Wiethop Truck Sales, Inc. v. Spradling
| Decision Date | 12 July 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 59211,No. 1,59211,1 |
| Citation | 538 S.W.2d 585 |
| Parties | WIETHOP TRUCK SALES, INC., et al., Respondents, v. James R. SPRADLING, Director of Revenue, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Clarence Thomas, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.
Joseph J. Russell, Limbaugh, Limbaugh & Russell, Walter S. Drusch, Jr., Spradling, Drusch & Dillard, Cape Girardeau, for respondents.
Respondents are in the business of selling trucks and truck trailers to be used for freight hauling. Respondent Wiethop Truck Sales, Inc. has its business in Cape Girardeau. Respondent Harris Truck and Trailer Sales, Inc. has places of business in both Cape Girardeau and Joplin. Both cities have adopted a 1% city sales tax pursuant to §§ 94.500--94.570, RSMo 1969.
The Department of Revenue assessed additional Cape Girardeau city sales taxes against Wiethop for $3,079.91, plus interest of $482.92, for a total assessment of $3,562.83 on sales of truck trailers. An additional assessment was made against Harris for Cape Girardeau city sales tax of $21,854.39, plus penalty of $2,185.44 and interest of $2,352.60, and Joplin city sales tax of $1,275.50 with a penalty of $127.55 and interest of $128.52, for a total assessment of $27,924.00, on sales of truck trailers.
Respondents filed petitions for reassessment. Appellant held that the assessments were correct. Respondents then filed a joint petition for review in the Circuit Court of Cape Girardeau County. The Circuit Court reversed the administrative decision and held that Respondents did not have a duty to collect or pay city sales tax on truck trailer sales. An appeal was then taken to this Court. We have jurisdiction because the case involves construction of the revenue laws of this state. Mo.Const., Art. V, § 3.
The question presented is whether Respondents are required to collect city sales tax on truck trailers which they sell.
We make the following preliminary observations:
(1) Section 94.510, RSMo 1969, a part of the City Sales Tax Act (§§ 94.500--94.570, RSMo 1969), authorizes incorporated cities, towns or villages with a population of five hundred or more to impose a sales tax 'on the receipts from the sale at retail of all tangible personal property * * * within any city adopting such tax * * *.'
(2) Section 94.540, RSMo 1969, provides generally that 'all retail sales shall be deemed to be consummated at the place of business of the retailer * * *.'
(3) Section 94.540, supra, also provides that '(a)ll applicable provisions contained in sections 144.010 to 144.510, RSMo, governing the state sales tax shall apply to the collection of the tax imposed by sections 94.500 to 94.570, except as modified in sections 94.500 to 94.570 * * *.'
(4) Section 144.070, RSMo 1969, provides that the collection of Missouri sales tax on sales of 'any new or used motor vehicle or trailer' shall be made by the state Director of Revenue at the time of application for an official certificate of title and registration.
We conclude from the above that § 144.070, supra, is incorporated by reference into the City Sales Tax Act and that the collection of a city sales tax on the sale of 'any new or used motor vehicle or trailer' shall be made by the Director of Revenue, except as modified by the City Sales Tax Act.
Appellant contends § 94.560, RSMo 1969, modifies § 144.070, supra, and imposes on the seller the duty of collection of a city sales tax on the sale of any new or used trailer. Section 94.560, supra, reads as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Goldberg v. Administrative Hearing Commission of Missouri
...the taxing authority and in favor of the taxpayer. Cascio v. Beam, 594 S.W.2d 942, 945 (Mo. banc 1980); Wiethop Truck Sales, Inc. v. Spradling, 538 S.W.2d 585, 586-87 (Mo.1976); O'Dell v. Division of Employment Security, 376 S.W.2d 137, 141-42 (Mo.1964); State ex rel. Benson v. Union Electr......
-
Smith Beverage Co. of Columbia, Inc. v. Reiss
...and as a taxing statute must be strictly construed in favor of the taxpayer and against the taxing authority. Wiethop Truck Sales, Inc. v. Spradling, 538 S.W.2d 585 (Mo.1976). On the other hand, § 144.615(6) establishes a Use Tax exemption as to tangible personal property held "solely for r......
-
Cascio v. Beam
...relating to taxation are to be narrowly construed in favor of the taxpayer and against the taxing authority. Wiethop Truck Sales, Inc. v. Spradling, 538 S.W.2d 585, 586-87 (Mo.1976); O'Dell v. Division of Employment Security, 376 S.W.2d 137, 141-42 (Mo.1964); State ex rel. Benson v. Union E......
-
Adams v. City of St. Louis, 59745
...of its terms is required. It is to be construed against the taxing authority and in favor of the taxpayer. Wiethop Truck Sales, Inc. v. Spradling, 538 S.W.2d 585, l.c. 587 (Mo.1976); Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. Campbell, 502 S.W.2d 354, 358 The term "earnings" has been defined as " 'th......