97-065

Response November 18, 1997

 

 

REQUEST LETTER

 

October 13, 1997

 

Dear Commissioner Oveson:

 

I am writing on behalf of one of our marketer members, COMPANY A in Utah.

 

In 1993-94, he sold 380,000 plus gallons a month to the COMPANY B (COMPANY B). NAME was forced to buy a new, larger truck so they could haul more fuel and be able to fuel at two locations. In March 1995, the COMPANY B created a job for one individual to be responsible for the fueling of locomotives. The purpose is to cut costs and determine least expensive fueling locations.

 

During 1993-94, Utah's fuel prices were competitive with the surrounding states. Now, with the imposed Utah State sales tax on diesel fuel, Utah's prices are higher than in surrounding states by the sales tax imposed on locomotives. Due to the cost difference, COMPANY B will not fuel their locomotives in Utah. Westbound trains fuel in CITY or CITY, STATE, eastbound trains are fueled in CITY, STATE and southbound trains fuel in CITY, STATE.

 

As a result. COMPANY A has sold fewer and fewer gallons to the locomotives. What was once 380,000 gallons of fuel sold per month has dropped well over half to 108,000 - 150,000 gallons per month. Utah's economy is losing business and money.

 

A solution to this problem might be the following. If the Utah State Sales Tax was exempted from fueling of locomotives, Utah would be on a level playing field with the surrounding states. COMPANY B could resume fueling in Utah because it is more accommodating to their needs. The loss of sales tax from these purchases could be offset by the additional taxes collected by the creation of additional jobs to handle the increase in fuel sales.

 

The State needs to consider its loss and the loss of Utah fuel marketers, such as NAME, and exempt the sales tax on fuels for locomotives.

 

I appreciate your time and attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please feel free to

contact me at your convenience.

 

Sincerely,

 

NAME

Regulatory Affairs Director

 

RESPONSE LETTER

 

 

November 18, 1997

 

NAME

ADDRESS

CITY STATE ZIP

 

Advisory Opinion - Tax on sales of diesel fuel for use in locomotives

 

Dear NAME,

 

We have received your request for tax guidance pertaining to the tax on diesel fuel purchased for use in locomotives. We offer the following:

 

No special fuel tax is imposed or collected upon dyed diesel fuel that is sold and used for any purpose other than to operate or propel a motor vehicle on public highways. However, fuel that is exempt from the special fuels tax is subject to sales tax.

 

With regard to the special fuels tax, COMPANY A may purchase non-taxable dyed diesel fuel for use in locomotives. If COMPANY A is purchasing diesel fuel for both taxable and non- taxable use, it must purchase taxable undyed fuel. However, it is eligible for a refund on taxes paid on fuel that is actually sold and used to operate locomotives. In that case, COMPANY A must document the distribution of tax exempt fuel for off highway uses on its return or refund request.

 

You have raised a concern about tax exemptions on fuels in surrounding states. We understand your concerns, but the Tax Commission has no authority to legislate or to create tax exemptions. This matter should be addressed with the state legislature.

 

Please let us know if you have other questions.

 

For the Commission,

 

Joe B. Pacheco,

Commissioner

^^