96-105

Response July 10, 1996

 

 

Request

June 17, 1996

 

Val Oveson, Chairman

Utah State Tax Commission

210 North 1950 West

Salt Lake City, UT 84134

 

RE: Request for Advisory Opinion

 

Dear Commissioner Oveson,

 

The Salt Lake County Assessor's Office is requesting an advisory opinion from the Tax Commission regarding personal property tax assessments on firms engaged in the “Rent-to-Own” industry. It has come to light that firms involved in this type of transaction are reporting their taxable property using various methodologies, resulting in unequal assessments for similarly situated taxpayers. There are also pending appeals on this issue for 1994 at the state level and for 1995 at the local level.

 

The businesses in question rent electronics, furniture, appliances, and other household items to individuals on a month-to-month or week-to-week basis. The renter can become the owner of the property upon completion of a specified number of payments, but title to the property remains with the business until all purchase options have been completed. The renter can return the property at the end of any rental period without further obligation as long as rental payments are up to date. No interest is charged, but the total price to the customer if he completes the full agreement is much higher than a regular retail purchase to account for the extra risk involved in the transaction. A copy of an agreement used by a local firm is attached. It is representative of the contract used by other businesses in this industry.

 

The argument has been made by the taxpayer that the property subject to this type of agreement is exempt as inventory because the intent of the parties is that the renter eventually becomes the owner. However, Rule 884-24P-33, paragraph ”D,” states:

 

“D. Other taxable personal property that is not included in the listed classes includes:

 

1. Supplies on hand as of January 1 at 12:00 noon, including office supplies, shipping supplies, maintenance supplies, replacement parts, lubricating oils, fuel and consumable items not held for sale in the ordinary course of business. Supplies are assessed at total cost, including freight-in.

 

2. Equipment leased or rented from inventory is subject to ad valorem tax. Refer to the appropriate property class schedule to determine taxable value.

 

3. Property held for rent or lease is taxable and is not exempt as inventory. Entities engaged in a combination of direct sales, leases or rental, or rent-to-own may establish an exemption for inventory by filing form TC-595 with the county assessor in the county where the property has situs by February 1.” (Emphasis added)

 

In light of the above administrative rule, we would appreciate an advisory opinion regarding the following questions:

 

1. Is the personal property which is in a customer's possession but still owned by the business and subject to a rent-to-own contract, taxable or exempt from ad valorem personal property tax in Utah? Are there any distinctions to be made for property subject to a “rent-to-own” agreement versus property subject to purely a rental or lease agreement?

 

2. If taxable, at what level of trade should the property be reported to the assessor; the historical cost to the merchant, the value placed on the property pursuant to the rent-to-own contract, or the normal retail price of the item if purchased through conventional means?

 

3. In establishing an exemption for “inventory” the taxpayer may file form TC-595 with the county assessor. We would appreciate an explanation of each line item of the form and what values from the taxpayer's financial statements should be used for each. A copy of the TC-595 form is attached.

 

1. Merchandise on Hand January 1, 19 _

2. Total Utah Sales 19 _

3. Total line 1 and line 2

4. Total Utah leased or rentals 19 _

5. Taxable Inventory (divide line 4 by line 3)

 

A. Does “merchandise on hand” only include that property which is not subject to a rental agreement, or does it have a broader meaning to include all “inventory” the merchant owns, including that subject to rental agreements?

 

B. What does the word “Sales” mean in this context? Is this just the revenue from outright sales, or does it include rental revenue from those contracts “paying off” within a certain period of time, or all rental income from each contract which pays off within the past calendar year?

 

C. Why are lines 1 and 2 added together?

 

D. What does “Total Utah leased or rentals” mean?

 

E. Upon calculation of the exemption percentage, to what amount or line does it apply?

 

4. Paragraph three of the Administrative Rule states, “Property held for rent or lease is taxable, and is not exempt as inventory.” Please explain what is meant by “held for rent or lease.”

 

5. For those customers who complete the required number of payments to assume ownership during any year, or have rented for some period and then pay a lump sum to become the owner of the property, is this counted as “rental income” or “sales income” on the TC-595 form?

 

6. According to the TC-595 form, if a firm receives more revenue from rental than from direct sales, as is the case with the rent-to-own industry, the taxable percent of inventory is greater than 100%. Applying this percentage to the inventory figure would result in more than 100% of the inventory being taxable. See Example A.

 

7. What is the proper classification for rent-to-own property; the class based on the description of the property, Class 3 (small equipment rentals), or Class 1(or some other value) based on the higher abuse the taxpayer's claims the equipment receives?

 

Since the Salt Lake County Assessor's Office has had to deal with this issue with several rent-to-own companies, we have interpreted the administrative rule and TC-595 form as follows:

 

The rule specifically states that property leased or rented from inventory is subject to ad valorem tax. We take this to include “rent-to-own” property as well, and do not differentiate from short term rentals (one or two days) versus the longer term “rent-to-own” agreements. It is our opinion that form TC-595 form is used to establish an exemption from taxation based on the percent of total revenue attributed to outright sale of product for the previous calendar year. This calculation needs four components: the total inventory of the merchant (this would include all property on hand as of Jan 1 and would include property on rent, since that property has not yet been sold), gross revenue from the prior year derived from the outright sale of merchandise (should not include any rental income in any form), the gross revenue from all forms of rental for the prior year, and the total of the sales and rental revenue. Dividing the sales revenue and rental revenues by the total revenue will give a percent, which when applied back against the inventory figure will result in the amount of inventory exempt and taxable.

 

The amount of property exempted will differ greatly if “merchandise on hand” is interpreted to exclude property subject to rental agreements. Including property subject to rental contracts will allow the exemption calculation to apply to inventory out on rent to account for the eventual sale of this property. It is our opinion that the TC-595 form in its present format does not yield a result which is accurate, logical, or mathematically correct.

 

In the alternative to a confusing and easily misinterpreted TC-595 form, might we suggest an easier and more understandable methodology for both parties. Exempt property for a rent-to-own establishment would be property on the floor or warehoused which is awaiting sale or rental as of Jan 1 of any year. Taxable property would then only be that property subject to a rental agreement as of the same date. This information is readily available from the firm's financial records as of the year end. However, this methodology would treat rent-to-own firms differently from the short-term equipment rental firms where all the inventory is taxable because it is all “held for rent.”

 

An advisory opinion on this issue would assist this office and other assessors statewide to uniformly assess this property. Taxpayers and assessing personnel have interpreted the rule and the form quite differently since no instructions or definitions have been set forth for their implementation and the TC-595 form in its present format yields incorrect results. A revised TC 595 form is attached, which yields what we believe to be the correct exemption percentage.

 

Sincerely,

 

XXXXX

 

 

July 10, 1996

 

XXXXX

 

Re: Advisory opinion request

 

Dear XXXXX

 

We have received your request for an advisory opinion on the taxation of property leased under a “rent to own agreement.” Although you raise an interesting issue, you also mention that this issue is being raised in two appeals; one that is before the Commission and one that may come to us in the future on appeal from the county’s decision. If we accepted your advisory opinion request, we would, in effect, be allowing you to argue your case outside the appeals process while denying the petitioner an opportunity to respond. Therefore, it is our policy to decline to issue an advisory opinion on any matter that is pending before the Commission on appeal. We think you will agree that the appeal process is a much better forum for addressing these matters and for allowing all parties in interest an opportunity to be heard.

 

We regret that we are unable to fulfill this request. We hope the appeal decisions in question will be helpful to you.

 

For the Commission,

 

Alice Shearer,

Commissioner