from a contractor, Respondent gets further behind in meeting tax
obligations.
16.
Mr. XXXXX stated that he lost $$$$$ on two different jobs in XXXXX;
contractors walk out on jobs without paying him. He is awaiting the possible arbitration of another case this
summer.
17.
In his defense, Mr. XXXXX stated that he knows he owes the taxes and
reports the liability honestly every quarter.
Although he is always playing catch-up, he eventually does pay off the
delinquency amounts.
CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW
The Tax Commission shall revoke the
license of any person violating any provisions of the Sales Tax Act. (Utah Code Ann. '59-11-106(1).)
DECISION AND
ORDER
The Tax Commission finds sufficient
cause exists for the revocation of license numbers XXXXX and XXXXX. Therefore, it is the order of the Utah State
Tax Commission that these license numbers are hereby revoked for failure to
comply with the laws of the State of Utah and the petition is granted.
DATED this 24th day of May, 1994.
BY ORDER
OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
W. Val
Oveson Roger O. Tew
Chairman Commissioner
Joe B.
Pacheco Alice Shearer
Commissioner Commissioner
NOTICE: You have twenty (20) days after the date of
the final order to file a request for reconsideration or thirty (30) days after
the date of final order to file in Supreme Court a petition for judicial
review. Utah Code Ann. ''63-46b-13(1), 63-46b-14(3)(a).
^^