Could an embalmer accept a resale certificate from the mortuary that supplied the casket and other funeral services?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1965. Ask about yours and see what current California tax law says, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The embalmer could accept a properly executed resale certificate from the mortuary. The embalmer performed embalming, then delivered the remains and tangible personal property to the mortuary that provided the casket and other funeral services.
The memorandum treated the embalmer as a subcontractor in that arrangement. It also combined an $875 “Mortuary and Funeral Service” charge with a $50 embalming charge, producing a $925 historical Standard Service measure under Ruling 8.
Source and live-annotation limits
The memorandum does not reproduce the San Bernardino auditing inquiry or identify the embalmer, mortuary, decedent, or Public Administrator matter. It supplies no remains, tangible property, casket, funeral services, contract, properly executed resale certificate, $875 or $50 billing, invoice, $925 calculation record, tax return, audit, assessment, completed transaction, or later outcome. Former Ruling 8 is cited for the Standard Service classification but is not reproduced.
The live annotation preserves the embalmer's work and delivery, subcontractor classification, and resale-certificate result. It omits the internal audit posture, tangible-property detail, proper-execution condition, Ruling 8, both stated charges, Public Administrator label, $925 measure, missing records and authority, and later-outcome gap.
What this means for you
Embalmers, mortuaries, and tax professionals
Document which party contracts with the customer, who supplies the casket and other property, every delivery, the subcontract relationship, the complete resale certificate, and each separately stated charge. Do not apply the historical $925 measure outside its absent underlying billing record.
Common questions
Why could the embalmer take a resale certificate?
The mortuary was the party providing the casket and complete service to the customer, while the embalmer acted as its subcontractor.
Did the certificate need to be properly executed?
Yes. The memorandum expressly conditioned the answer on a proper resale certificate.
What charges entered the historical Standard Service measure?
The $875 funeral-service billing and the $50 embalming charge, totaling $925.
Citations and references
- Sales and Use Tax Ruling 8 — historical Standard Service classification and measure applied
- Audit request, embalmer and mortuary arrangement, resale certificate, $875 and $50 billings, and transaction records — described or referenced but not included
Verbatim support
From the official August 19, 1965 memorandum:
Accordingly, the embalmer may accept a properly executed resale certificate.
Therefore, the billing of $875 for "Mortuary and Funeral Service" and the $50 charge attributable to "Embalming, Public Administrator” should be added to compute the charge for the Standard Service. $925 is the proper measure.
Source
- Annotated Legal Opinions collection: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-and-fees/annotations-menu.htm
- Annotation page: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/lawguides/vol2/suta/370-0000-all.html
- Original supporting opinion: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/lawguides/annotations/370-0160.pdf
Original ruling text
370.0160
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
August 19, 1965
To:
San Bernardino - Auditing (BM)
From:
Tax Counsel (PRD)
We agree with your conclusion that the embalmer who only performs embalming services and then delivers the remains to the mortuary which provides the casket and other services is a subcontractor delivering tangible personal property along with the remains. Accordingly, the embalmer may accept a properly executed resale certificate. It is our understanding that embalming is within the purview of the Standard Service classification of Ruling 8. Therefore, the billing of $875 for "Mortuary and Funeral Service" and the $50 charge attributable to "Embalming, Public Administrator” should be added to compute the charge for the Standard Service. $925 is the proper measure.
PRD:o'b [lb]
What does the law say today, for your facts?
This ruling is from 1965. 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