90-007

Response November 9, 1990

 

 

 

November 9, 1990

 

XXXXX

 

Re: Declaratory Judgment - Autoclaves

 

Dear XXXXX:

 

This letter is in response to your recent request for a Tax Commission ruling on whether Utah sales tax is due on the sale of two autoclaves manufactured in Utah and shipped to the final consumer in Nevada. You have stated that title will pass in Utah.

 

The Tax Commission policy is to initially treat all such inquires as requests for advisory opinions. As such, it was referred to the Tax Commission's Auditing Division for their analysis and recommendations. The division's recommendation is as follows:

 

1. Code Section 59-12-102(8)(a) defines a retail sale to mean "any sale within the state of tangible personal property ..." (emphasis added). §59-12-103 imposed sales tax on retail sales and such tax is due where the sale takes place regardless of where the property may later be taken for use. This position is supported by the rehearing by the United States Supreme Court in the 1962 case of Pacific States Cast Iron Pipe Co. vs the Utah State Tax Commission.

 

Administrative Rule R865-19-44S provides an exemption for sales made in interstate commerce. In order to qualify as an interstate sale, the seller must either physically deliver the products across the state line, or hire a common carrier to do it. It doesn't matter who pays the common carrier as long as the seller is the shipper.

 

In summary, if there is no way to structure the transaction to qualify as an interstate sale, Utah tax must be collected even though the state of Nevada will also collect tax.

 

Based upon the facts presented in your letter, we are in agreement with the Auditing Division's recommendations. Obviously, if there are deviations from these facts, this opinion may be negated.

 

If you do not agree with this determination, you may appeal to the Tax Commission for a formal hearing. The results of that hearing would constitute a declaratory judgment and be appealable to the Utah State Supreme Court. A Notice of Appeal Rights is attached.

 

For the Commission,

 

Joe B. Pacheco

Commissioner


MEMORANDUM

 

TO: XXXXX

 

FROM: XXXXX

 

DATE: October 19, 1990

 

SUBJECT: Request for Advisory Opinion

 

XXXXX has requested a declaratory judgment/advisory opinion on the tax exempt status of future sales of steel vessels manufactured in Utah for future shipment to Nevada.

 

Please respond according to the guidelines established by the Commission. Thank you.


August 7, 1990

 

STATE TAX COMMISSION

160 East 300 South

Salt Lake City, UT 84134

 

Gentlemen:

 

Subject: SALES TAX STATUS

 

Several weeks ago I contacted your department in regard to the tax consequences of our Company's future sale of a steel vessel that we will be manufacturing in Utah for future shipment to Nevada.

 

A representative with your department suggested that we get a formal ruling from your state as to whether the transaction would be subject to Utah State Sales Tax and that the ruling would be binding on all parties.

 

The facts are as I set forward:

 

- Our Company has contracted with a customer in Nevada to install two (2) Autoclaves and support vessels in the State of Nevada. An Autoclave is a steel pressure vessel which is used in the XXXXX Industry for pressure oxidizing gold ore. The steel vessels that will become part of the finished Autoclave are to be manufactured in Utah for shipment to Nevada. Our problem relates to passage of title. Title will pass in Utah. Would these steel vessels then be subject to Utah State Sales Tax?

 

- We have been informed by Nevada Taxing Authorities that the completed Autoclave will be subject to Nevada State Sales and Use Tax. Nevada doesn't grant credit for Sales Tax paid in other states. We, therefore, request a ruling as to the sales tax consequences of this transaction for the State of Utah.

 

If you need any additional information, please contact the writer.

 

Very truly yours,

 

XXXXX

Tax Accountant