How was a nonmanufacturing dealer taxed on a lump-sum outdoor television-antenna installation?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1954. Ask about yours and see what current California tax law says, with citations.
Plain-English summary
For an ordinary outdoor television antenna furnished and installed by a retailer that did not manufacture it, the retail selling price was treated as the retailer's cost of the antenna when billed on a lump-sum basis.
The result was the same whether one lump sum covered the television set, antenna, and installation of both or separate lump sums covered the set installation and antenna installation.
The memorandum expressly replaced contrary portions of a January 24, 1952 internal policy for ordinary outdoor antennas.
Common questions
Did bundling the antenna with the television change the measure?
No.
What measure applied to the nonmanufacturing installer?
Its cost of the outdoor antenna.
Did the memorandum apply to manufacturer-installers?
It specifically addressed retailers that did not manufacture the antenna.
Citations and references
- Former Board Ruling 11 — lump-sum fixture measure applied in the memorandum
- January 24, 1952 memorandum — earlier ordinary-antenna policy expressly displaced by this source
Source
- Annotated Legal Opinions collection: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-and-fees/annotations-menu.htm
- Annotation page: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/lawguides/vol2/suta/190-0000-all.html
- Original supporting opinion: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/lawguides/annotations/190-2540.pdf
Original ruling text
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
190.2540
Place:
Date:
To:
San Bernardino - Auditing
From:
Headquarters – Sales Tax Counsel (WWM)
Re:
Application of Tax With Respect to the
Operation of Television Dealers
Sacramento
December 24, 1954
This is in answer to your memorandum of March 26, 1954, and follow-ups. While there was some question in our mind in the past as to whether we should continue to pursue the policy outlined in the first and third paragraphs on page two of the memorandum of January 24, 1952, to Mr. W. C. S--- regarding F--- Inc., (F - XXXXX, now X - XXXXX), we can now state that it is definitely the opinion of the legal staff that the ordinary type of outdoor television antenna installation is no longer covered by the statements in those two paragraphs. In other words, where the retailer furnishes and installs the antenna and is not the manufacturer thereof, the retail sale price is regarded as the cost of the outdoor antenna to him provided the retailer makes a lump-sum charge. Therefore, Ruling 11 will be exactly applied. This will be true whether one lump-sum charge is made for everything including the set, the outdoor antenna and installation of both, or whether on lump-sum charge is made for the set and its installation and another lump-sum charge is made for the outdoor antenna and its installation. We hope to set forth a bulletin on the matter of the application of the tax to television sets in the near future. If you have any further specific questions, you are assured that they will be answered more promptly. Upon my return from vacation next week I will write you concerning our views on S--- A. K---. I will write you the week of January 3.
W. W. Mangels
WWM:tj
What does the law say today, for your facts?
This ruling is from 1954. 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