Could a manufacturer that leased its own MTE trailer pay tax on raw-material cost instead of lease receipts?

Short answer Yes. The manufacturer was the consumer of the incorporated raw materials, so it could pay tax on their purchase price; the MTE lease itself was not taxable.
State
CA
Ruling
Annotation 335.0082
Tax type
Sales and Use Tax
Issued
1976-05-07
Issued by
California State Board of Equalization
Requested by
A trailer manufacturer planning a California lease

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1976. Ask about yours and see what current California tax law says, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 1976
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 short 1976 confirmation letter addressed a proposed lease of one manufactured trailer to a California customer and asserted that the trailer qualified as MTE. Documents it refers to, such as the request or supporting records, are not published with it. Another taxpayer should not treat this advice as binding. Current MTE, manufacturer-lessor, fabrication, material, election, lease, and tax rules 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 trailer manufacturer planned to lease a trailer it had built to a California customer and asked whether use tax could be measured by the purchase price of the raw materials incorporated into the trailer.

California said yes. The trailer qualified as mobile transportation equipment, so the lease was excluded from the definition of a sale. The manufacturer-lessor was therefore the consumer of the raw materials it incorporated into the trailer.

The manufacturer could pay tax measured by the raw materials' purchase price, and tax would not apply to the lease transaction. The source also noted that an MTE lessor could elect in some circumstances to measure use tax by fair rental value, but the manufacturer was free to decline that election.

Proposed facts and missing records

The May 7 letter confirms advice reportedly given on May 5, but the earlier communication is not reproduced. The transaction remained a plan: the source says the redacted business “plans to lease” the trailer and supplies no executed lease, delivery, commencement, return, or evidence that the proposal closed.

The letter states that the trailer qualified as MTE under section 6023 but gives no dimensions, configuration, transport function, highway capability, registration, inspection, or other classification evidence. It also includes no raw-material invoice, purchase price, tax-paid record, fabrication schedule, fair-rental-value election or non-election record, return, payment, or tax amount.

The live 335.0082 annotation identifies the inquirer as a trailer manufacturer and materially tracks the proposed material-cost and lease-receipt treatment. It omits the May 5 prior advice, section 6094's optional fair-rental-value election, and the absent transaction and classification records.

Common questions

Was the manufactured trailer treated as MTE?

Yes. That classification meant the lease itself was not a taxable sale.

What was the manufacturer treated as consuming?

The raw materials incorporated into the trailer.

Was fair-rental-value reporting mandatory?

No. The letter said the lessor could decline that election and pay tax measured by raw-material purchase price.

Did the source document the trailer's MTE features or a completed lease?

No. It asserted MTE status for the proposed trailer but included no specifications, lease, commencement evidence, return, or tax record.

Citations and references

  • California Revenue and Taxation Code sections 6006, 6023, and 6094
  • May 5, 1976 prior advice — confirmed but not separately included
  • Trailer specifications, raw-material purchase records, proposed lease, election records, returns, and tax-payment evidence — not included

Verbatim support

From the official May 7, 1976 letter:

We are of the opinion that you may pay the tax measure by the purchase price of the raw materials and that tax will not apply to the lease transaction.

Since the lease will not qualify as a sale, you will be regarded as the consumer of the raw materials incorporated into the trailer.

Source

Original ruling text

335.0082

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION

May 7, 1976

916-445-2641

This is to confirm our advice to you of May 5, 1976.
We understand that --- --- --- plans to lease a trailer to a customer here in California. You have inquired as to whether you may pay use tax measured by the purchase price of the raw materials incorporated into the trailer. We are of the opinion that you may pay the tax measure by the purchase price of the raw materials and that tax will not apply to the lease transaction. Revenue and Taxation Code Section 6006 provides that the term “sale” means and includes any lease of tangible personal property except a lease of “mobile transportation equipment for use in transportation of persons or property…” the trailer in question will qualify as an item of mobile transportation equipment under Revenue and Taxation Code Section 6023. Since the lease will not qualify as a sale, you will be regarded as the consumer of the raw materials incorporated into the trailer. Revenue and Taxation Code Section 6094 provides that a lessor of mobile transportation equipment may in certain circumstances elect to pay his use tax measured by the fair rental value of the equipment. The lessor is free, however, to decline to make this election.

Very truly yours,

Gary J. Jugum
Tax Counsel

GJJ:lb
Bc:
Out of State
Chicago

What does the law say today, for your facts?

This ruling is from 1976. 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