94-018

Response March 3, 1995

 

 

Request

October 28, 1992

 

Attention: XXXXX

 

Dear XXXXX:

 

We have received a copy of your letter concerning the taxability of fracturing, acidizing and cementing of oil and gas wells pursuant to the Utah Supreme Court ruling of XXXXX Services versus State Tax Commission.

 

There are numerous differences in the way that XXXXX operates versus this case. XXXXX lumps the material and service charges on their billings and also includes the sales tax associated with the materials in this amount. Our work order contract states that we agree to sell the materials ordered by our customer and provide a service if desired. We separately state the materials and services on the billing. In addition, we do not include the sales tax in the price for the materials, but separately state the applicable tax. XXXXX claims that they are a real property contractor as far as cementing jobs are concerned while we claim to be a retailer of the materials in the state of Utah.

 

We have been audited by the State of Utah and they have accepted our methods of billing without exception. We conclude that our taxation of the above mentioned service jobs is correct as we would have to change our entire billing procedure to include us tax in our prices to operate as a contractor.

 

Please call XXXXX in our Tax Department at XXXXX if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further.

 

Thank you for using XXXXX.

 

Very truly yours,

 

XXXXX

Sales Tax Supervisor

 

 

June 21, 1994

 

Utah State Tax Commission

Attention: Mr. Joe Pacheco

160 East 3rd South

Salt Lake City, UT 84134

 

Resales Tax Determination Fracture/Stimulation Jobs

 

Dear Mr Pacheco:

 

Per Utah Supreme Court ruling No. 900368, XXXXX, XXXXX v State Tax Commission, we should not pay sales tax on fracture/stimulation jobs for Utah operations.

 

Our vendors of fracture/stimulation services have changed their billings accordingly and applied for refunds of overpaid sales tax with the exception of XXXXX. XXXXX response to our inquiry (copy attached) was that they feel the ruling does not apply to their operation.

 

We request a determination in this matter. We would appreciate your expediting the determination as we are losing statute. Please contact me at XXXXX if you have any questions Thank you.

 

Sincerely,

 

XXXXX

XXXXX

 

 

March 3, 1995

 

Re: Advisory Opinion - Sales Tax Application to Oil Well Fracturing and Stimulation Service

 

Dear XXXXX:

 

You requested an advisory opinion as to how sales tax applies to your purchases of fracturing/stimulation services from the XXXXX.

 

Our research indicates as follows:

 

1. The Supreme Court of the State of Utah in the case of XXXXX v. State Tax Commission, No. 900368, ruled that “the essence of XXXXX fracturing and acidizing services is providing services, not tangible personal property.” The chemicals consumed were found to be incidental to the services, and the charges by XXXXX for the services and chemicals used were therefore ruled exempt from the tax. Consequently, XXXXX was considered to be the consumer of the chemicals used and was liable for the tax on its cost of those chemicals.

 

2. In so far as XXXXX is providing the same services (hydraulic fracturing and acidizing) and using similar chemicals, the XXXXX case is controlling. The claim by XXXXX in their letter to you dated XXXXX (copy attached) that they “separately state the materials and services on the billing” and that they “do not include the sales tax on the price for the materials, but separately state the applicable tax,” does not change the application of the case. Neither the charges for the service nor the chemicals are taxable. XXXXX is considered the consumer of the chemicals so used and is liable for the tax on its cost of those chemicals.

 

3. It must be noted, however, that pursuant to Administrative Rule R865-19S-16 (copy attached) if the tax has been collected, it is properly due unless refunded to the customer.

 

This opinion is based upon the facts presented in your letter. 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 and a copy of the Utah Taxpayer Bill of Rights are attached.

 

Respectfully,

 

Alice Shearer

Commissioner