Did a purchaser owe use tax when the seller was properly liable for California sales tax?

Short answer No. The letter said section 6401 exempted the purchaser from use tax when the seller was properly liable for sales tax.
State
CA
Ruling
Annotation 570.0116
Tax type
Sales and Use Tax
Issued
1991-12-02
Issued by
California State Board of Equalization
Requested by
Chairman and chief executive officer of a redacted company

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1991. Ask about yours and see what current California tax law says, with citations.

Currency note: this ruling is from 1991
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 December 2, 1991 letter answers questions about an August 31, 1982 internal memorandum and interprets sections 6091 and 6401. The annotation summary adds a proposition about the seller's failure to pay, but the supporting letter does not state or analyze nonpayment, so this page does not report that broader proposition. Current law controls.
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

When a seller was properly liable for California sales tax, section 6401 exempted the purchaser from use tax. Gross receipts remained in the sales-tax measure unless the law exempted them.

Section 6091 did not alter that conclusion. Its presumption concerned the factual question whether a sale was retail, not the legal meaning of another statutory provision.

Common questions

Did the supporting letter decide what happens if the seller fails to pay the sales tax?

No. That statement appears in the annotation summary, not in the supporting letter.

What did section 6091 presume?

That the sale was at retail as a matter of fact; it did not create a presumption about statutory meaning.

Citations and references

  • Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code § 6091 — retail-sale presumption distinguished
  • Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code § 6401 — purchaser use-tax exemption interpreted

Source

Original ruling text

570.0116

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
1020 N STREET, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA
(P.O. BOX 942879, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 94279-0001)
(916) 445-3723

December 2, 1991

Mr. J--- F. M--Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
--- --- --- --- --XXXX --- Road, Suite XXX
---, CA XXXXX
Dear Mr. M---:
This is in response to your letter of November 19, 1991.
You have asked questions in regard to our memorandum to the Petitions Unit of August 31, 1982. That memorandum concerned the interpretation of Revenue and Taxation Code section 6401. Gross receipts are required to be included in the measure of sales tax if the gross receipts are other than exempt under the Sales and Use Tax Law. If the seller is properly liable for sales tax, the purchaser is exempt from use tax. Section 6091 is not applicable to a purchaser asserting an exemption pursuant to section 6401. While gross receipts are generally presumed subject to the sales tax, it does not follow that such gross receipts are legally required to be included in the measure of sales tax. The presumption is a presumption as to fact (the sale was at retail), not a presumption as to the meaning of any provision of law. Very truly yours,

Gary J. Jugum
Assistant Chief Counsel

GJJ:sr

What does the law say today, for your facts?

This ruling is from 1991. 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