Was tax on a refunded core deposit also refunded when the customer later returned a used auto part?

Short answer For a new replacement part, refund only the core deposit; for a reconditioned replacement part, refund the deposit and the tax paid on it.
State
CA
Ruling
Annotation 315.0370
Tax type
Sales and Use Tax
Issued
1980-02-27
Issued by
California State Board of Equalization
Requested by
Counsel for an automobile-parts seller

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1980. Ask about yours and see what current California tax law says, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 1980
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 brief 1980 opinion distinguished a new replacement part from a reconditioned replacement part when a customer later returned a used core. It does not explain every pricing, exchange, invoice, deposit, or refund variation. Current core-deposit, new-part, reconditioned-part, exchange, tax-reimbursement, and refund rules control today.
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

California gave different refund treatment depending on the replacement part sold.

When the customer bought a new part, paid tax on the price plus a core deposit, and later returned a used part, the customer received only the core deposit back. The tax paid on that deposit was not refunded or credited.

When the customer bought a reconditioned part under the same basic sequence, returning the used core entitled the customer to both the core deposit and the tax paid on that deposit.

Common questions

Did returning a core always produce a tax refund?

No.

What happened for a new replacement part?

Only the deposit was refunded.

What happened for a reconditioned replacement part?

The deposit and the related tax were refunded.

Citations and references

The supporting opinion does not cite a specific statute or regulation for this distinction.

Source

Original ruling text

315.0370

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
1020 N STREET, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA
(P.O. BOX 942879, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 94279-0001)
(916) 322-2378

February 27, 1980

Ms. J--- B. S--G---, S--- & E--XXX --- Road, #XXX
---, CA XXXXX
Re:

G--- A--- Inc.
SY – XX-XXXXXX
Sales Tax on Automobile Parts

Dear Ms. S---:
As you requested on the telephone today, following is a brief outline of our position with respect to the taxation of core deposits on auto parts sold by G--- A---. 1)

New Parts – The customer purchases the part, leaves a core deposit, and is charged tax on the total. Later, he brings in his used part. Under these circumstances, he would be entitled to a credit or refund of the core deposit only. Tax paid with respect to the core deposit should not be credited or refunded to him;

2)

Reconditioned Parts – The customer purchases the part, leaves a deposit, and is charged tax on the total. Later, he brings in his used part. Under these circumstances, he would be entitled to a credit or refund of the core deposit plus tax paid with respect to it. Very truly yours,

Les Sorensen
Tax Counsel

LS:po

What does the law say today, for your facts?

This ruling is from 1980. 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