Ezel / Tax Rulings / CA

Did Vit-A-Way Livestock Fortifier qualify as feed rather than a taxable disease-treatment product?

Short answer Yes. California classified it as feed and distinguished preventive fortification from products labeled and sold for specific disease treatment or cure.
State
CA
Ruling
Annotation 110.1380
Tax type
Sales and Use Tax
Issued
1952-03-20
Issued by
California State Board of Equalization
Requested by
A Board official asking about Vit-A-Way Livestock Fortifier
Topics
drugs disease prevention disease treatment exemptions
Source
View Original PDF

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1952. Ask about yours and see what current California tax law says, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 1952
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 an internal California State Board of Equalization legal memorandum dated March 20, 1952, published by CDTFA as support for a sales and use tax annotation. It applies a historical distinction between fortified feed used to prevent or control disease and products labeled and sold for specific treatment or cure. Another taxpayer should not treat it as binding and should check current Vit-A-Way, livestock-fortifier, fortified-feed, veterinary-drug, disease-prevention, disease-treatment, 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

Vit-A-Way Livestock Fortifier qualified as feed under Ruling 47 as then cited.

The memorandum explained the controlling distinction: adding drugs or other nonnutritive ingredients to poultry or animal feed for disease prevention or control did not remove feed status, but a mixture labeled and sold for specific disease treatment or cure was not treated as feed.

Citations and references

  • California State Board of Equalization Ruling 47 (as cited)

Source

Original ruling text

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE

110.1380
Sacramento, California
March 20, 1952

To:

Mr. W. S. Freeland

From:

E. H. Stetson

Re:

C--- L. A--XXXX --- -----, California

Account No. D-XXXXX

In reply to your letter of February 11, it is our opinion that Vit-A-Way Livestock Fortifier is a food within the meaning of Ruling 47. You are referred to page 1 of the summary of selected rulings for January 1, to June 30, 1951. It is there stated that “when poultry and animal feeds are fortified with drugs or other non-nutritive ingredients which are added for the purpose of preventing or controlling diseases the feeds will not lose their status as such. On the other hand, if the mixture is labeled and sold for the specific treatment or cure of disease, the product will not be regarded as a feed.”

NBH:ja

What does the law say today, for your facts?

This ruling is from 1952. 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