Sine v. State Tax Commission
| Citation | 15 Utah 2d 214,390 P.2d 130 |
| Decision Date | 13 March 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 10012,10012 |
| Parties | d 214 Jerry SINE and Dora Sine, Plaintiffs, v. STATE TAX COMMISSION of Utah, Defendant. |
| Court | Utah Supreme Court |
Wesley Sine, Ronald C. Barker, Salt Lake City, for plaintiff.
A. Pratt Kesler, Atty. Gen., George J. Romney, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salt Lake City, for defendant.
Review of a Tax Commission assessment under an act commonly known as the Use Tax Act of 1937, 1 incident to the furnishing by Sines, motel owners, to their paying guests, of linen, towels, mattress covers, blankets, wash rags, soap, post cards, drinking glass covers, toilet bands, stationery and magazines purchased from out-of-state sources, the Sines claiming the items mentioned were exempt from the use tax under 59-16-4(h) 2, as to all items mentioned, except magazines, which latter, they urge, are exempted under the definition of 'newspapers' under 59-15-4(b)(1) 3. Affirmed.
Under the wording of 59-16-4(h) it appears reasonable to conclude,--which we do, that the legislature did not contemplate an exemption of soap, linen, wash rags and the like procured from out-of-state sources, incident to normal motel service, as being in the aggregate 'manufactures or compounds' for resale. Sines urge otherwise, of course. Nonetheless, we venture a guess that motel owners include any cost they are put to by paying a use tax on such claimed exempt property, by including in the daily room rental charge an amount sufficient to absorb it. In the last analysis, they are collectors of the tax for the State, and the cost of such items is chargeable off as a business expense anyway. Any complaint about double taxation is not theirs, but is legitimate and assertable, if at all, by the consumer,--their guest,--who, generally speaking pays all of the ancillary taxes involved in the privilege of obtaining a little sleep.
The Sines say the elemental question is 'who consumes the property, the manufacturer or the ultimate users?' We agree that this is the question. We have difficulty, nonetheless, in visualizing a motel owner as a manufacturer, or of concluding that the legislature contemplated his status as being a 'manufacturer' in the ordinary connotation of that term. It is unrealistic to believe that such an owner, dealing in housing accommodations, is a fabricator of a canned product consisting of soap, towels, wash rags, radio service, ice, bell-hops, maids, unworn carpets, pictures and drapes, in the sense that it is all a sort of Lydia E. Pinkham's Vegetable Compound placed on the market in a bottle. In so concluding we are constrained to hold that the motel owner is the ultimate consumer under the letter and spirit of the use tax act. We seem to be substantiated by our own and other...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
BJ-Titan Services v. State Tax Com'n, BJ-TITAN
...Inc. v. Utah State Tax Comm'n, 802 P.2d 715 (Utah 1990); Hardy v. State Tax Comm'n, 561 P.2d 1064 (Utah 1977); Sine v. State Tax Comm'n, 15 Utah 2d 214, 390 P.2d 130 (1964); Barrett Inv. Co. v. State Tax Comm'n, 15 Utah 2d 97, 387 P.2d 998 (1964); Ralph Child Constr. Co. v. State Tax Comm'n......
-
Appeal of AT & T Technologies, Inc.
...Dec. 67, 356 N.E.2d 67 (1976); Kentucky Board of Tax Appeals v. Brown Hotel Company, 528 S.W.2d 715 (Ky.1975); Sine v. State Tax Commission, 15 Utah 2d 214, 390 P.2d 130 (1964). 'The general theme of all of these cases is that when the primary function and purpose of the taxpayer is to prov......
-
J & B Pub. Co. v. Secretary, Dept. of Rev.
...these items to guests could not be considered separate transactions for sales tax purposes. Similarly, in Sine v. State Tax Commission of Utah, 15 Utah 2d 214, 390 P.2d 130 (1964), the court considered the imposition of sales tax upon a hotel for its purchase of linen, towels, mattress cove......
-
25,690 La.App. 2 Cir. 3/30/94, S & R Hotels v. Fitch
...these items to guests could not be considered separate transactions for sales tax purposes. Similarly, in Sine v. State Tax Commission of Utah, 15 Utah 2d 214, 390 P.2d 130 (1964), the court considered the imposition of sales tax upon a hotel for its purchase of linen, towels, mattress cove......