Were deep-well pumps furnished and installed at a federal game refuge improvements to realty?
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
A contractor furnished and installed five deep-well pumps at a government game refuge under a federal bureau contract.
The letter said Board precedent consistently treated deep-water well pumps as improvements to realty under section 6384 and cited Bell v. Bank of Perris in support.
It proposed treating the contractor as the consumer of the pumps. Because the matter remained a petition, the recommendation was scheduled for Board action unless the taxpayer timely requested a hearing.
Common questions
Were the deep-well pumps machinery and equipment?
No, under the proposed recommendation.
Who was treated as the consumer?
The contractor that furnished and installed the pumps.
Was the letter itself final Board action?
No.
Citations and references
- Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code section 6384 — federal real-property construction provision
- Bell v. Bank of Perris, 52 Cal.App.2d 66 — real-property authority cited by the letter
Source
- Annotated Legal Opinions collection: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-and-fees/annotations-menu.htm
- Annotation page: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/lawguides/vol2/suta/565-0000-all.html
- Original supporting opinion: https://cdtfa.ca.gov/lawguides/annotations/565-0500.pdf
Original ruling text
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
565.0500
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
May 24, 1965
Gentlemen:
We have considered your client's petition for redetermination in the light of information obtained by our auditors, information submitted by you, and information obtained at the preliminary hearing held in Hollywood on May 5, 1965. A review of our precedent indicates that deep water well pumps have consistently been regarded as improvements to realty under Section 6384 of the law. As pointed out at the preliminary hearing, we believe the case of Bell v. Bank of Perris, 52 Cal. App. 2d 66, supports our position. Accordingly, we propose to recommend to the Board that your client be considered the consumer of the five deep well pumps furnished and installed at the REDACTED TEXT refuge pursuant to a contract with the REDACTED TEXT bureau. Since you have not requested a Board hearing in this matter, it will be scheduled for action by the Board on the nonappearance calendar. However, if a Board hearing is desired, one should be requested in writing within 15 days of the date of this letter. Very truly yours Jack D. Paulson Associate Tax Counsel JDP:ls [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