home home Find a law or rule home Washington Tax Decisions home Washington Tax Decisions Washington Tax Decisions

March 31, 2014


Det. No. 11-0210, 33 WTD 40 (2014) Appeal of use tax assessments on two antique automobiles.  Because both automobiles were delivered to Washington State where the Taxpayer is a resident, and neither automobile was purchased for resale, we affirm the assessments. We sustain both assessments.

Det. No. 12-0349, 33 WTD 45 (2014)

An operator of a wrecking yard that sells cars and car parts (Taxpayer) protests the assessment of retail sales tax and business and occupation (B&O) tax on grounds that the measure of taxes and allocation between retail and wholesale sales should be based on its general ledger rather than bank deposits and documentation of wholesale sales.  Taxpayer also argues that certain sales are deductible from retail sales because they were made to qualified nonresidents.  We deny the petition.
Det. No. 13-0046, 33 WTD 51 (2014) A vending machine operator protests retail sales tax assessed on taxable food items that were originally categorized as “tax exempt” and on vending machine purchases on which taxpayers later took a “tax paid at source” deduction. Taxpayer’s petition is denied.
Det. No. 13-0068R, 33 WTD 55 (2014) Out-of-state oil refinery and fuel seller (Taxpayer) petitions for reconsideration of Determination No. 13-0068, which ruled that Taxpayer has taxable nexus with Washington State through an exchange agreement with a [third-party supplier] fuel terminal in [City A, Washington].  Because the Taxpayer’s customers are receiving the fuel in Washington State, and a third party is assisting the Taxpayer in maintaining its Washington market, nexus is created and we reaffirm the Department’s finding.
Det. No. 13-0185, 33 WTD 59 (2014) A taxpayer appeals the rescission of the rural county business and occupation tax credit for new employees authorized under chapter 82.62 RCW, and requests a refund of business and occupation tax paid as a result of the rescission.  The Taxpayer Account Administration Division (TAA) of the Department of Revenue (Department) rescinded the credit because the taxpayer failed to file a second annual report required by the Department to verify the eligibility requirements of the tax credit have been met.  The taxpayer argues the credit should be reinstated because it has now provided the report substantiating its eligibility for the credit, and because a second annual report is not mandated by statute.  We grant the petition.