Could flavoring and preservative ingredients be bought tax-free for use in exempt animal feed?

Short answer Yes, when they became component parts of exempt feed. The same ingredients were taxable when incorporated into nonexempt feed such as the described pet food.
State
CA
Ruling
Annotation 110.0680
Tax type
Sales and Use Tax
Issued
1966-05-31
Issued by
California State Board of Equalization
Requested by
An animal-feed product company asking about ingredients mixed into feed to improve or preserve it

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1966. Ask about yours and see what current California tax law says, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 1966
Subsequent statutory amendments, regulation changes, court decisions, or later rulings may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current tax advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, rate, or position mentioned here.
Disclaimer: This is a California State Board of Equalization tax-counsel letter dated May 31, 1966, published by CDTFA as support for a sales and use tax annotation. It addresses listed products and functions under the feed rules then cited, and its result changes when an ingredient becomes part of nonexempt feed. Another taxpayer should not treat it as binding and should check current feed-additive, component-part, flavoring, preservative, pet-food, exemption, and sales-and-use-tax rules. This summary is informational only and is not legal or tax advice.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official state tax ruling. The original ruling (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original ruling (PDF)

Plain-English summary

Ingredients that increased solubility, enhanced or masked flavor, inhibited bacteria or fungi, suppressed oxygen formation, or treated out-of-condition feed could be purchased without tax when they became component parts of exempt animal feed.

The letter listed Cattle Lure, Molasses Intensifier, Standard Flavors, Stock Charm, Kem-wet, End-ox, Mold Curb, and Fat Mask as examples. The result depended on the finished feed: an ingredient incorporated into nonexempt feed was taxable. Dog Lure used in the described pet food was the letter's nonexempt example.

Citations and references

  • California State Board of Equalization Ruling 47 (as cited)
  • California State Board of Equalization Bulletin 61-27 (as cited)

Source

Original ruling text

110.0680

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION

May 31, 1966
P--- R. P---, Inc.
--- XX, --- ----- ---, CA XXXXX
Attention:

Mr. J--- L. S--Director of Research

SR -- XX XXXXXX

Gentlemen:
This is in reply to your letter of May 19, 1966, regarding products to be mixed with animal feed to enhance the flavor of the feed or to mask undesirable flavors or odors. The products in this catalogue which increase soluability, enhance the flavor, inhibit the growth of bacteria and fungi, surpress oxygen formation, or treat out-of-condition feed become the component parts of the feed. When the feeds are exempt, the constituent materials may be purchased without tax. This will include items similar to those noted in your catalogue, such as cattel lure, molasses intensifier, standard flavors, stock charm, kem-wet, end-ox, mold curb, and fat mask. Note that these items may become part of feed which is not exempt and, in that case, their retail sale would be taxable. Dog lure as part of pet food is such a product because dogs are not a form of animal life the products of which ordinarily constitute food for human consumption or are to be sold in the regular course of business. For your ready reference, we are enclosing copies of ruling 47 and bulletin 61-27. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to write to us again. You are always welcome, of course, to write or call our district office in your area. Very truly yours,

Philip R. Dougherty
Associate Tax Counsel

PRD:md
Encl.
cc:
--- --- District – District Administrator
--- --- – Subdistrict Administrator

What does the law say today, for your facts?

This ruling is from 1966. Ezel checks current California tax law against your situation and cites the authority it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace