South Shoe Mach. Co. v. Johnson
| Decision Date | 27 February 1963 |
| Citation | 159 Me. 74,188 A.2d 353 |
| Parties | SOUTH SHOE MACHINE CO., Inc. v. Ernest H. JOHNSON, State Tax Assesor. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
Berman, Berman, Wernick & Flaherty, Portland, for plaintiff.
Ralph W. Farris, Sr., John W. Benoit, Asst. Attys. Gen., Augusta, for defendant.
Before WILLIAMSON, C. J., and WEBBER, TAPLEY, SIDDALL, SULLIVAN, and DUBORD, JJ.
The defendant in his capacity as State Tax Assessor appeals from a decision of the Superior Court setting aside the imposition in 1960 of a tax on the 'use' of property owned by plaintiff. The plaintiff, a nonresident corporation, leased shoe machinery to resident lessees to be used by them in their business in this state. No sales tax was paid on the sale of the property to the owner-lessor. Upon the facts disclosed by the record the plaintiff has correctly stated the issue to be 'whether the lessor, having leased the machinery for use by lessees within the State of Maine, being an out of state corporation not qualified to do business in Maine and not having transacted any business in Maine, and having done nothing in Maine with respect to this machinery while located in Maine, can be said to have exercised in this state any right or power over this tangible personal property incident to its ownership thereof.'
In Trimount Coin Machine Co. v. Johnson, State Tax Assessor, 152 Me. 109, 124 A.2d 753, we held that under such circumstances there was no taxable use by the owner-lessor in Maine within the meaning of the statute. The learned justice below, finding no distinguishing facts, concluded that Trimount governed in the instant case. The defendant, while recognizing that the matter before us is indistinguishable, urges that we reconsider and overrule Trimount.
Sec. 4 of R.S. Ch. 17 imposed a tax 'on the storage, use or other consumption in this state of tangible personal property, purchased at retail sale.' Sec. 2 defined 'use' as follows: "Use' includes the exercise in this state of any right or power over tangible personal property incident to its ownership when purchased by the user at retail sale.' In Trimount we held in effect that except as provided in the foregoing definition the word 'use' as employed in the language of the act would be given its ordinary meaning and the lessee in Maine under a lease giving him full possession and control of the property would be deemed to be the sole user. The nonresident lessor would be deemed to 'use' the property in Maine within the meaning of the statute only if he exercised some right or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Union Oil Co. of Cal. v. State Bd. of Equalization
...a 'use' within the state. (Trimount Coin Machine Co. v. Johnson (1956) 152 Me. 109, 124 A.2d 753; South Shoe Machine Co., Inc. v. Johnson (1963) 159 Me. 74, 188 A.2d 353.) 'The use and possession of the property in Maine in its entirety is, and at all times had been, in the lessee or custom......
-
Realco Services, Inc. v. Halperin
...right or power over the property within the statutory definition of 'use'.' 152 Me. at 113, 124 A.2d at 756. South Shoe Machine Co. v. Johnson, 159 Me. 74, 188 A.2d 353 (1963), involved a use tax assessed against a non-resident lessor of shoe machinery which was used within the State of Mai......
-
Commercial Leasing, Inc. v. Johnson
...exercised in this state any right or power over the property within the statutory definition of 'use.' In South Shoe Machine Co. Inc. v. Johnson, 159 Me. 74, 76, 188 A.2d 353, 354, a nonresident corporation leased shoe machinery to resident lessees to be used by them in their business in th......
-
Automatic Canteen Co. of America v. Johnson
...us.' Here we have evidence of acts by the appellant within Maine--facts not present in Trimount or in South Shoe Machine Co., Inc. v. Johnson, State Tax Assessor, Me., 188 A.2d 353. The employees of the appellant Automatic Canteen Company of America coming into Maine were interested in and ......