Was a requested donation an admission charge when people who declined could enter an event without restriction?

Short answer No, if payment was genuinely voluntary. A set amount, turnstile, restrictive device, or door solicitation could show visitors reasonably believed payment was required.
State
CA
Ruling
Annotation 550.0020
Tax type
Sales and Use Tax
Issued
1970-01-27
Issued by
California State Board of Equalization
Requested by
An event sponsor asking whether requested donations at cat shows, auto shows, and similar activities were admission charges (identity redacted)

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1970. Ask about yours and see what current California tax law says, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 1970
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 January 27, 1970 assistant-counsel letter addresses requested donations at cat shows, auto shows, or similar events and assumes some entrants actually declined to pay without restriction. It emphasizes the surrounding facts and outward signs of whether payment was practically required. Current law controls over the annotation. 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

An event sponsor requested a donation from people entering cat shows, auto shows, or similar activities. Payment was not required, people who declined were admitted without restriction, and experience showed that some people did not donate.

The letter said this was not an admission charge because the cited rule defined admission as consideration required for entry. A voluntary payment did not meet that definition.

The surrounding facts still had to make the voluntary nature obvious. A fixed donation amount, turnstile or other restrictive device, or an attendant requesting payment at the door could be evidence that everyone had to pay or reasonably believed payment was required.

Common questions

Did merely asking for a donation create admission?

No, if nonpaying visitors truly entered without restriction.

Could a stated amount or door attendant change the result?

Yes. Those facts could indicate the charge was effectively mandatory.

Citations and references

  • Board Ruling 53(c)(2)(C) (as cited)

Source

Original ruling text

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

550.0020

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
January 27, 1970
Dear Mr. REDACTED TEXT,
This is in response to your letter of January 15 asking whether a donation requested for admission to a cat show, auto show, or other activity constituted an “admission charge” subjecting sales of food products to tax under recent amendments to the Sales and Use Tax Law. It is my understanding that the donation is requested but not required and persons not desiring to make a donation are granted admission without any restriction. I assume that experience shows some persons do not make a donation. Under Ruling 53(c)(2)(C), admission charge means any consideration required to be paid in money or otherwise, for admittance to a place. As the sponsors of the events you describe do not require a donation, but rather make such a payment voluntary; entrance is not subject to an admission charge within the meaning of the code and regulations. However, the facts surrounding the request for the donation must be such that it is obvious that admittance is not restricted to those making the donation. A set amount for the donation, a turnstile or other restrictive device that must be passed through, or an attendant requesting the donation at the door will be evidence that the charge is not voluntary and all must pay or would reasonably believe they are required to pay. Very truly yours, Lawrence A. Augusta Assistant Counsel Laa:ph [lb]

What does the law say today, for your facts?

This ruling is from 1970. 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