Nucor Corp., Nucor Steel Utah Div. v. Utah State Tax Com'n, STEEL--UTAH

Decision Date18 May 1992
Docket NumberSTEEL--UTAH,No. 900328,900328
PartiesNUCOR CORPORATION, NUCORDIVISION, Petitioner, v. UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, Respondent.
CourtUtah Supreme Court

Mark K. Buchi, Gary R. Thorup, Richard G. Wilkins, Salt Lake City, Murray Ogborn, Tim O'Neill, Denver, Colo., for petitioner.

R. Paul Van Dam, Brian Tarbet, Salt Lake City, for respondent.

HALL, Chief Justice:

Petitioner Nucor Corporation, Nucor Steel--Utah Division ("Nucor") seeks review of the order of the Utah State Tax Commission upholding a deficiency assessment against Nucor for sales and use taxes for the period October 1, 1984, through September 30, 1987, and denying its request for sales and use tax exemptions for its purchases of lance pipes, stirring lances and mill rolls used in the production of steel at its Utah facilities.

Nucor is engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing steel products at a steel mill located near Plymouth, Utah. It converts scrap metal and other materials into steel products which it sells to its customers. Nucor also sells or exchanges slag and scale, co-products of its operations, for consideration. The process of converting scrap metal into steel products takes place in three basic steps: melting scrap metal, refining the molten metal into steel by adding necessary reagents and removing undesirable impurities, and rolling or shaping the steel into the desired form.

To begin the melting process, Nucor places approximately 70 tons of scrap metal into an electric arc furnace. Next, it adds carbon graphite electrodes and charges them with high-voltage electricity. The electricity arcs between the electrodes and through the scrap metal, creating the intense heat necessary to melt the scrap metal. During this process, the carbon graphite electrodes melt in the heat and become an ingredient or component of the molten metal. Therefore, the carbon graphite electrodes serve the dual purpose of providing a charge for the melting process and providing carbon, a necessary strengthening agent, to the final steel product.

Nucor injects oxygen into the furnace to maintain sufficient heat during the melting process. Nucor inserts a one-inch diameter steel pipe, known as a lance pipe, through the door in the furnace and forces oxygen through the pipe. Because of the intense heat, the leading edge of the iron lance pipe melts inside the furnace and becomes part of the molten metal. As it does so, additional lance pipe is inserted into the furnace, much as a pencil is continually inserted into a pencil sharpener. One hundred percent of the lance pipe melts and becomes an ingredient of Nucor's finished steel product.

After the metals have melted, Nucor "taps" or opens the furnace using a quarter-inch steel lance pipe, which also feeds continuously into the furnace and melts into the finished product. Tapping increases the temperature in the furnace and allows molten metal to pour into a ladle for further refining and transportation. Nucor then lowers a stirring lance into the ladle and injects nitrogen and argon gas into the molten steel, causing impurities to rise to the surface and become part of the steel co-product known as slag. The stirring lance is an iron pipe 72 inches long and 1.9 inches in diameter. It is surrounded by a layer of ceramic material 3.5 inches thick. The stirring lance melts during this stirring process. The steel pipe portion of the stirring lance becomes part of the finished steel product, while the ceramic coating rises to the top of the ladle and becomes part of the slag.

After the refining process is completed, the ladle transports the molten metal to a continuous casting machine. This machine partially cools the metal and shapes it into pieces of steel approximately 6 inches high, 6 inches wide, and 27 feet long, known as billets. Rollers draw the billets through a series of mill stands and shape them into the forms requested by Nucor's customers. The mill stands consist of a drive mechanism and two mill rolls. The mill rolls are steel cylinders, cut by a lathe into a shape calculated to produce the desired steel product. The drive mechanism turns the two mill rolls in opposite directions to draw the billets through the cut. This shapes the billets to the desired form as they are drawn through successively smaller mill roll cuts.

As a result of the heat and pressure of the rolling process, the steel from the mill rolls wears off and transfers to the hot billets or flakes off as an iron oxide known as "scale." When a mill roll loses 12 percent of its original substance to the milling process, it must be replaced. Nucor then removes the mill roll from its mill stand and uses it as raw material or scrap in subsequent furnace loads.

On October 27, 1988, the Auditing Division of the Tax Commission issued a statutory notice of deficiency against Nucor for the period of October 1984 through September 1987, which concluded that Nucor's purchases of graphite electrodes, lance pipes, stirring lances, and mill rolls were subject to sales and use tax. The assessment issued to Nucor concluded that Nucor owed back sales and use taxes for its purchases of these items.

On November 23, 1988, Nucor timely filed a request for agency action protesting the audit report. Nucor asserted that Utah Code Ann. § 59-12-104(28) (1987) exempted its purchases from sales and use taxes. 1 A formal hearing was held on October 11, 1989. On June 7, 1990, the Commission issued its final decision, allowing the exemption for the purchase of graphite electrodes, but upholding the tax on the lance pipes, stirring lances, and mill rolls because Nucor's principal use of these items was as equipment, not as ingredients for its products. On July 9, 1990, Nucor deposited the deficient sales and use tax for its purchases of lance pipes, stirring lances, and mill rolls with the Commission and filed a petition for review of final agency action before this court.

The Utah Administrative Procedures Act (UAPA) governs our review of the Commission's decision. 2 Under UAPA, this court reviews an agency decision which interprets statutory law using the correction of error standard found in section 63-46b-16(4)(d), unless the legislature has granted the agency discretion in interpreting and administering the statute. 3 Agency discretion may be either express or implied and, if granted, results in review of the agency action for an abuse of discretion under section 63-46b-16(4)(h)(i). 4

Nucor claims exemption under section 59-12-104(28) of Utah's tax code. This section reads:

The following sales and uses are exempt from sales and use taxes imposed by this chapter:

....

(28) property purchased for resale in this state, in the regular course of business, either in its original form or as an ingredient or component part of a manufactured or compounded product.

The parties do not dispute that the stirring lances, lance pipes, and mill rolls are purchased in the regular course of business and become ingredients in Nucor's final product. The parties do dispute whether the items were "purchased for resale" under the meaning of the statute. Nucor contends that a proper interpretation of section 59-12-104(28) allows the exemption so long as Nucor had any intent, however incidental, to use the items as ingredients in its products. The Commission contends that the statute exempts only items purchased for the primary purpose of resale and that incidental use of the items in Nucor's product does not fit within the exemption. This case therefore turns on the scope of the "purchased for resale" requirement. Resort to traditional rules of statutory construction does not aid in determining this issue, 5 which appears to be a matter of policy that the legislature left to the Commission's discretion. 6 Therefore, the proper standard of review of the Commission's decision is the abuse of discretion standard found in section 63-46b-16(4)(h)(i). 7

The Commission construed the phrase "purchased for resale" narrowly, requiring that Nucor have resale as its primary purpose behind the items' purchase. As support for its interpretation, the Commission cited our decision in Union Portland Cement Co. v. State Tax Commission. 8 In Union Portland, we held that incidental ingredients which entered a product during the manufacturing process of cement were not exempt from use tax under the exemption statute then in effect. 9 We reasoned that the statutory exemptions went hand in hand with the sales and use tax statutes, with the purpose of placing the tax burden upon the ultimate consumers of products. 10 Under the scheme, a manufacturer or wholesaler that purchased items for resale could avoid the tax, which passed to the consumers upon their purchase of the finished product. 11 The determination of a purchaser's status as a consumer subject to tax or as a wholesaler or manufacturer exempt from taxation depended on the purchaser's use of the item and the reason for its purchase. 12

In the Union...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • King v. Industrial Com'n of Utah, 920464-CA
    • United States
    • Utah Court of Appeals
    • March 18, 1993
    ...court uses statutory construction as a tool in ascertaining whether an implicit grant of discretion exists. See, e.g., Nucor Corp. v. Tax Comm'n, 832 P.2d 1294 (Utah 1992) (applying reasonableness review to agency's interpretation of statutory language based on implicit grant because langua......
  • Luckau v. Board of Review of Indus. Com'n of Utah, 910715-CA
    • United States
    • Utah Court of Appeals
    • October 16, 1992
    ...rules of statutory construction, we find no implicit grant of discretion. See Morton, 814 P.2d at 589; Nucor Corp. v. Utah State Tax Comm'n, 832 P.2d 1294, 1296-1297 & n. 5 (Utah 1992); Ferro v. Utah Dep't of Commerce, 828 P.2d 507, 510 (Utah App.1992). We accordingly apply a correction of ......
  • Miller Welding Supply, Inc. v. Utah State Tax Com'n, Auditing Div.
    • United States
    • Utah Court of Appeals
    • September 2, 1993
    ...(1987) as implicitly limiting the tax imposed on "common carriers" under Utah Code Ann. § 59-12-103 (1987)); Nucor Corp. v. Utah State Tax Comm'n, 832 P.2d 1294 (Utah 1992) (upholding the Tax Commission's determination that "purchased for resale" under Utah Code Ann. § 59-12-104(28) (1987) ......
  • Bhatia v. Department of Employment Sec.
    • United States
    • Utah Court of Appeals
    • June 2, 1992
    ...after an unsuccessful attempt to interpret the statute through traditional rules of statutory construction); Nucor Corp. v. State Tax Comm'n, 832 P.2d 1294, 1296 (Utah 1992) (no implicit grant of discretion found until after supreme court concluded that traditional rules of statutory constr......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Utah Standards of Appellate Review
    • United States
    • Utah State Bar Utah Bar Journal No. 7-8, October 1994
    • Invalid date
    ...Equalization, 853 P.2d 894, 896 (Utah 1993); Zissi v. State Tax Comm'n, 842 P.2d 848, 852 (Utah 1992); Nucor Corp. v. State Tax Comm'n, 832 P.2d 1294, 1296 (Utah 1992); Questar Pipeline Co. v. State Tax Comm'n, 817 P.2d 316, 317 (Utah 1991). The Utah Supreme Court provided a detailed discus......
  • Utah Standards of Appellate Review – Revised [1]
    • United States
    • Utah State Bar Utah Bar Journal No. 12-8, October 1999
    • Invalid date
    ...from the statutory language. "Morton Int'l, Inc. v. Auditing Div., 814 P.2d 581, 589 (Utah 1991); accord Nucor Corp. v. State Tax Comm'n, 832 P.2d 1294,1296 (Utah 1992) (stating" [a]gency discretion may be either express or implied and, if granted, results in review of agency action for an ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT