Were envelopes or wrapping paper bought to mail a free exempt publication themselves exempt as components or nonreturnable containers?

Short answer No. California taxed the mailing materials because they were not publication components and the buyer gave away rather than sold the contents.
State
CA
Ruling
Annotation 385.0220
Tax type
Sales and Use Tax
Issued
1953-03-20
Issued by
California State Board of Equalization
Requested by
Los Angeles review staff

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1953. Ask about yours and see what current California tax law says, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 1953
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This March 20, 1953 California State Board of Equalization Sales Tax Counsel office correspondence answers an unpublished March 3 Los Angeles review memorandum about an unnamed publication given away rather than sold. Documents it refers to, such as the request or supporting records, are not published with it. Another publisher or distributor should not treat it as binding; current component-part, packaging, nonreturnable-container, publication, sales-tax, and use-tax law controls. 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

Los Angeles review staff asked about a person who gave away an exempt publication and bought envelopes or wrapping paper to mail it. Sales Tax Counsel said the issue had also been discussed with an otherwise unidentified Mr. Say.

California concluded that the mailing materials were not ingredients or component parts of the publication under former section 6362.

The purchase also did not qualify under section 6364's nonreturnable-container rule because the buyer gave away the publication instead of selling the contents and container. The seller's sale of the envelopes or wrapping paper to that buyer was taxable.

Source and live-annotation limits

The official PDF does not include the March 3 review memorandum, whose year is not printed, or the publication, envelopes, wrapping paper, mailing or distribution records, purchase, seller, price, invoice, return, audit or assessment, or later outcome. It identifies no publisher, distributor, seller, publication, or purchaser; redacts the account; and gives no role for Mr. Say beyond stating that counsel discussed the problem with him.

The live annotation accurately repeats the component-part, nonreturnable-container, and taxable-sale conclusions. It omits the March 3 request, Los Angeles review origin, discussion with Mr. Say, statutory numbers, redacted account, and source and outcome limits.

What this means for you

Free-publication distributors, mailers, and tax professionals

The publication's exemption did not automatically extend to separate mailing materials. Preserve the publication, packaging, purchase, mailing, and sales records needed to show whether material becomes part of a product and whether the contents and container are actually sold.

Common questions

Q: Did the envelopes become components of the publication?

A: No.

Q: Why did the nonreturnable-container exemption fail?

A: The purchaser gave away the publication rather than selling the contents and container.

Q: Was the sale of the mailing materials taxable?

A: Yes.

Citations and references

  • Former California Revenue and Taxation Code § 6362
  • California Revenue and Taxation Code § 6364
  • March 3 Los Angeles review memorandum — described but not included; its year is not printed
  • Publication, mailing materials, purchases, tax records, and outcomes — described or implicated but not documented

Verbatim support

From the official Sales Tax Counsel correspondence:

We believe that envelopes or wrapping paper in which publications are enclosed are not properly regarded as ingredient or component parts of the publication within the meaning of Section 6362.

It is not exempt under Section 6364 as a nonreturnable container sold to a person who sells the contents and container, nor is it exempt under Section 6362 as the sale of property which becomes an ingredient or component part of the publication.

Source

Original ruling text

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE

385.0220
Place:
Date:

To:

Los Angeles – Review (PER)

From:

Headquarters – Sales Tax Counsel

Re:

Envelopes used to mail exempt publication,
Which publication is given away, not sold

Sacramento
March 20, 1953

Mr. Say and I have discussed the problem mentioned in your memo of March 3 and it is our opinion that envelopes or wrapping paper in which publications are enclosed are not properly regarded as ingredient or component parts of the publication within the meaning of Section 6362. Accordingly, where a person who gives away a publication purchases envelopes or wrapping paper to use as containers of the publication, the sale of the envelopes or wrapping paper to him is taxable. It is not exempt under Section 6364 as a nonreturnable container sold to a person who sells the contents and container, nor is it exempt under Section 6362 as the sale of property which becomes an ingredient or component part of the publication.

E. H. Stetson
EHS:ph

What does the law say today, for your facts?

This ruling is from 1953. 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