Was a landowner's grant of the right to enter and remove rock, sand, or gravel a taxable sale of tangible personal property?

Short answer No. The in-place grant was a removal right rather than a personal-property sale; tax applied only if a right holder first severed the material and sold it.
State
CA
Ruling
Annotation 150.0540
Tax type
Sales and Use Tax
Issued
1950-04-11
Issued by
California State Board of Equalization
Requested by
An internal recipient asking for an Attorney General opinion and guidance on rights to remove rock, sand, and gravel

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1950. Ask about yours and see what current California tax law says, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 1950
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 April 11, 1950 internal memorandum supplies the complete supporting text for both Annotation 150.0540 and Annotation 150.0550. It relies on Attorney General Opinion NS-3526 and gives general transaction categories rather than deciding a fully described contract. Current law, the granted property interest, who performs severance, and whether a later sale occurs control. 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

A landowner could grant another person the right to enter and remove rock, sand, or gravel still in the ground.

The memorandum treated that grant as a right affecting material still part of the realty, not as a sale of tangible personal property. Sales tax therefore did not apply to the grant itself.

Tax treatment changed after severance. If the landowner or another person holding the removal right extracted the material and then sold it to a contractor, that retail sale was taxable. If the contractor itself removed and used the material in a construction contract, the memorandum found no sale of tangible personal property.

This same complete memorandum also supports Annotation 150.0550, which focuses on the rock, sand, and gravel classification.

Common questions

Did payment for an in-place removal right trigger sales tax?

No. The memorandum did not treat the grant as a personal-property sale.

When could the material become part of a taxable sale?

When a removal-right holder first severed it and then sold the removed material at retail.

What if the contractor performed the severance itself?

The memorandum found no taxable sale of tangible personal property in that arrangement.

Citations and references

  • California Attorney General Opinion NS-3526 (May 19, 1941) (as cited)

Source

Original ruling text

State of California

Memorandum

To:

Mr. L. H. Wilson

From:

R. G. Hamlin

Subject:

Excavation and Removal of Gravel

Board of Equalization

150.0540
Sacramento
April 11, 1950

You have requested a copy of Attorney General’s Opinion NS-3526, dated May 19, 1941, and have inquired with respect to the application of the tax to sales of rock, sand and gravel. It is our opinion that the sale of rock, sand and gravel at retail is subject to the tax. Thus, if rock, sand or gravel is removed from the ground and sold at retail, the tax applies. As indicated by the above opinion of the Attorney General, however, the sale of rock, sand or gravel in place does not constitute the sale of tangible personal property. Therefore, where the owner of the land grants a right to another to remove rock, sand or gravel from the ground, the transaction does not constitute a sale of tangible personal property and is not subject to the sales tax. As rock, sand and gravel are “materials,” the tax does not apply if a contractor removes such “materials” from the land and used them in fulfilling a construction contract. This is for the reason that in such case there is no sale of tangilbe personal property involved. On the other hand, the tax will apply if the “materials” are removed by the owner of the property, or other person having the right of removal, and are sold to the contractor. We are enclosing a copy of Attorney General’s Opinion NS-3526.

RGH:HB

What does the law say today, for your facts?

This ruling is from 1950. 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