Was a municipal utility district's infrequent sale of a complete electrical line exempt as an occasional sale?

Short answer No. Although complete-line sales were infrequent, the district held a seller's permit and made a broader series of miscellaneous equipment and joint-pole sales sufficient to make this sale taxable.
State
CA
Ruling
Annotation 530.0200
Tax type
Sales and Use Tax
Issued
1953-08-10
Issued by
California State Board of Equalization
Requested by
A municipal utility district's valuation engineer (district identity redacted)

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 is an August 10, 1953 California State Board of Equalization tax-counsel opinion issued to a municipal utility district and published by CDTFA as support for a sales and use tax annotation. It applies a historical occasional-sale provision to a district that already held a seller's permit and made miscellaneous equipment sales. Statutory numbering and modern occasional-sale rules may differ. 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 municipal utility district proposed to sell a complete "Fringe Line" consisting of 56 poles, crossarms, insulators, and conductors to a utility company. The district held a seller's permit and also made miscellaneous sales, including interests in joint poles. Its last complete-line sale had been several years earlier.

The Board concluded that the line sale was taxable rather than an exempt occasional sale. Even if the property itself had not been held or used in an activity requiring a seller's permit, this transaction belonged to a series of sales that the Board considered sufficient to constitute a permit-requiring selling activity.

The infrequency of complete-line sales did not isolate the transaction from the district's broader equipment-sale activity.

What this means for you

Municipal utilities, public districts, equipment buyers, and tax professionals

Review the seller's entire pattern of tangible-property sales, not just how often it sells the exact asset type. Existing permit status and recurring miscellaneous sales can defeat occasional-sale treatment.

Common questions

Q: Did the long gap since the last complete-line sale make this sale occasional?

A: No. The Board considered the district's broader series of miscellaneous sales.

Q: Did the district already hold a seller's permit?

A: Yes, and the opinion treated its sales activity as sufficient to require one.

Q: What property was sold?

A: A 56-pole electrical line with crossarms, insulators, and conductors.

Citations and references

  • Former California Revenue and Taxation Code § 6006.5, as cited in the opinion

Source

Original ruling text

530.0200

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
August 10, 1953
Your letter of August 6

Attention:

______
Valuation Engineer

Gentlemen:
You have inquired concerning the applicability of the California retail sales tax with respect to the sale of a “Fringe Line” consisting of 56 poles together with crossarms, insulators, and conductors to Pacific Gas & Electric Company. The district holds a seller’s permit under the Sales and Use Tax Law and makes miscellaneous sales including sales of interests in joint poles. You point out that sales of complete lines are infrequent, the last such sale being in 1948-9. It is our opinion, nevertheless, that the sale in question is taxable. It does not appear that it can be regarded as an exempt occasional sale under Section 6006.5 of the Sales and Use Tax Law. Although perhaps meeting the first requirements set forth therein as a sale of property not held or used in an activity requiring the holding of a seller’s permit, it appears not to meet the second requirement in that it is one of a series of sales sufficient in our opinion to constitute an activity requiring the holding of a seller’s permit. Yours very truly,

E. H. Stetson
Tax Counsel

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