94-1570

Tourism

Signed 3/23/95

BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION

____________________________________

XXXXX, )

XXXXX, :

Petitioner, : ORDER

:

v. : Appeal No. 94-1570

:

COMPLIANCE AUDITING UNIT ) Account No. XXXXX

COLLECTION DIVISION OF THE :

UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, :

Respondent. : Tax Type: Tourism

_____________________________________

STATEMENT OF CASE

This matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission for a Settlement Conference pursuant to the provisions of Utah Code Ann. §59-1-502.5, on XXXXX. G. Blaine Davis, Administrative Law Judge, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present and representing Petitioner on the telephone was XXXXX XXXXX. Present and representing Respondent was XXXXX from the Compliance Auditing Unit of the Collection Division of the Utah State Tax Commission.

The matter was originally noticed as a Prehearing Conference, but upon discussion of the matter, both parties agreed that there were no factual disputes and that the Prehearing Conference should be converted to a Settlement Conference and an Order entered thereon.

The petitioner operates a XXXXX which is located in XXXXX. The XXXXX is operated by XXXXX, and the management is located in XXXXX.

When XXXXX enacted its tourism tax in XXXXX, Petitioner did not receive any notice of the adoption of such a tax. The lack of Notice was because of their XXXXX showing Petitioner as a XXXXX, and the XXXXX did not indicate that they had XXXXX. In addition, the address of XXXXX was apparently listed on Tax Commission records as being located within XXXXX instead of XXXXX, so the computer did not give them any notice of the adoption of the XXXXX XXXXX tourism tax.

An audit was performed on the business for the period XXXXX, and determined that Petitioner had failed to collect and remit tourism tax in the amount of $$$$$ plus interest due thereon. Petitioner does not dispute that the amount is correct if Petitioner had collected the tax, but represents that they had no knowledge of the tax so they did not collect the tax.

Respondent has concurred and also requested the Tax Commission to grant the petitioner's request because of the lack of notice to them to collect the tax.

Petitioner is current in all required tax filings, and since they received notice of the imposition of the tourism tax, they have timely and properly filed returns showing the amounts of tax due, and have paid the amount of tourism tax due thereon.

DECISION AND ORDER

Based upon the information presented at the conference, and the records of the Tax Commission, the Tax Commission determines that because of the lack of notice being given to Petitioner, and because Petitioner did not collect the tax and would otherwise be required to pay the tax from its own pocket, and further because they have complied faithfully with the requirement to collect and remit the taxes since they became aware of such requirement, the Tax Commission determines that tourism tax imposed by the audit of Petitioner should be abated, and hereby grants the Petition For Redetermination of the petitioner.

This decision does not limit a party's right to a formal hearing. However, this Decision and Order will become the Final Decision and Order of the Commission unless any party to this case files a written request within thirty (30) days of the date of this decision to proceed to a Formal Hearing. Such a request shall be mailed to the address listed below and must include the Petitioner's name, address, and appeal number:

Utah State Tax Commission

Appeals Division

210 North 1950 West

Salt Lake City, Utah 84134

Failure to request a Formal Hearing will preclude any further administrative action or appeal rights in this matter.

DATED this 23rd day of March, 1995.

BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION

W. Val Oveson Roger O. Tew

Chairman Commissioner

Joe B. Pacheco Alice Shearer

Commissioner Commissioner

^^