Ezel / Tax Rulings / CA

Could chewing gum be treated as part of an exempt meal so that its selling price escaped sales tax?

Short answer No. The memorandum said chewing gum was not properly part of a meal for that purpose, leaving the seller liable for sales tax on the gum's selling price.
State
CA
Ruling
Annotation 550.1660
Tax type
Sales and Use Tax
Issued
1951-06-01
Issued by
California State Board of Equalization
Requested by
An internal inquiry about chewing gum sold with meals (identity redacted)
Topics
chewing gum meals meal exemption sales tax
Source
View Original PDF

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1951. Ask about yours and see what current California tax law says, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 1951
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 June 1, 1951 one-paragraph internal memorandum states only that chewing gum was not properly regarded as part of a meal for purposes of avoiding tax on the gum's selling price. It supplies no additional facts about the seller, meal, pricing, or governing provision. 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

The memorandum rejected treating chewing gum as part of an exempt meal.

As a result, a seller of both the meal and the gum remained liable for sales tax on the gum's selling price. The source gives no further facts or legal analysis.

Common questions

Did selling gum with a meal make it exempt?

No. The memorandum expressly rejected that treatment.

What amount did the source identify as taxable?

The selling price of the gum.

Did the memorandum explain a broader food-product rule?

No. Its complete text is limited to the single conclusion above.

Source

Original ruling text

State of California

Board of Equalization

Memorandum

To:

REDACTED TEXT

From:

E. H. Stetson

Subject:

REDACTED TEXT

550.1660
Date:

June 1, 1951

In answer to your memo of May 31, we do not think that chewing gum is properly regarded
as part of a “meal” such that the seller of the meal and the gum is not liable for sales tax on the
selling price of the gum.
EHS:ph

What does the law say today, for your facts?

This ruling is from 1951. 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