home home Find a law or rule home Tax Research Index home Research Index Files home TRI212-229_files home Tax Research Index Tax Research Index
WAC 229 Refunds.      
WAC: 458-20-229   02/01/1993 Refunds.Effective 3/4/93
    08/13/2007 WAC 458-20-229
    07/24/2008 WAC 458-20-229
RCW: 82.08.050   1993 Buyer to pay, seller to collect tax--Statement of tax--Exception--Penalties.
  82.32.060   1992 Excess payment of tax, penalty, or interest-Credit or refund-Payment of judgments for refund.
  3106.2009 2/2/09 Refunds of over collected retail sales tax
  299.32.229 12/16/66 RETAIL SALES TAX REFUNDS This advisory explains that a seller is not entitled to a refund of improperly collected sales tax unless the seller has first refunded the tax to the customer, and that the customer must secure a refund of tax overpayment from the seller. Cancelled effective 6/30/04. Subject matter is discussed in rule WAC 229. Additionally, ETA 299 explanation that both the seller and the customer have two years to seek a refund of sales taxes is incorrect. Rule 229 correctly notes that the statutory period for claiming a refund is four years after the close of the tax year in which the tax was paid.
  2025.08.229   6/30/05 Refunds of over collected retail sales tax Revised 2/2/09 See ETA 3106.2009
Customized Training Program 06/06/2012 B&O Tax Credit for Washington Customized Training Program Extended
Incentives 06/06/2012 B&O Tax Credit for Washington Customized Training Program Extended
Spirits Tax 08/30/2012 Claims of Constitutional Impairment of Contract made under Initiative 1183
Spirits Tax 03/01/2012 Questions and Answers on Spirits Tax for Retailers
Customized Training Program, Incentives     05/05/2006 B&O Tax Credit and Training Assistance for New and Expanding Businesses (Other Reference Rule 101 and Misc)
IAG: 02.01   01/01/2001 Refunds of Retail Sales Tax Collected in ErrorCancelled effective June 30, 2005 - See ETA 2025
DIRECTIVE: None      
RPM: None      
WTD: 1 WTD 1 85-164A   REFUNDS, CREDITS AND OFFSETS -- NONCLAIM PERIOD -- PROPER AMOUNT DUE -- ADDITIONAL TAXES DUE. In order to determine whether additional taxes are due under RCW 82.32.050, any amounts earlier overpaid but now barred by the nonclaim period are not considered in the determination of the proper amount due. Guy F. Atkinson & Co and Puget Sound Power & Light Co.distinguished.
  1 WTD 1 85-164A   REFUNDS, CREDITS AND OFFSETS -- NONCLAIM PERIOD. Under the current version of RCW 82.32.050 and 82.32.060, offsets or their economic equivalence are no longer permitted. Guy F. Atkinson & Co and Puget Sound Power & Light Co.distinguished.
  2 WTD 127 87-4   RETAIL SALES TAX -- REFUND -- SELLER TO COLLECT TAX -- ETB 132. RCW 82.32.050 imposes a duty upon each seller to collect the retail sales tax from the buyer. Seller not entitled to a refund of sales tax that had been remitted to the Department because buyer was refusing to pay seller the tax that was due.
  3 WTD 435 84-256   RETAIL SALES TAX -- CREDIT -- REFUND -- NONCLAIM PERIOD -- PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENT WITHIN FOUR YEARS. The language of RCW 82.32.060 does not mandate a netting of all individual excise taxes coming under the purview of Title 82 RCW before determining the amount of any overpayment which may have been made within nonclaim period. The use of the article "a" modifying "'tax" mandates that taxes which have been "overpaid" be calculated on a "tax by tax" basis, without regard to any erroneous overpayments of other individual taxes.
  4 WTD 197 49WNAPP532   SALES TAX -- REFUND -- SELLER'S STATUS. A seller receives a sales tax refund as a trustee of the buyer and may not benefit it from it. RCW 82.08.050.
  4 WTD 197 49WNAPP532   EXCISE TAX -- INTEREST RATE -- DIFFERENCE BETWEEN UNDERPAYMENT AND REFUND -- VALIDITY. The fact that the interest rate on an excise tax delinquency under RCW 82.32.050 is greater than the interest rate paid on an excise tax refund under RCW 82.32.060 does not violate a taxpayer's equal protection rights.
  5 WTD 93 88-40   B & OREFUNDS - SELF HELP - PENALTY -EVASION. There is no statutory authority for self help refunds. Where a taxpayer willfully withholds any properly due excise taxes (such as B&O taxes or collected retail sales taxes) under an unverified claim that the taxpayer is entitled to a refund, without first having followed the Legislature's prescribed procedure for refunds, then the evasion penalty shall apply. F.I.D.
  7 WTD 11 88-383   REFUND -- NON-CLAIM PERIOD. The Department of Revenue does not have authority to grant a credit or refund of taxes paid in error unless the request is made within the statutory time period. Guy F. Atkinson Co. v. State, cited.
  7 WTD 303 89-212   REFUNDS, CREDITS AND OFFSETS -- NONCLAIM PERIOD -- STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS WAIVER AGREEMENT. Refund claim made in 1989 for taxes paid in 1983 is barred by RCW 82.32.060. No exception made because taxpayer had executed a Statute of Limitations Waiver Agreement for 1983.
  8 WTD 149 89-389   REFUNDS -- CREDITS -- NONCLAIM PERIOD -- "EXAMINATION OF RECORDS" CONSTRUED. An "examination of records," as used in RCW 82.32.060 pertains solely to the audit function, and is complete when an assessment is issued.
  9 WTD 286-69 80-175   REFUNDS -- CREDITS -- FOUR YEAR LIMITATION -- SALES TAXES PAID BEYOND FOUR YEAR LIMITATION. No refund or credit may be made for taxes paid more than four years prior to the beginning of the calendar year in which the refund or credit is sought, or examination of records by the Department is completed. Where Department assessed an unregistered taxpayer beyond the four year limitation, any overpayment or incorrect payment of taxes beyond the four year limitation is not allowed as a credit to offset taxes assessed.
  11 WTD 67 80-298   NON -- CLAIM PERIOD -- TAX ASSESSMENT -- DETERMINING AMOUNT OF USE TAX PROPERLY DUE -- OVERPAYMENTS. In computing the amount of additional use tax "properly due" for a tax assessment, an auditor must take into consideration all use tax liability and all payments during the audit period, including double payments or payments made in error even though the period for claiming a refund for a particular payment of taxes under82.32.060 may have passed. Accord: Puget Sound Power & Light, Co v. State, 70 Wn. 2nd 493, (1967); Contra: Det. 90-175;Dist:Det.No 87-256, WTD 435 (1987) [Analysis the same, but different result]; Dist.81-161A.
  17 WTD 278 95-052ER   REFUNDS -- ERRONEOUS WRITTEN ADVICE -- ESTOPPEL -- RELIANCE.The doctrine of estoppel will not lightly be invoked against the State to deprive it of the power to collect taxes.Three elements must be present to create an estoppel:(1) an admission, statement, or act inconsistent with the claim afterwards asserted, (2) action by the other party on the faith of such admission, statement, or act, and (3) injury to such other party resulting from allowing the first party to contradict or repudiate such admission, statement, or act.Reliance on erroneous advice is thus one of the necessary common law elements of estoppel
  17 WTD 278 95-052ER   REFUNDS -- ERRONEOUS WRITTEN ADVICE -- RELIANCE --The Taxpayer’s Rights and Responsibilities Act provides statutory remedies for written misinformation issued by the Department for taxpayers (1) who have been issued specific erroneous written advice/reporting instructions, and (2) who have relied on these instructions to their detriment.Further, taxpayer remedies consist only of the right to (1) the waiver of interest and penalties on an assessment, and (2) the waiver, “in certain instances,” of the tax assessment itself.There is no provision for the refund of taxes already paid which were not the result of a tax deficiency assessment.Taxpayer, who was not issued specific erroneous written advice concerning its airport terminal, and had clearly not relied on erroneous advice concerning certain of its other projects, is not entitled to relief under the Act.In any event, a refund of taxes voluntarily paid is not a remedy under RCW 82.32A.020.
  18 WTD 316 98-226   TIMELINESS OF REFUND REQUEST.When a taxpayer pays taxes assessed by the Department and subsequently requests a refund of taxes for the period covered by the tax assessment, the taxpayer will receive a refund of taxes overpaid during the audit period and beyond the normal four-year refund period to the extent that the tax assessment over-assessed the “amount properly due” and the refund request is made within the statutory period following the payment of the tax assessment.
  19 WTD 270 99-159   RETAIL SALES TAX – COLLECTION OF EXCESSIVE TAX.Where excessive tax is collected, a credit for that Amount may not be issued absent verification that the excess amount was refunded to the purchaser.
  21 WTD 119 01-085   SALES TAX – REFUND OF -- STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS – EXTENSION OF -- LIMITATION.Where a taxpayer paid sales tax to vendors on supplies for which it could have claimed an exemption, the statute of limitations on its refund claim is, effectively, extended when the taxpayer pays a tax assessment covering an audit period in which the “overpayment” is actually made.The amount of any refund, however, is limited to the amount of the tax assessment.
  22 WTD 17 02-0059   RCW 82.32.060: SALES/USE TAX – REFUND REQUEST – ESTOPPEL.A corporation (A) is estopped from seeking a refund of sales and use taxes paid on machinery and equipment after it wrote a letter presented by another corporation (B) in a similar refund request to the Department of Revenue disclaiming any interest in the machinery and equipment.
  22 WTD 131 02-002   B&O TAX – SALES TAX – USE TAX – REFUND -- PETITION – STATUE OF LIMITATIONS – EXTENSION.A petition for review requesting a refund of taxes paid must be filed within four years after the close of the tax year in which the taxes were paid.The Department may not grant an extension of time to file a petition for review requesting a refund of taxes paid.
  22 WTD 249 02-0063R   TAXES PAID LESS THAN OR IN EXCESS OF THOSE PROPERLY DUE -- ASSESSMENT -- REFUND -- Taxes properly due prior to an audit period, but not paid until the audit period, are not attributable to that audit period for the purpose of computing "excess" taxes above those properly due during the audit period for purposes of RCW 82.04.050 and -.060.
  22 WTD 262 02-0163   REFUNDS -- B&O TAX -- RETAIL SALES TAXES.When a taxpayer erroneously over-reports and remits both the retailing B&O and retail sales tax, and then discovers an exemption or deduction applied, the taxpayer may ask for a refund of its overpaid B&O taxes without repaying the collected retail sales tax to its customers and also asking for a refund of the overpaid retail sales tax.
  23 WTD 55 01-075   RETAIL SALES TAX – EXTENTION OF NON-CLAIM PERIOD – EXECUTED WAIVER.A Taxpayer’s petition for refund of overpaid taxes was filed timely where the taxpayer filed its refund request within the extended deadlines of written waivers executed pursuant to RCW 82.32.050.
  23 WTD 83 03-0079   PETITIONS FOR REFUNDS -- ESTOPPEL -- CONDITIONAL REFUNDS.Under Rule 229, when refund requests are initiated by a petition of a taxpayer, the Taxpayer Account Administration Division grants a refund on a conditional basis and subject to future field audit verification.When the Audit Division later examines taxpayer's records to verify the refund, it is not estopped from re-assessing taxes properly due if it determines the refunded amount was improper.
  24 WTD 201 04-0196E   REFUNDS -- INITIATED BY A TAXPAYER -- CONDITIONALLY GRANTED SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION -- ESTOPPEL. When a refund request is initiated by a taxpayer’s petition, Rule 229 allows DOR to conditionally grant a refund subject to future field audit verification.Absent evidence that the conditional refund request was actually verified by field audit, the DOR is not estopped from assessing additional taxes owed within the time limits allowed by RCW 82.32.050.
  26 WTD 83 04-0100   RCW 82.32.060:TAX REFUNDS – NONCLAIM PERIOD.A taxpayer cannot obtain a refund for tax paid more than four years prior to the year in which the claim for refund is made, unless the taxpayer has executed a written waiver consistent with the terms of RCW 82.32.060(2), or unless the taxpayer seeks a refund of excess tax paid on a deficiency assessment for a period prior to the statutory four-year refund period and the taxpayer files a refund claim within four years of paying the deficiency assessment.
  27 WTD 119 07-0324E   RCW 82.32.060; Rule 229: REFUNDS -- ASSIGNMENTS.A written release from the taxpayer (the purchaser) affirming that any state tax refund belongs to the Contractor (the seller) acts as an assignment of any refund, and thereby the Contractor has satisfied the “refund to taxpayer” requirement of Rule 229(3)(b)(ii).
  29 WTD 005 09-0090 01/27/10 Rule 229; RCW 82.32.060:  OTHER TOBACCO PRODUCTS TAX – REFUND CLAIM – NONCLAIM STATUTE – SUBSTANTIATION REQUIREMENT.    Taxpayer failed to provide the Department of Revenue with invoices supporting the amount of its refund claim.  As a result, the Department of Revenue correctly denied taxpayer’s refund request due to its failure to substantiate its claim within the time limits set forth in Rule 229. 
  29 WTD 024 09-0129 04/29/10 RULE 229; RCW 82.32.170:  REFUNDS - APPLICATION – FILED BY
REPRESENTATIVE - AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE - CTIA.  If a tax refund application is filed by a taxpayer representative, Rule 229 requires that the representative’s authority to file a refund claim on behalf of the taxpayer must be perfected by filing a Confidential Taxpayer Information Authorization form (CTIA).  Where a taxpayer’s representative filed a CTIA within 90 days after the Department first notified taxpayer that substantiating documents were required, the representative’s signature was timely perfected and the refund application deemed valid.    
  29 WTD 024 09-0129 04/29/10 RULE 229;  RCW 82.32.170:  REFUNDS – APPLICATION – REASONS
FOR REFUND CLAIM – ADDITIONAL REASONS – UNTIMELY.  Where a taxpayer added two different reasons for claiming a refund five months after its original refund application was filed, the additional two reasons were not made within the nonclaim period and therefore ruled untimely. 
  29 WTD 024 09-0129 04/29/10 RULE 229;  RCW 82.32.170:   REFUNDS – APPLICATION – APPEAL OF –
DUE DATE FOR SUBSTANTIATING DOCUMENTS – EXTENSION.  Where a taxpayer appealed the denial of its original refund application and was sustained upon appeal, the delay caused by the appeal process was held to be for “good cause” and the taxpayer was allowed an extension for submitting substantiating documents.
  32 WTD 74 10-0375 06/27/2013 RULE 229; RCW 82.32.170: REFUNDS – SUBSTANTIATION
REQUIREMENT. Rule 229(3)(b)(vii) states that if the Department does not receive the necessary substantiation within the applicable time period, the Department “shall” deny the claim for lack of adequate substantiation. Here, TAA properly denied Taxpayer’s refund claim for lack of substantiation.
  34 WTD 196 14-0156 04/30/2015 RCW 82.32.060(1) – PERIOD OF LIMITATIONS – PAYMENT – NET CREDIT: A net credit adjustment, resulting from a multi-year audit - with debit and credit adjustments, is not a payment of taxes, penalties, or interest, by a taxpayer, for purposes of the nonclaim period in RCW 82.32.060(1).
  34 WTD 196 14-0156 04/30/2015 RCW 82.32.060; WAC 458-20-229(3)(b) – REFUND REQUEST - SUBSTANTIATION: Where a taxpayer made a refund request, the Department determined it was lacking adequate substantiation to process the refund request and provided a taxpayer with written request and 90 days to produce such substantiation, and the taxpayer failed to provide the substantiation necessary to support the refund request, the Department shall deny the refund request for lack of adequate substantiation.