95-045

Response August 15, 1995

 

 

Request

July 25, 1995

 

Commissioners

Utah state Tax Commission

210 North 1950 West

Salt Lake City, UT 84134

 

Dear Commissioner:

 

Regarding: Charges for installation of machinery or equipment purchased or leased by a manufacturer for use in new or expanding operations.

 

Some questions have arisen from our in-house discussions of Section 59-12-103(1)(I) regarding the taxability of services to install tangible personal property in connection with other tangible personal property. We would appreciate your responding to the following requests:

 

1. For some time, we have been working under the assumption that the amount paid for labor to install machinery or equipment purchased or leased by a manufacturer for use in new or expanding operations is exempt from sales or use taxes. We have also assumed that the amount paid for labor to install a new segment that is not a replacement part to an existing piece of qualifying machinery or equipment is exempt from sales or use taxes.

 

Would you verify the accuracy of these assumptions.

 

2. It is our understanding that the rational for these exemptions is as follows: Since the amount paid for the tangible personal property in both of these situations is exempt under Section 59-12-104(15) of the Utah Code, the amount paid for labor to install such tangible personal property is also exempt.

 

Would you verify the accuracy of this understanding.

 

3. Although it appears that R865-19S-51 was not intended to address these exemptions, some of the provisions in that rule seem to apply as well. For example, Paragraph E refers to tangible personal property which is attached to real property but remains personal property. A piece of manufacturing machinery that remains tangible personal property but is connected to a power source and a water source in the building and which is bolted to the floor to keep it from vibrating could fit that description. And the provision in Paragraph e for exemption of installation charges would seem applicable to manufacturing machinery. The issue of separately stated charges, however, would be moot in this case since the purchase or lease of the equipment itself would be exempt.

 

Would you indicate whether or not Rule R865-19S-51 is appropriately applicable to the amount paid for installation of machinery or equipment purchased or leased by a manufacturer for use in new or expanding operations.

 

As always, thank you for taking the time to advise us.

 

Sincerely,

 

XXXXX

Research Consultant

 

 

August 15, 1995

 

XXXXX

 

RE: Installation charges associated with manufacturing equipment

 

Dear XXXXX,

 

We have received your request for an opinion regarding charges for installation of manufacturing equipment. Our research indicates the following:

 

Section 59-12-104(15) of the Utah Code exempts the sale or lease of qualified manufacturing equipment. Nothing in the statute’s language extends the exemption to installation charges. However, our experience indicates that installation charges are often included in the cost of the machinery or equipment. Under such circumstances, we have allowed the exemption for the entire charge. For purposes of consistency, we also allow the exemption if the installation charge is stated separately. Rule R865-19S-51 has no application to the installation of manufacturing equipment.

 

The manufacturing equipment exemption does not apply to “labor to repair, renovate, or clean machinery or equipment.” See Utah Administrative Rule R865-19S-85 (B). New parts installed to repair or renovate the machinery do not qualify for exemption, nor do charges for the installation. If a new segment is added to the existing machinery, it must qualify for exemption under the “new or expanding operations” test as described in R865-19S-85 (A)(3).

 

Tangible personal property does not necessarily lose its character as a personal property by mere attachment to real property. The question of whether personal property has been converted to real property is a case-specific determination requiring examination of the particular facts in each situation.

 

If you have further questions, please contact us.

 

For the Commission,

 

Alice Shearer

Commissioner