What qualified as a carrier under the interstate-shipment provision of California Sales and Use Tax Ruling 55?

Plain-English summary

An internal auditor's February 19 letter asked what “carrier” meant in paragraph A-1-c of California Sales and Use Tax Ruling 55. The request's year, contents and any underlying shipment are not supplied.

Assistant counsel defined a carrier as a person or firm engaged in the business of transporting tangible personal property owned by other people for compensation. The definition included both common carriers and contract carriers.

The letter listed railroads, trucking companies, airlines, steamship companies, express companies, drayage companies, and the United States Mail as examples. It invited the requester to submit complete facts for an opinion about a particular transaction.

Ruling 55 itself is absent, so the definition's surrounding shipment conditions, exclusions and later history cannot be reconstructed from the letter. CDTFA's live annotation calls the source authority “the regulation” without identifying a replacement provision.

No particular transporter, compensation arrangement, contract, shipment, destination, taxable measure, tax proceeding, or later outcome was decided.

Common questions

Did the definition cover both common and contract carriers?

Yes. Both were expressly included when engaged in transporting other people's tangible property for compensation.

What examples did counsel list?

Railroad, trucking, airline, steamship, express and drayage companies, plus United States Mail.

Did merely receiving goods make someone a carrier?

The letter does not address that factual boundary. Its stated definition requires being engaged in compensated transportation of property owned by others.

Did counsel decide a specific shipment?

No. Counsel invited complete transaction details before giving a fact-specific opinion.

Is Ruling 55's complete text or successor rule supplied?

No. The PDF cites only A-1-c, and the live annotation's generic reference to “the regulation” provides no exact replacement citation.

Citations and references

• California Sales and Use Tax Ruling 55 A-1-c — cited for the historical carrier term; rule text, complete conditions, replacement, later history, and current law not supplied
• February 19 request and shipment records — not reproduced or absent; request year, parties, property, transporter, compensation, contract, delivery and outcome remain unproved
• March 30 response — definition and examples only, with no applied transaction or later result
• Official Annotation 325.0320 — preserves the core definition but substitutes generic “regulation” terminology and omits the provenance, examples, missing authority and evidence, outcome, and reliance status

Source

• Annotated Legal Opinions collection: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-and-fees/annotations-menu.htm
• Annotation page: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/lawguides/vol2/suta/325-0000-all.html
• Original supporting opinion: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/lawguides/annotations/325-0320.pdf

Original ruling text

325.0320

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION

March 30, 1954
[Now: SR- --- - XX-XXXXXX]

Your letter of February 19
Account No. - - XXX

S--- M--- Corporation
of California
---, California
Attention:

Mr. F. P--Internal Auditor

Gentlemen:
Ref. No. XXXX
The word “carrier” as used in Paragraph A-1-(c) of Ruling 55 is defined as a person or firm engaged in the business of transporting for compensation tangible personal property owned by other persons. The term includes both common carriers and contract carriers. Examples of carriers are railroad companies, trucking companies, airline companies, steamship companies, express companies, drayage companies, and the United States Mail. If you have any question concerning the interpretation of the ruling in a specific factual situation, we shall be pleased to give you an opinion upon being furnished with complete details. Very truly yours,

Bill Holden
Assistant Counsel

BH:ja
cc:

--- - Auditing