93-007

Response April 28, 1993

 

 

Request

February 25, 1993

 

Commissioner Joe Pacheco

Utah State Tax Commission

Heber M. Wells

160 East 300 South

Salt Lake City, UT 84134

 

Re: Legal Ruling

 

The taxpayer requests assistance in determining proper sales/use tax treatment for the following transactions:

 

1. Taxpayer is lessor of tangible personal property. A copy of the lease document used in conjunction with this transaction is attached as Exhibit A.

 

2. The transaction is virtually identical to #1 above. However, a purchase requirement is added to the lease document. A copy of the lease document with the purchase requirement added is attached as Exhibit B. The amount specified in the purchase requirement will vary and can be anywhere from $1.00 to 20% of the original equipment cost set forth in the lease document.

 

3. The transaction is virtually identical to #1 above. However, a purchase option is added to the lease document. A copy of the lease document with the purchase option added is attached as Exhibit C. The amount specified in the purchase option will vary and can be anywhere from $1.00 to 20% of the original equipment cost set forth in the lease document.

 

4. The taxpayer sometimes will acquire payment streams from equipment vendors that may enter into any of the above three types of transactions. This is commonly done by using a “Master Assignment of Equipment Rental Agreements”, a copy of which is set forth in Exhibit D. The taxpayer requests to know not only the tax implications to him as the assignor (buyer) in this transaction but also any tax implications attributable to the assignee (seller).

 

5. The taxpayer enters into transactions whereby customers have the right to use tangible personal property in exchange for the purchase of a stipulated number of units of product. These type of arrangements are commonly referred to as upcharge agreements. A copy of the upcharge agreement is attached as Exhibit E.

 

6. The transaction is virtually identical to #5 above. However, an addendum is used in conjunction with the upcharge agreement that stipulates that title to the equipment will revert to the customer after a specified number of units of product are acquired.

 

For each of the foregoing transactions, please indicate if sales/use tax is due on the rental/usage payments when received, or at inception of the transaction either on the original equipment cost or on the gross payments due. Please send your reply to me at the following address.

 

XXXXX

 

If you have any questions or need some clarification concerning the above information, please feel free to call me at XXXXX.

 

Your attention to this matter will be greatly appreciated.

 

Yours truly,

 

XXXXX

 

 

MEMORANDUM

 

TO: XXXXX, Director

 

FROM: XXXXX, Secretary

 

DATE: XXXXX

 

SUBJECT: Request for Advisory Opinion - No. 93-007DJ

 

Attached is a request for an advisory opinion from XXXXX. Will you please review the request of XXXXX for assistance in determining proper sales/use tax treatment of equipment leases.

 

Please prepare the response for signature by the Commission as per the guidelines established by them.

 

Thank you.


 

 

April 28, 1993

 

XXXXX

 

Re: Advisory Opinion -- Sales or Use Tax Applicability to Certain Lease Transactions or “Upcharge Agreements”

 

Your request (copy attached) for an advisory opinion as to how sales or use tax applies to certain lease transactions and “upcharge agreements” was referred to the Auditing Division for their analysis.

 

The division's staff recommendations are as follows:

 

1. Under provisions of Utah Code Annotated Section 59-12-103 and Administrative Rule R865-19-32S (copy attached), leases of tangible personal property to final consumers are generally subject to the tax on the gross amount of each periodic lease payment. The responsibility for collecting, reporting, and remitting the tax is placed on the lessor and is not transferable to the lessee by provisions of the lease agreement. See attached copy of Tax Bulletin 2-91 and U.C.A. Section 59-12-107.

 

2. Adding a purchase requirement to the lease agreement, depending on the terms of the agreement, may allow treatment of the lease to be handled as a “conditional sale lease.” This treatment is at the option of the lessee. See Rule R865-19-32S, paragraphs F, G, and H.

 

3. When the agreement contains a purchase option rather than a purchase requirement, the treatment as a conditional sale lease is still available under the above referenced rule if the criteria of the rule are met.

 

4. When your client acquires payment streams from equipment vendors who have already entered into the above types of transactions, we would prefer administratively that the assignor (Buyer) would take over the tax collection and reporting responsibilities. However, unless title to the equipment transfers to the assignor, we would still hold the vendor responsible for tax should the assignor default. If title to the equipment does transfer to the assignor, the assignor is liable for any taxes due.

 

5. When the taxpayer enters into transactions under which customers have use of tangible personal property “in exchange for purchase of a stipulated number of units of product,” tax treatment will vary depending on the disposition of “product.” If the product is resale merchandise (for resale by the customer), the taxpayer (provider of the tangible personal property) is considered the consumer of the tangible personal property, and tax is due on the provider's material costs of such items. See Rule R865-19-68S. If the product is for taxable consumption by the customer, then the tangible personal property provided under the agreement considered part of the sale of the product, and no additional tax is due beyond that due on the sale of “the product.” See R865-19-68S(B).

 

Treatment is no different from the above if title transfers to customer after specified product volume is acquired.

 

Based upon the facts presented in your letter, we are in agreement with Auditing Division's recommendations. Obviously, if there are deviations from the 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 and a copy of the Utah Taxpayer Bill of Rights are attached.

 

In contacting the Tax Commission, if special accommodations are needed in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, please call (801) 530-6920, (801) 530-6077 or TDD (801) 530-6269 allowing three working days notice.

 

For the Commission,

 

Joe B. Pacheco

Commissioner