Which training, research, and quality-testing uses of machines withdrawn from finished-goods inventory were taxable?

Short answer Training owners or prospective buyers and testing a machine for its own quality standards were nontaxable demonstration. Training service employees, researching improvements or new uses, using a machine to test other machines, and investigating customer problems were taxable uses.
State
CA
Ruling
Annotation 210.0560
Tax type
Sales and Use Tax
Issued
1967-07-21
Issued by
California State Board of Equalization
Requested by
Board San Jose auditing staff

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1967. Ask about yours and see what current California tax law says, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 1967
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 historical California State Board of Equalization tax-counsel memorandum dated July 21, 1967, published by CDTFA as support for a sales and use tax annotation. It applies to the specific inventory, departmental uses, training, tests, and lease described and is not a binding ruling for another manufacturer. CDTFA says statutory law controls if inconsistent with an annotation. 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 machine manufacturer withdrew finished goods for its training, application-research, and quality-assurance departments. The Board classified the uses by what the machine was actually doing.

Training service employees was taxable, including classes in which machines could be torn down and reassembled. Training owners of similar machines or prospective buyers in the machines' uses and applications was nontaxable demonstration and display.

Application research was taxable when machines were studied for improvements or new uses or were used to test other equipment. In quality assurance, testing a withdrawn machine to determine whether that machine met the manufacturer's own standards was nontaxable. Using one machine to test another, or to investigate problems reported in customers' machines, was taxable.

The memorandum separately reviewed a two-year lease with a purchase option and concluded it was not a lease in lieu of sale. Tax therefore applied to the monthly rental payments.

What this means for you

Manufacturers with training programs

Who is being trained and why matters. Customer-owner and prospective-buyer instruction promoted the machine itself; service-employee training served an internal operational purpose.

Research and quality-assurance teams

Distinguish the machine being evaluated from the machine used as test equipment. The former's own standards test was nontaxable here, while the latter's use to test other property was taxable.

Accountants and tax professionals

Track inventory withdrawals by department and specific function. Broad labels such as “training” or “quality assurance” did not determine the result.

Common questions

Q: Was training prospective buyers taxable?
A: No. The memorandum treated instruction about uses and applications for prospective buyers as demonstration and display.

Q: What about training employees who service the machines?
A: That was taxable use measured by the machines' cost.

Q: Could a machine be tested for its own quality standards without tax?
A: Yes, on the stated facts. But using that machine to test another machine was taxable.

Q: Were research activities exempt as demonstration?
A: No. Studying machines for improvements or new applications was taxable use.

Q: How were the lease payments treated?
A: The lease was not considered in lieu of sale, so tax applied to monthly rental payments.

Source

Original ruling text

State of California

Board of Equalization

Memorandum

To:

San Jose - Auditing

From:

Tax Counsel (GAT) Headquarters

Subject:

B--- I---, Inc.
S--- Division
XXXX --- Avenue
--- ---, California

210.0560

Date:

July 21, 1967

SR -- XX-XXXXXX

This is in reply to your request for rulings concerning the application of use tax with respect to machines manufactured by B--- which are withdrawn from its finished goods inventories and charged to its Training, Application Research, and Quality Assurance Departments. It is our understanding that these departments use the machines in the following ways: (1) Training Department Machines charged to the training department are used in classes for training employees in servicing the machines. The machines are also used in other classes for training customers in their use. Machines may be used in classes for as long as 14 months. In the employee training classes, the machines may be completely torn down and reassembled. In the customer training classes, the trainees are instructed in the uses and possible applications of the machines. Customer trainees may be owners of machines or prospective buyers. In our opinion, the use of machines for training service employees is subject to tax measured by the cost thereof. On the other hand, it is our opinion that the use of machines to train owners of similar machines or prospective buyers constitutes demonstration and display. Accordingly, no tax is incurred with respect to such use. (2) Application Research Department New and standard models of machines are assigned to the Application Research Department for study to determine how they can be improved and whether they can be applied to uses other than those for which they were constructed. These machines are also used to test other instruments and accessories.

San Jose - Auditing
SR -- XX-XXXXXX

-2-

July 21, 1967
210.0560

In our opinion, the use of new and standard model machines by the Application Research Department to find new applications and to determine whether they can be improved and the use of the machines to test other machines are taxable uses. Therefore, the cost of such machines is subject to tax. (3) Quality Assurance Department Machines are assigned to the Quality Assurance Department to determine whether they meet the qualify and standards required by the manufacturer. In determining whether they meet such standards, other machines are used to test them. Machines are also used to check out problems which customers have complained of in their own machines. In our opinion, the testing of machines withdrawn from inventory to determine whether they meet company standards does not subject such machines to tax. On the other hand, it is our opinion that the use of machines to test other machines is subject to tax, and that the use of machines to check customer’s problems is likewise subject tot tax. We have examined the copy of the lease which you submitted. The lease is for a term of two years, renewable monthly thereafter. The lessee has the option to purchase the leased machine. If he then exercises the option within the first 60 days of the lease, he will be given credit for 100% of the rentals which he has paid toward the purchase price. If he exercises the option after 60 days, he will be given credit toward the purchase price for 75% of the rentals paid. In our opinion, this lease is not in lieu of sale. Accordingly, tax applies to the monthly rental payments.

GAT:ph

What does the law say today, for your facts?

This ruling is from 1967. 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